Cited by 306Research Data Management PracticesSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies

Digitization and the Future of Natural History Collections

Hedrick, Brandon P, Heberling, J Mason, Meineke, Emily K, Turner, Kathryn G, Grassa, Christopher J, Park, Daniel S, Kennedy, Jonathan, Clarke, Julia A +4 more·2020·BioScience

Abstract

Natural history collections (NHCs) are the foundation of historical baselines for assessing anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity. Along these lines, the online mobilization of specimens via digitization—the conversion of specimen data into accessible digital content—has greatly expanded the use of NHC collections across a diversity of disciplines. We broaden the current vision of digitization (Digitization 1.0)—whereby specimens are digitized within NHCs—to include new approaches that rely on digitized products rather than the physical specimen (Digitization 2.0). Digitization 2.0 builds on the data, workflows, and infrastructure produced by Digitization 1.0 to create digital-only workflows that facilitate digitization, curation, and data links, thus returning value to physical specimens by creating new layers of annotation, empowering a global community, and developing automated approaches to advance biodiversity discovery and conservation. These efforts will transform large-scale biodiversity assessments to address fundamental questions including those pertaining to critical issues of global change.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/biosci/biz163

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • X-ray computed microtomography (micro-CT) can non-destructively digitize valuable collection material in 3D.

    “X-ray computed microtomography (micro-CT) can non-destructively digitize valuable collection material in 3D 10 , 11”

    From High-throughput phenomics of global ant biodiversity (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hedrick, B. P., Heberling, J. M., Meineke, E. K., Turner, K. G., Grassa, C. J., Park, D. S., Kennedy, J., Clarke, J. A., Cook, J. A., Blackburn, D. C., Edwards, S. V., & Davis, C. C.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Carnegie Museum of Natural History (US)
  • Idaho State University (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • University of New Mexico (US)
  • Florida Museum of Natural History (US)
Corresponding author
  • Hedrick, Brandon P
  • Davis, Charles C
Venue
BioScience
Published
2020-02-07
Volume
70
Issue
3
Pages
243-251
ISSN
  • 0006-3568 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-3244
OpenAlex
W2959883904
Cited by
306
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 19
FWCI
35.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
BioScience (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1441785, 1746177, EF1208835, 1754584)
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 › Ecology › Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Keywords
natural history collections, digitization, specimen records, biodiversity assessment, biodiversity discovery, conservation, global change, digital curation, annotation, biodiversity data infrastructure

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