Turney Shaun, Cameron Elyssa R, Cloutier Christopher A, Buddle Christopher M
Department of Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, Canada.
PeerJ. 2015 Aug 6;3:e1168. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1168. eCollection 2015.
Scientific findings need to be verifiable and grounded in repeatability. With specimen-level research this is in part achieved with the deposition of voucher specimens. These are labeled, curated, data-based specimens that have been deposited in a collection or museum, available for verification of the work and to ensure researchers are calling the same taxa by the same names. Voucher specimens themselves are the subject of research, from the discovery of new species by taxonomists to ecologists documenting historical records of invasive species. Our objective was to quantify the frequency of voucher specimen deposition in biodiversity and community ecology research through a survey of the peer-reviewed literature about arthropods, from 1989 until 2014. Overall rates of voucher deposition were alarmingly low, at under 25%. This rate increased significantly over time, with 35% of papers reporting on vouchers in 2014. Relative to the global mean, entomological research had a significantly higher rate of voucher deposition (46%), whereas researchers studying crustaceans deposited vouchers less than 6% of the time, significantly less than the mean. Researchers working in museums had a significantly higher frequency of voucher deposition. Our results suggest a significant culture shift about the process of vouchering specimens is required. There must be more education and mentoring about voucher specimens within laboratories and across different fields of study. Principal investigators and granting agencies need a proactive approach to ensuring specimen-level data are properly, long-term curated. Editorial boards and journals can also adopt policies to ensure papers are published only if explicit statements about the deposition of voucher specimens is provided. Although the gap is significant, achieving a higher rate of voucher specimen deposition is a worthy goal to ensure all research efforts are preserved for future generations.
科学发现需要是可验证的，并基于可重复性。对于标本水平的研究，这在一定程度上是通过存放凭证标本实现的。这些是经过标记、整理、基于数据的标本，已存放在收藏机构或博物馆中，可用于核实研究工作，并确保研究人员对同一分类群使用相同的名称。凭证标本本身就是研究的对象，从分类学家发现新物种到生态学家记录入侵物种的历史记录。我们的目标是通过对1989年至2014年关于节肢动物的同行评审文献进行调查，量化生物多样性和群落生态学研究中凭证标本存放的频率。凭证存放的总体比例低得惊人，不到25%。随着时间的推移，这一比例显著上升，2014年有35%的论文报告了凭证情况。相对于全球平均水平，昆虫学研究的凭证存放率显著更高（46%），而研究甲壳类动物的研究人员存放凭证的时间不到6%，明显低于平均水平。在博物馆工作的研究人员凭证存放频率显著更高。我们的结果表明，在凭证标本的处理过程中需要有重大的文化转变。在实验室内部和不同研究领域之间，必须有更多关于凭证标本的教育和指导。主要研究者和资助机构需要采取积极主动的方法，以确保标本水平的数据得到妥善、长期的整理。编辑委员会和期刊也可以采取政策，确保只有在提供了关于凭证标本存放的明确说明时才发表论文。尽管差距很大，但实现更高的凭证标本存放率是一个值得追求的目标，以确保所有研究成果都能为后代保存下来。
