Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders

Conservation assessments of hyperdiverse groups of organisms are often challenging and limited by the availability of occurrence data needed to calculate assessment metrics such as extent of occurrence (EOO). Spiders represent one such diverse group and have historically been assessed using primary...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vaughn Shirey, Sini Seppälä, Vasco Branco, Pedro Cardoso
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Pensoft Publishers 2019-12-01
Series:Biodiversity Data Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://bdj.pensoft.net/article/47369/download/pdf/
_version_ 1818343487859326976
author Vaughn Shirey
Sini Seppälä
Vasco Branco
Pedro Cardoso
author_facet Vaughn Shirey
Sini Seppälä
Vasco Branco
Pedro Cardoso
author_sort Vaughn Shirey
collection DOAJ
description Conservation assessments of hyperdiverse groups of organisms are often challenging and limited by the availability of occurrence data needed to calculate assessment metrics such as extent of occurrence (EOO). Spiders represent one such diverse group and have historically been assessed using primary literature with retrospective georeferencing. Here we demonstrate the differences in estimations of EOO and hypothetical IUCN Red List classifications for two extensive spider datasets comprising 479 species in total. The EOO were estimated and compared using literature-based assessments, Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)-based assessments and combined data assessments. We found that although few changes to hypothetical IUCN Red List classifications occurred with the addition of GBIF data, some species (3.3%) which could previously not be classified could now be assessed with the addition of GBIF data. In addition, the hypothetical classification changed for others (1.5%). On the other hand, GBIF data alone did not provide enough data for 88.7% of species. These results demonstrate the potential of GBIF data to serve as an additional source of information for conservation assessments, complementing literature data, but not particularly useful on its own as it stands right now for spiders.
first_indexed 2024-12-13T16:31:22Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b72ef2b5e18243f7b1d7eb3ad7325252
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1314-2836
1314-2828
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-13T16:31:22Z
publishDate 2019-12-01
publisher Pensoft Publishers
record_format Article
series Biodiversity Data Journal
spelling doaj.art-b72ef2b5e18243f7b1d7eb3ad73252522022-12-21T23:38:29ZengPensoft PublishersBiodiversity Data Journal1314-28361314-28282019-12-0171810.3897/BDJ.7.e4736947369Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spidersVaughn Shirey0Sini Seppälä1Vasco Branco2Pedro Cardoso3The Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel UniversityLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of HelsinkiLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of HelsinkiLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of HelsinkiConservation assessments of hyperdiverse groups of organisms are often challenging and limited by the availability of occurrence data needed to calculate assessment metrics such as extent of occurrence (EOO). Spiders represent one such diverse group and have historically been assessed using primary literature with retrospective georeferencing. Here we demonstrate the differences in estimations of EOO and hypothetical IUCN Red List classifications for two extensive spider datasets comprising 479 species in total. The EOO were estimated and compared using literature-based assessments, Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)-based assessments and combined data assessments. We found that although few changes to hypothetical IUCN Red List classifications occurred with the addition of GBIF data, some species (3.3%) which could previously not be classified could now be assessed with the addition of GBIF data. In addition, the hypothetical classification changed for others (1.5%). On the other hand, GBIF data alone did not provide enough data for 88.7% of species. These results demonstrate the potential of GBIF data to serve as an additional source of information for conservation assessments, complementing literature data, but not particularly useful on its own as it stands right now for spiders.https://bdj.pensoft.net/article/47369/download/pdf/Araneaearthropodaconservationextent of oc
spellingShingle Vaughn Shirey
Sini Seppälä
Vasco Branco
Pedro Cardoso
Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders
Biodiversity Data Journal
Araneae
arthropoda
conservation
extent of oc
title Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders
title_full Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders
title_fullStr Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders
title_full_unstemmed Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders
title_short Current GBIF occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders
title_sort current gbif occurrence data demonstrates both promise and limitations for potential red listing of spiders
topic Araneae
arthropoda
conservation
extent of oc
url https://bdj.pensoft.net/article/47369/download/pdf/
work_keys_str_mv AT vaughnshirey currentgbifoccurrencedatademonstratesbothpromiseandlimitationsforpotentialredlistingofspiders
AT siniseppala currentgbifoccurrencedatademonstratesbothpromiseandlimitationsforpotentialredlistingofspiders
AT vascobranco currentgbifoccurrencedatademonstratesbothpromiseandlimitationsforpotentialredlistingofspiders
AT pedrocardoso currentgbifoccurrencedatademonstratesbothpromiseandlimitationsforpotentialredlistingofspiders