Data Entry: Please note that the research database will be replaced by UNIverse by the end of October 2023. Please enter your data into the system https://universe-intern.unibas.ch. Thanks

Login for users with Unibas email account...

Login for registered users without Unibas email account...

 
Online solutions and the "Wallacean shortfall" : what does GBIF contribute to our knowledge of species' ranges?
JournalArticle (Originalarbeit in einer wissenschaftlichen Zeitschrift)
 
ID 2281005
Author(s) Beck, Jan; Ballesteros-Mejia, Liliana; Nagel, Peter; Kitching, Ian J.
Author(s) at UniBasel Beck, Jan
Ballesteros, Liliana
Nagel, Peter
Year 2013
Title Online solutions and the "Wallacean shortfall" : what does GBIF contribute to our knowledge of species' ranges?
Journal Diversity & distributions
Volume 19
Number 8
Pages / Article-Number 1043-1050
Keywords Climatic niche space, Global biodiversity information facility (GBIR), Lepidoptera, natural history collections, range extent, range filling, Sphingidae
Abstract

Aim

To investigate the contribution to range filling, range extent and climatic niche space of species of information contained in the largest databank of digitized biodiversity data: the global biodiversity information facility (GBIF). We compared such information with a compilation of independent distributional data from natural history collections and other sources.

Location

Europe.

Methods

We used data for the hawkmoths (Lepidoptera, family Sphingidae) to assess three aspects of range information: (1) observed range filling in 100 km × 100 km grid cell squares, (2) observed European range extent and (3) observed climatic niche. Range extents were calculated as products of latitudinal and longitudinal extents. Areas derived from minimum convex polygons drawn onto a 2-dimensional niche space representing the two main axes of a principal component analysis (PCA) were used to calculate climatic niche space. Additionally, record-based permutation tests for niche differences were carried out.

Results

We found that GBIF provided many more distribution records than independent compilation efforts, but contributed less information on range filling, range extent and climatic niches of species.

Main conclusions

Although GBIF contributed relevant additional information, it is not yet an effective alternative to manual compilation and databasing of distributional records from collections and literature sources, at least in lesser-known taxa such as invertebrates. We discuss possible reasons for our findings, which may help shape GBIF strategies for providing more informative data.

Publisher Blackwell Science
ISSN/ISBN 1366-9516
URL http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ddi
edoc-URL http://edoc.unibas.ch/dok/A6205493
Full Text on edoc No
Digital Object Identifier DOI 10.1111/ddi.12083
ISI-Number WOS:000321444900016
Document type (ISI) Article
 
   

MCSS v5.8 PRO. 0.323 sec, queries - 0.000 sec ©Universität Basel  |  Impressum   |    
06/06/2024