Global gaps in trait data for terrestrial vertebrates

Aim Trait data are increasingly being used in studies investigating the impacts of global changes on the structure and functioning of ecological communities. Despite a growing number of trait data collations for terrestrial vertebrates, there is to date no global assessment of the gaps and biases th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Global ecology and biogeography 2020-12, Vol.29 (12), p.2143-2158
Hauptverfasser: Etard, Adrienne, Morrill, Sophie, Newbold, Tim, Sheard, Catherine
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2158
container_issue 12
container_start_page 2143
container_title Global ecology and biogeography
container_volume 29
creator Etard, Adrienne
Morrill, Sophie
Newbold, Tim
Sheard, Catherine
description Aim Trait data are increasingly being used in studies investigating the impacts of global changes on the structure and functioning of ecological communities. Despite a growing number of trait data collations for terrestrial vertebrates, there is to date no global assessment of the gaps and biases the data present. Here, we assess whether terrestrial vertebrate trait data are taxonomically, spatially and phylogenetically biased. Location Global. Time period Present. Major taxa studied Terrestrial vertebrates. Methods We compile seven ecological traits and quantify coverage as the proportion of species for which an estimate is available. For a species, we define completeness as the proportion of non‐missing values across traits. We assess whether coverage and completeness differ across classes and examine phylogenetic biases in trait data. To investigate spatial biases, we test whether wider‐ranging species have more complete trait data than narrow‐ranging species. Additionally, we test whether species‐rich regions, which are of most concern for conservation, are less well sampled than species‐poor regions. Results Mammals and birds are well sampled even in species‐rich regions. For reptiles and amphibians (herptiles), only body size presents a high coverage (>80%), in addition to habitat‐related variables (amphibians). Herptiles are poorly sampled for other traits. The shortfalls are particularly acute in some species‐rich regions and for certain clades. Across all classes, geographically rarer species have less complete trait information. Main conclusions Trait information is less available on average in some of the most diverse areas and in geographically rarer species, both of which crucial for biodiversity conservation. Gaps in trait data might impede our ability to conduct large‐scale analyses, whereas biases can impact the validity of extrapolations. A short‐term solution to the problem is to estimate missing trait data using imputation techniques, whereas a longer‐term and more robust filling of existing gaps requires continued data‐collection efforts.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/geb.13184
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2462825604</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2462825604</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3324-bdba14be62dfd4a705f630bfdd5d993a6b5c94fc15a89f6ee616d08bf75279a93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKsH_8GCJw_b5ru7Ry1tFQpeFLyFySYpW9ZunaRK_73RFW_OZebwzMzLQ8g1oxOWa7rxdsIEq-QJGTGpdVlxUZ3-zfz1nFzEuKWUKqn0iKhV11voig3sY9HuioTQpsJBgiL0WCSP6GPCNiMfHpO3CMnHS3IWoIv-6rePycty8Tx_KNdPq8f53bpshOCytM4Ck9Zr7oKTMKMqaEFtcE65uhagrWpqGRqmoKqD9l4z7Whlw0zxWQ21GJOb4e4e-_dDDmK2_QF3-aXhUvOKK01lpm4HqsE-RvTB7LF9AzwaRs23FZOtmB8rmZ0O7Gfb-eP_oFkt7oeNL_Z3YyU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2462825604</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Global gaps in trait data for terrestrial vertebrates</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Etard, Adrienne ; Morrill, Sophie ; Newbold, Tim ; Sheard, Catherine</creator><contributor>Sheard, Catherine</contributor><creatorcontrib>Etard, Adrienne ; Morrill, Sophie ; Newbold, Tim ; Sheard, Catherine ; Sheard, Catherine</creatorcontrib><description>Aim Trait data are increasingly being used in studies investigating the impacts of global changes on the structure and functioning of ecological communities. Despite a growing number of trait data collations for terrestrial vertebrates, there is to date no global assessment of the gaps and biases the data present. Here, we assess whether terrestrial vertebrate trait data are taxonomically, spatially and phylogenetically biased. Location Global. Time period Present. Major taxa studied Terrestrial vertebrates. Methods We compile seven ecological traits and quantify coverage as the proportion of species for which an estimate is available. For a species, we define completeness as the proportion of non‐missing values across traits. We assess whether coverage and completeness differ across classes and examine phylogenetic biases in trait data. To investigate spatial biases, we test whether wider‐ranging species have more complete trait data than narrow‐ranging species. Additionally, we test whether species‐rich regions, which are of most concern for conservation, are less well sampled than species‐poor regions. Results Mammals and birds are well sampled even in species‐rich regions. For reptiles and amphibians (herptiles), only body size presents a high coverage (&gt;80%), in addition to habitat‐related variables (amphibians). Herptiles are poorly sampled for other traits. The shortfalls are particularly acute in some species‐rich regions and for certain clades. Across all