当前位置: X-MOL 学术Oecologia › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Natural history collections and the future legacy of ecological research.
Oecologia ( IF 2.7 ) Pub Date : 2020-02-13 , DOI: 10.1007/s00442-020-04620-0
Rodrigo B Salvador 1 , Carlo M Cunha 2
Affiliation  

Natural history collections are now being championed as key to broad ecological studies, especially those involving human impacts in the Anthropocene. However, collections are going through a crisis that threatens their present and future value, going beyond underfunding/understaffing to a more damaging practice: current researchers are no longer depositing material. This seems to be especially true for ecological studies that now benefit from historical collections, as those researchers are not trained to think about voucher specimens. We investigated indexed journals in Ecology and Zoology to assess if they have guidelines concerning voucher specimens. Only 4% of ecological journals presently encourage (but mostly do not require) voucher deposition, while 15% of zoological journals encourage it. In the first place, this goes contrary to scientific standards of reproducibility, since specimens are primary data. Secondly, this erodes the legacy we will leave for future researchers, because if this trend goes on unchecked, it will leave a massive gap in collections' coverage, undermining the quality that is presently acclaimed. The scientific community needs a wakeup call to avoid impoverishing the future value of natural history collections. Training and changing researchers' mindsets is essential, but that takes time. For the moment, we propose a stopgap measure: at the minimum, academic journals should encourage authors to deposit specimens in open collections, such as museums and universities.

中文翻译:

自然史收藏和生态研究的未来遗产。

现在,自然历史收藏被认为是广泛生态学研究的关键,特别是那些涉及人类对人类世的影响的研究。但是,馆藏正经历一场威胁其现值和未来价值的危机,不仅资金不足/人手不足,而且更具破坏性:目前的研究人员不再存放材料。对于现在受益于历史收藏的生态研究而言,这似乎尤其正确,因为这些研究人员没有受过思考凭证样本的培训。我们调查了生态学和动物学索引期刊,以评估它们是否有关于凭证标本的指南。目前,只有4%的生态期刊鼓励(但大部分不需要)凭证的存入,而15%的生态期刊鼓励这样做。首先,由于样品是主要数据,因此这与可重复性的科学标准背道而驰。其次,这侵蚀了我们留给未来研究人员的遗产,因为如果这种趋势不加遏制,将在馆藏范围上留下巨大的差距,从而破坏目前广受赞誉的质量。科学界需要警醒,以免损害自然历史收藏的未来价值。培训和改变研究人员的思维方式至关重要,但这需要时间。目前,我们提出了权宜之计:至少,学术期刊应鼓励作者将标本存放在博物馆和大学等开放收藏中。因为如果这种趋势继续发展下去,将会在产品系列的覆盖范围上留下巨大的缺口,从而破坏目前广受好评的质量。科学界需要警醒,以免破坏自然历史收藏品的未来价值。培训和改变研究人员的思维方式至关重要,但这需要时间。目前,我们提出了权宜之计:至少,学术期刊应鼓励作者将标本存放在博物馆和大学等开放收藏中。因为如果这种趋势不加遏制,将会在产品系列的覆盖范围上留下巨大的缺口,从而破坏目前广受赞誉的质量。科学界需要警醒,以免损害自然历史收藏的未来价值。培训和改变研究人员的思维方式至关重要,但这需要时间。目前,我们提出了权宜之计:至少,学术期刊应鼓励作者将标本存放在博物馆和大学等开放收藏中。但这需要时间。目前,我们提出了权宜之计:至少,学术期刊应鼓励作者将标本存放在博物馆和大学等开放收藏中。但这需要时间。目前,我们提出了权宜之计:至少,学术期刊应鼓励作者将标本存放在博物馆和大学等开放收藏中。
更新日期:2020-02-13
down
wechat
bug