Environmental and geographical biases in plant specimen data from the Colombian Andes

Abstract

Specimen records are a major source of species information for biodiversity research. However, specimen records currently available may be geographically or environmentally biased. Detailed knowledge of biases is useful for understanding and accounting for errors they introduce into analyses of biodiversity patterns. Here we study geographical and environmental biases in online records representing the flora of the Colombian Andes and explore their effect on sample completeness at different spatial scales. We found a strong geographical and environmental sampling bias. Plant records were concentrated close to cities where herbaria and researchers are located. The highlands > 2000 m are better sampled, whereas mid- and lowlands remain poorly sampled (i.e. montane and lowland forest). Sampling completeness (SC) median across the Colombian Andes is < 75% at the scales studied. We explore possible causes of sampling bias, identify critical gaps and priority areas for plant sampling and make recommendations for strategies to increase SC and reduce biases.

Unveiling evolutionary cradles and museums of flowering plants in a neotropical biodiversity hotspot

“…There are several aspects that could introduce biases or impact the quality of the results. Weaknesses in the databases can exacerbated these issues, including limited taxonomic diversity, low sampling levels [ 24 ], and structural variations in the phylogeny. It is important to know that the results, in taxonomic terms, may not encompass the entire species numbers of the country.…”

“…Digitizing the biological diversity of Colombia, the second most biodiverse country in the world, poses a significant challenge. Consequently, the spatial data of plants in Colombia may not fully represent a large percentage of the existing flora and its actual coverage [ 24 ]. Although the current sampling does not yet reach the international standards, open-access flora data for Colombia, such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) or the Botanical Information and Ecology Network (BIEN), can be considered acceptable despite the sampling biases.…”

Assessing digital accessible botanical knowledge and priorities for exploration and discovery of plant diversity across Mesoamerica

“…This poor data coverage in Mesoamerica appears to be similar to estimates for plants in the Andean region; for instance, Vargas et al . (2022) estimated a completeness < 75% for plants, whereas Mutke & Weigend (2017) report only 4% of grid cells as well collected. The poor spatial data coverage may result either from a low effort in field surveys of plant diversity or disparities in the mobilisation and sharing of digital data across regions, or both (Stropp et al ., 2016; Nelson & Ellis, 2019).…”

How to fill the biodiversity data gap: Is it better to invest in fieldwork or curation?

“…This reduced the dataset to 21,926 plant records that, after curatorial and fieldwork represent 2384 species, 903 genera and 187 families. All specimens of this research are available in open databases (see: Vargas et al., 2022 ; https://doi.org/10.1093/botlinnean/boac035 ). The specimens at the Herbario Nacional Colombiano (COL, http://www.biovirtual.unal.edu.co/es/colecciones/search/plants/ ) and Jardín Botanico de Bogotá (JBB, https://herbario.jbb.gov.co/especimen/simple ) have images in high resolution for many of the specimens that support the current manuscript.…”

“…They are also essential for designing effective conservation and management strategies. However, it is well known that biodiversity information is incomplete or biased, limiting the generalization of results and the predictive power of models ( Feeley and Silman, 2011a ; García Márquez et al., 2012 ; Sousa-Baena et al., 2013 ; Vargas et al., 2022 ).…”