classes, geographically rarer species have less complete trait information. Main conclusions Trait information is less available on average in some of the most diverse areas and in geographically rarer species, both of which crucial for biodiversity conservation. Gaps in trait data might impede our ability to conduct large‐scale analyses, whereas biases can impact the validity of extrapolations. A short‐term solution to the problem is to estimate missing trait data using imputation techniques, whereas a longer‐term and more robust filling of existing gaps requires continued data‐collection efforts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1466-822X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1466-8238</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/geb.13184</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Amphibians ; Biodiversity ; Birds ; Body size ; Completeness ; Conservation ; coverage ; phylogenetic biases ; Phylogeny ; Reptiles ; Reptiles &amp; amphibians ; spatial biases ; Spatial data ; Species ; taxonomic biases ; Terrestrial environments ; terrestrial vertebrates ; traits ; Vertebrates ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>Global ecology and biogeography, 2020-12, Vol.29 (12), p.2143-2158</ispartof><rights>2020 The Authors. Global Ecology and Biogeography published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2020. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3324-bdba14be62dfd4a705f630bfdd5d993a6b5c94fc15a89f6ee616d08bf75279a93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3324-bdba14be62dfd4a705f630bfdd5d993a6b5c94fc15a89f6ee616d08bf75279a93</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7361-0051 ; 0000-0002-1700-2972</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fgeb.13184$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fgeb.13184$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Sheard, Catherine</contributor><creatorcontrib>Etard, Adrienne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morrill, Sophie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newbold, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sheard, Catherine</creatorcontrib><title>Global gaps in trait data for terrestrial vertebrates</title><title>Global ecology and biogeography</title><description>Aim Trait data are increasingly being used in studies investigating the impacts of global changes on the structure and functioning of ecological communities. Despite a growing number of trait data collations for terrestrial vertebrates, there is to date no global assessment of the gaps and biases the data present. Here, we assess whether terrestrial vertebrate trait data are taxonomically, spatially and phylogenetically biased. Location Global. Time period Present. Major taxa studied Terrestrial vertebrates. Methods We compile seven ecological traits and quantify coverage as the proportion of species for which an estimate is available. For a species, we define completeness as the proportion of non‐missing values across traits. We assess whether coverage and completeness differ across classes and examine phylogenetic biases in trait data. To investigate spatial biases, we test whether wider‐ranging species have more complete trait data than narrow‐ranging species. Additionally, we test whether species‐rich regions, which are of most concern for conservation, are less well sampled than species‐poor regions. Results Mammals and birds are well sampled even in species‐rich regions. For reptiles and amphibians (herptiles), only body size presents a high coverage (&gt;80%), in addition to habitat‐related variables (amphibians). Herptiles are poorly sampled for other traits. The shortfalls are particularly acute in some species‐rich regions and for certain clades. Across all classes, geographically rarer species have less complete trait information. Main conclusions Trait information is less available on average in some of the most diverse areas and in geographically rarer species, both of which crucial for biodiversity conservation. Gaps in trait data might impede our ability to conduct large‐scale analyses, whereas biases can impact the validity of extrapolations. A short‐term solution to the problem is to estimate missing trait data using imputation techniques, whereas a longer‐term and more robust filling of existing gaps requires continued data‐collection efforts.</description><subject>Amphibians</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Body size</subject><subject>Completeness</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>coverage</subject><subject>phylogenetic biases</subject><subject>Phylogeny</subject><subject>Reptiles</subject><subject>Reptiles &amp; amphibians</subject><subject>spatial biases</subject><subject>Spatial data</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>taxonomic biases</subject><subject>Terrestrial environments</subject><subject>terrestrial vertebrates</subject><subject>traits</subject><subject>Vertebrates</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>1466-822X</issn><issn>1466-8238</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKsH_8GCJw_b5ru7Ry1tFQpeFLyFySYpW9ZunaRK_73RFW_OZebwzMzLQ8g1oxOWa7rxdsIEq-QJGTGpdVlxUZ3-zfz1nFzEuKWUKqn0iKhV11voig3sY9HuioTQpsJBgiL0WCSP6GPCNiMfHpO3CMnHS3IWoIv-6rePycty8Tx_KNdPq8f53bpshOCytM4Ck9Zr7oKTMKMqaEFtcE65uhagrWpqGRqmoKqD9l4z7Whlw0zxWQ21GJOb4e4e-_dDDmK2_QF3-aXhUvOKK01lpm4HqsE-RvTB7LF9AzwaRs23FZOtmB8rmZ0O7Gfb-eP_oFkt7oeNL_Z3YyU</recordid><startdate>202012</startdate><enddate>202012</enddate><creator>Etard, Adrienne</creator><creator>Morrill, Sophie</creator><creator>Newbold, Tim</creator><creator>Sheard, Catherine</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7361-0051</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1700-2972</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202012</creationdate><title>Global