Dataset Information

Why European biodiversity reporting is not reliable.

ABSTRACT: The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aims to end the loss of biodiversity, which is one of the greatest ecological challenges of our time. The lack of success in biodiversity policy implementation is partly related to gaps in biodiversity monitoring. Our overall objective is to contribute to the preparation of the upcoming post 2020 period by a review of biodiversity indicator choices in European CBD reports and hence in national monitoring systems. Negative binary generalized models and poisson generalized linear models prove that through free indicator choice in CBD reporting, countries do not choose biodiversity indicators according to their national geographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Moreover, species and ecosystem diversity indicators were chosen with a disproportionate frequency compared to that of genetic diversity indicators. Consequently, trends derived from national CBD reports and monitoring systems in Europe are not reliable, which should be an alarming signal concerning biodiversity policy implementation. Finally, a flow chart to revise national biodiversity monitoring systems is proposed.

SUBMITTER: Ette JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7982379 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Why European biodiversity reporting is not reliable.

Ette Jana-Sophie JS Geburek Thomas T

Ambio 20201207 4

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aims to end the loss of biodiversity, which is one of the greatest ecological challenges of our time. The lack of success in biodiversity policy implementation is partly related to gaps in biodiversity monitoring. Our overall objective is to contribute to the preparation of the upcoming post 2020 period by a review of biodiversity indicator choices in European CBD reports and hence in national monitoring systems. Negative binary generalized models and ...[more]

PMID: 33289051

Similar Datasets

Project description:Color research continuously demands better methods and larger sample sizes. Citizen science (CS) projects are producing an ever-growing geo- and time-referenced set of photographs of organisms. These datasets have the potential to make a huge contribution to color research, but the reliability of these data need to be tested before widespread implementation.We compared the difference between color extracted from CS photographs with that of color extracted from controlled lighting conditions (i.e., the current gold standard in spectrometry) for both birds and plants. First, we tested the ability of CS photographs to quantify interspecific variability by assessing > 9,000 CS photographs of 537 Australian bird species with controlled museum spectrometry data. Second, we tested the ability of CS photographs to quantify intraspecific variability by measuring petal color data for two plant species using seven methods/sources with varying levels of control.For interspecific questions, we found that by averaging out variability through a large sample size, CS photographs capture a large proportion of across species variation in plumage color within the visual part of the spectrum (R2 = 0.68-0.71 for RGB space and 0.72-0.77 for CIE-LAB space). Between 12 and 14 photographs per species are necessary to achieve this averaging effect for interspecific studies. Unsurprisingly, the CS photographs taken with commercial cameras failed to capture information in the UV part of the spectrum. For intraspecific questions, decreasing levels of control increase the color variation but averaging larger sample sizes can partially mitigate this, aside from particular issues related to saturation and irregularities in light capture.CS photographs offer a very large sample size across space and time which offers statistical power for many color research questions. This study shows that CS photographs contain data that lines up closely with controlled measurements within the visual spectrum if the sample size is large enough, highlighting the potential of CS photographs for both interspecific and intraspecific ecological or biological questions. With regard to analyzing color in CS photographs, we suggest, as a starting point, to measure multiple random points within the ROI of each photograph for both patterned and unpatterned patches and approach the recommended sample size of 12-14 photographs per species for interspecific studies. Overall, this study provides groundwork in analyzing the reliability of a novel method, which can propel the field of studying color forward.

Project description:BackgroundSynoptic reporting is recommended by many guideline committees to encourage the thorough histologic documentation necessary for optimal management of patients with melanoma.MethodsOne hundred fifty-one pathologists from 40 US states interpreted 41 invasive melanoma cases. For each synoptic reporting factor, the authors identified cases with "complete agreement" (all participants recorded the same value) versus any disagreement. Pairwise agreement was calculated for each case as the proportion of pairs of responses that agreed, where paired responses were generated by the comparison of each reviewer's response with all others.ResultsThere was complete agreement among all reviewers for 22 of the 41 cases (54%) on Breslow thickness dichotomized at 0.8 mm, with pairwise agreement ranging from 49% to 100% across the 41 cases. There was complete agreement for "no ulceration" in 24 of the 41 cases (59%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 42% to 100%. Tumor transected at base had complete agreement for 26 of the 41 cases (63%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 31% to 100%. Mitotic rate, categorized as 0/mm2 , 1/mm2 , or 2/mm2 , had complete agreement for 17 of the 41 cases (41%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 36% to 100%. Regression saw complete agreement for 14 of 41 cases (34%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 40% to 100%. Lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and microscopic satellites were rarely reported as present. Respectively, these prognostic factors had complete agreement for 32 (78%), 37 (90%), and 18 (44%) of the 41 cases, and the ranges of pairwise agreement were 47% to 100%, 70% to 100%, and 53% to 100%, respectively.ConclusionsThese findings alert pathologists and clinicians to the problem of interobserver variability in recording critical prognostic factors.Lay summaryThis study addresses variability in the assessment and reporting of critical characteristics of invasive melanomas that are used by clinicians to guide patient care. The authors characterize the diagnostic variability among pathologists and their reporting methods in light of recently updated national guidelines. Results demonstrate considerable variability in the diagnostic reporting of melanoma with regard to the following: Breslow thickness, mitotic rate, ulceration, regression, and microscopic satellites. This work serves to alert pathologists and clinicians to the existence of variability in reporting these prognostic factors.

Project description:BackgroundHealth practice guidelines (HPGs) are important tools for the translation of evidence into practice. Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) checklist provides guidance on reporting health practice guidelines (HPGs). We assessed the reporting completeness and quality of a set of national (Croatian) and relevant transnational (European) HPGs.MethodsThe national sample included all HPGs published in the official journal of the Croatian Medical Association in 2014-2016. We searched PubMed to identify relevant European guidelines (n = 24). Two independent reviewers assessed the adherence with the items on the RIGHT checklist. Kappa score was used to measure the level of agreement. Frequentist and Bayes statistics Bayes factor (BF10) was used to evaluate the differences between the national and transnational HPGs.ResultsOverall, Croatian and European HPGs adhered to less than 50% of RIGHT checklist items. Croatian HPGs reported a median of 14.0 (95% CI 13.0-15.0) RIGHT reporting items, and European counterparts reported a median of 16.0 (95% CI 14.0-17.2) out of the total of 35 checklist items (Mann Whitney U test, P = 0.048; BF10 = 1.543). European HPGs were better than Croatian HPGs in reporting stakeholder involvement and values and preferences (BF10 = 80.63), as well as describing the implications of costs and resources (BF10 = 55.15). Croatian HPGs better reported HPGs specified aims (BF10 = 16.90), primary intended users (BF10 = 8.70), and sources of funding (BF10 = 122.90). Most insufficiently reported items for both HPG sets were defining the guideline questions and clear outcomes, quality assurance, management of funding and conflicts of interest, and guideline limitations.ConclusionsImportant methodological details are missing from most published HPGs at national and transnational levels. To ensure better quality and adequate use of HPGs, reporting guidelines should be endorsed and used by developers and users alike.

Dataset Information

Why European biodiversity reporting is not reliable.

Publications

Why European biodiversity reporting is not reliable.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets