Cited by 52Evolution and Paleontology StudiesEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesSpecies Distribution and Climate Change

Analysis of biodiversity data suggests that mammal species are hidden in predictable places

Open access
Parsons, Danielle J., Pelletier, Tara A., Wieringa, Jamin G., Duckett, Drew J., Carstens, Bryan C.·2022·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Only an estimated 1 to 10% of Earth’s species have been formally described. This discrepancy between the number of species with a formal taxonomic description and actual number of species (i.e., the Linnean shortfall) hampers research across the biological sciences. To explore whether the Linnean shortfall results from poor taxonomic practice or not enough taxonomic effort, we applied machine-learning techniques to build a predictive model to identify named species that are likely to contain hidden diversity. Results indicate that small-bodied species with large, climatically variable ranges are most likely to contain hidden species. These attributes generally match those identified in the taxonomic literature, indicating that the Linnean shortfall is caused by societal underinvestment in taxonomy rather than poor taxonomic practice.

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.2103400119

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Less speciose mammal taxa like Hyracoidea, Scandentia, Pilosa, Pholidota, Lagomorpha, and Perissodactyla that have received comparatively less taxonomic attention in the 21st century are also likely to contain cryptic species.

    “However, less speciose mammal taxa like Hyracoidea, Scandentia, Pilosa, Pholidota, Lagomorpha, and Perissodactyla that have received comparatively less taxonomic attention in the 21st century are also likely to contain cryptic species (Parsons et al. 2022).”

    From How many mammal species are there now? Updates and trends in taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic knowledge (2025) · cites this paper as Parsons et al. 2022

    The Results (Species Delimitation; page unavailable) support the general point that mammal species may contain hidden diversity, but identify Chiroptera, Rodentia, and Eulipotyphla as the orders expected to contain the majority. The copy does not make that prediction for the six named orders. The Discussion (Predictors of Hidden Species in Mammals; page unavailable) also associates hidden species with taxa more represented in recent taxonomic publications, rather than comparatively less attention. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Rodents, bats, and eulipotyphlans are predicted to be the largest sources of unrecognized mammal species despite high rates of new species recognition in these clades.

    “Rodents, bats, and eulipotyphlans are predicted to be the largest sources of unrecognized mammal species despite the high rate of new species recognition in these clades.”
  • Parsons et al. (2022) used mitochondrial genetic data from a subset of 4,310 mammal species to find that body mass and range size rank as the top predictors of unrecognized cryptic species.

    “Parsons et al. (2022) used mitochondrial genetic data from a subset of 4,310 mammal species to find which covariates best predict unrecognized cryptic species, with body mass and range size ranking as the top predictors.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Parsons, D. J., Pelletier, T. A., Wieringa, J. G., Duckett, D. J., & Carstens, B. C.
Affiliations
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Radford University (US)
Corresponding author
Carstens, Bryan C.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2022-03-28
Volume
119
Issue
14
Pages
e2103400119-e2103400119
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W4220793638
Cited by
52
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3
FWCI
7.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DBI1661029, DBI1910623, DBI-1911293)
  • Ohio Supercomputer Center (PA11174)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecological Modeling › Species Distribution and Climate Change
Keywords
Linnean shortfall, hidden species, mammals, species description, taxonomic effort, body size, species distribution, biodiversity data
MeSH terms
Animals, Mammals, Phylogeny, 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