gaps in trait data for terrestrial vertebrates</title><author>Etard, Adrienne ; Morrill, Sophie ; Newbold, Tim ; Sheard, Catherine</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3324-bdba14be62dfd4a705f630bfdd5d993a6b5c94fc15a89f6ee616d08bf75279a93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Amphibians</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Body size</topic><topic>Completeness</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>coverage</topic><topic>phylogenetic biases</topic><topic>Phylogeny</topic><topic>Reptiles</topic><topic>Reptiles &amp; amphibians</topic><topic>spatial biases</topic><topic>Spatial data</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>taxonomic biases</topic><topic>Terrestrial environments</topic><topic>terrestrial vertebrates</topic><topic>traits</topic><topic>Vertebrates</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Etard, Adrienne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morrill, Sophie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newbold, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sheard, Catherine</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Global ecology and biogeography</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Etard, Adrienne</au><au>Morrill, Sophie</au><au>Newbold, Tim</au><au>Sheard, Catherine</au><au>Sheard, Catherine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Global gaps in trait data for terrestrial vertebrates</atitle><jtitle>Global ecology and biogeography</jtitle><date>2020-12</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>2143</spage><epage>2158</epage><pages>2143-2158</pages><issn>1466-822X</issn><eissn>1466-8238</eissn><abstract>Aim Trait data are increasingly being used in studies investigating the impacts of global changes on the structure and functioning of ecological communities. Despite a growing number of trait data collations for terrestrial vertebrates, there is to date no global assessment of the gaps and biases the data present. Here, we assess whether terrestrial vertebrate trait data are taxonomically, spatially and phylogenetically biased. Location Global. Time period Present. Major taxa studied Terrestrial vertebrates. Methods We compile seven ecological traits and quantify coverage as the proportion of species for which an estimate is available. For a species, we define completeness as the proportion of non‐missing values across traits. We assess whether coverage and completeness differ across classes and examine phylogenetic biases in trait data. To investigate spatial biases, we test whether wider‐ranging species have more complete trait data than narrow‐ranging species. Additionally, we test whether species‐rich regions, which are of most concern for conservation, are less well sampled than species‐poor regions. Results Mammals and birds are well sampled even in species‐rich regions. For reptiles and amphibians (herptiles), only body size presents a high coverage (&gt;80%), in addition to habitat‐related variables (amphibians). Herptiles are poorly sampled for other traits. The shortfalls are particularly acute in some species‐rich regions and for certain clades. Across all classes, geographically rarer species have less complete trait information. Main conclusions Trait information is less available on average in some of the most diverse areas and in geographically rarer species, both of which crucial for biodiversity conservation. Gaps in trait data might impede our ability to conduct large‐scale analyses, whereas biases can impact the validity of extrapolations. A short‐term solution to the problem is to estimate missing trait data using imputation techniques, whereas a longer‐term and more robust filling of existing gaps requires continued data‐collection efforts.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/geb.13184</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7361-0051</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1700-2972</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1466-822X
ispartof Global ecology and biogeography, 2020-12, Vol.29 (12), p.2143-2158
issn 1466-822X
1466-8238
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2462825604
source Wiley Journals
subjects Amphibians
Biodiversity
Birds
Body size
Completeness
Conservation
coverage
phylogenetic biases
Phylogeny
Reptiles
Reptiles & amphibians
spatial biases
Spatial data
Species
taxonomic biases
Terrestrial environments
terrestrial vertebrates
traits
Vertebrates
Wildlife conservation
title Global gaps in trait data for terrestrial vertebrates
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T15%3A07%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Global%20gaps%20in%20trait%20data%20for%20terrestrial%20vertebrates&rft.jtitle=Global%20ecology%20and%20biogeography&rft.au=Etard,%20Adrienne&rft.date=2020-12&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=2143&rft.epage=2158&rft.pages=2143-2158&rft.issn=1466-822X&rft.eissn=1466-8238&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/geb.13184&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2462825604%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2462825604&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true