The history and impact of digitization and digital data mobilization on biodiversity research
Open accessAbstract
The first two decades of the twenty-first century have seen a rapid rise in the mobilization of digital biodiversity data. This has thrust natural history museums into the forefront of biodiversity research, underscoring their central role in the modern scientific enterprise. The advent of mobilization initiatives such as the United States National Science Foundation's Advancing Digitization of Biodiversity Collections (ADBC), Australia's Atlas of Living Australia (ALA), Mexico's National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO), Brazil's Centro de Referência em Informação (CRIA) and China's National Specimen Information Infrastructure (NSII) has led to a rapid rise in data aggregators and an exponential increase in digital data for scientific research and arguably provide the best evidence of where species live. The international Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) now serves about 131 million museum specimen records, and Integrated Digitized Biocollections (iDigBio) in the USA has amassed more than 115 million. These resources expose collections to a wider audience of researchers, provide the best biodiversity data in the modern era outside of nature itself and ensure the primacy of specimen-based research. Here, we provide a brief history of worldwide data mobilization, their impact on biodiversity research, challenges for ensuring data quality, their contribution to scientific publications and evidence of the rising profiles of natural history collections. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Biological collections for understanding biodiversity in the Anthropocene’.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 [10]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 69 · Cited by 304
- Authors
- Nelson, G., & Ellis, S.
- Affiliations
- Florida State University (US)
- Florida Museum of Natural History (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nelson, Gil
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2018-11-19
- Volume
- 374
- Issue
- 1763
- Pages
- 20170391
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- PMC
- PMC6282090
- OpenAlex
- W2901476362
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 69
- Citations by year
- 2026: 49 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 3.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- United States National Science Foundation (DBI 1547229)
- 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 museums, digital biodiversity data, data mobilization, Atlas of Living Australia, CONABIO, GBIF, iDigBio, museum specimen record, data quality, biodiversity research
- MeSH terms
- Museums, Specimen Handling, 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