4.2 Article

Digitization protocol for scoring reproductive phenology from herbarium specimens of seed plants

Journal

APPLICATIONS IN PLANT SCIENCES
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

BOTANICAL SOC AMER INC
DOI: 10.1002/aps3.1022

Keywords

citizen science; digitization workflows; herbarium specimens; ontology; phenology

Categories

Funding

  1. Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
  2. Sibbald Trust
  3. National Science Foundation [DBI-1547229, DBI-0735191, DBI-1265383, DBI-1458550, DBI-1410087, DBI-EF1208835, DEB-1556768, DBI-1458264, DBI-1209149]
  4. Scottish Government
  5. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  6. Direct For Biological Sciences [1209149] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  8. Direct For Biological Sciences [1458527] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PREMISE OF THE STUDY: Herbarium specimens provide a robust record of historical plant phenology (the timing of seasonal events such as flowering or fruiting). However, the difficulty of aggregating phenological data from specimens arises from a lack of standardized scoring methods and definitions for phenological states across the collections community. METHODS AND RESULTS: To address this problem, we report on a consensus reached by an iDigBio working group of curators, researchers, and data standards experts regarding an efficient scoring protocol and a data-sharing protocol for reproductive traits available from herbarium specimens of seed plants. The phenological data sets generated can be shared via Darwin Core Archives using the Extended MeasurementOrFact extension. CONCLUSIONS: Our hope is that curators and others interested in collecting phenological trait data from specimens will use the recommendations presented here in current and future scoring efforts. New tools for scoring specimens are reviewed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available