Cited by 380Research Data Management PracticesSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Data integration enables global biodiversity synthesis

Open access
Heberling, J. Mason, Miller, Joseph T., Noesgaard, Daniel, Weingart, Scott B., Schigel, Dmitry·2021·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: As anthropogenic impacts to Earth systems accelerate, biodiversity knowledge integration is urgently required to support responses to underpin a sustainable future. Consolidating information from disparate sources (e.g., community science programs, museums) and data types (e.g., environmental, biological) can connect the biological sciences across taxonomic, disciplinary, geographical, and socioeconomic boundaries. In an analysis of the research uses of the world’s largest cross-taxon biodiversity data network, we report the emerging roles of open-access data aggregation in the development of increasingly diverse, global research. These results indicate a new biodiversity science landscape centered on big data integration, informing ongoing initiatives and the strategic prioritization of biodiversity data aggregation across diverse knowledge domains, including environmental sciences and policy, evolutionary biology, conservation, and human health.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.2018093118

Cites

64 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 65 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 380

Metadata

Authors
Heberling, J. M., Miller, J. T., Noesgaard, D., Weingart, S. B., & Schigel, D.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Museum of Natural History (US)
  • Global Biodiversity Information Facility (DK)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
Heberling, J. Mason
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2021-02
Volume
118
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W3127515314
Cited by
380
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 81 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 21
FWCI
50.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecological Modeling › Species Distribution and Climate Change
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
biodiversity data integration, GBIF, citizen science, species distribution modeling, macroecology
MeSH terms
Animals, Classification, Humans, Museums, Databases, Factual, Biodiversity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review