ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025
The hidden biodiversity knowledge split in biological collections.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Local expertise anchors biodiversity documentation, but geopolitical power drives parachute discovery.npj biodiversity · 2026Review
- The hidden biodiversity knowledge split in biological collections.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ecological and evolutionary processes generate biodiversity, yet how biodiversity data are organized and shared globally can shape our understanding of these processes. We show that name-bearing type specimens-the primary reference for species identity-of all freshwater and brackish fish species are predominantly housed in Global North museums, disconnected from their countries of origin. This geographical divide creates a 'knowledge split' with consequences for biodiversity science, particularly in the Global South, where researchers face barriers in studying native species' name bearers housed abroad. Meanwhile, Global North collections remain flooded with non-native name bearers. We relate this imbalance to historical and socioeconomic factors, which ultimately restrict access to critical taxonomic reference materials and hinder global species documentation. To address this disparity, we call for international initiatives to promote fairer access to biological knowledge, including specimen repatriation, improved accessibility protocols for researchers in countries where specimens originated and inclusive research partnerships.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.