Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 905–919 | Cite as

Non-geographic collecting biases in herbarium specimens of Australian daisies (Asteraceae)

  • Alexander N. Schmidt-Lebuhn
  • Nunzio J. Knerr
  • Michael Kessler
Original Paper


Biological collections are increasingly becoming databased and available for novel types of study. A possible limitation of these data, which has the potential to confound analyses based on them, is their biased composition due to non-random and opportunistic collecting efforts. While geographic biases are comparatively well studied and understood, very little attention has been directed at other potential biases. We used Asteraceae specimen data from Australia’s Virtual Herbarium to test for over- and under-representation of plants with specific morphology, phenology and status by comparing observed numbers of specimens against a null distribution of simulated collections. Strong collecting biases could be demonstrated against introduced plants, plants with green or brown inflorescences, and very small plants. Specimens belonging to species with very restricted areas of distribution were also found to be strongly underrepresented. A moderate bias was observed against plants flowering in summer. While spiny plants have been collected only about half as often as should be expected, much of this bias was due to nearly all of them also being introduced (thistles). When introduced species were analyzed alone, a negative effect of spines remained but was much more moderate. The effect of woody or herbaceous habit, other inflorescence colours, tall growth and size of the capitula was comparatively negligible. Our results indicate that care should be taken when relying on specimen databases or the herbaria themselves for studies examining phenology, resource availability for pollinators, or the distribution and abundance of exotic species, and that researchers should be aware of collecting biases against small and unattractively coloured plants.


Asteraceae Australia Biodiversity databases Collecting bias Compositae Invasive plants 



The authors thank Anthony Brown, Mike Crisp, Bob Godfree, Brendan Lepschi, Joe Miller, Nathalie Nagalingum, Maggie Nightingale and other colleagues at the Centre for Australian National Biodiversity Research for helpful discussions, and David Hawksworth and an anonymous reviewer for critically reviewing an earlier draft of the paper.

Supplementary material

10531_2013_457_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (102 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 101 kb)


  1. Brent RP (2007) Some long-period random number generators using shifts and xors. ANZIAM J 48(CTAC2006):C188–C202Google Scholar
  2. Brown EA (1992) Asteraceae. In: Harden GJ (ed) Flora of New South Wales volume 3. UNSW Press, Sydney, pp 131–341Google Scholar
  3. Burbidge NT (1982) A revision of Vittadinia (Compositae) together with reinstatement of Eurybiopsis DC. and description of a new genus Campactra. Brunonia 5:1–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. CANBR [Centre for Australian National Biodiversity Research] (2010) Australian Tropical Rainforest plants edition 6 [online version]. Accessed Dec 2011
  5. CHAH [Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria] (2011) Australian plant census. Accessed 28 Sep 2011
  6. Cooke DA (1986) Compositae (Asteraceae). In: Jessop JP, Toelken HR (eds) Flora of South Australia part 3: Polemoniaceae—Compositae, 4th edn. South Australian Government Printing Division, Adelaide, pp 1423–1658Google Scholar
  7. Curtis WM (1963) The student’s Flora of Tasmania part 2: Angiospermae: Lythraceae to Epacridaceae. LG Shea, Government PrinterGoogle Scholar
  8. Dunlop CR (1981a) Allopterigeron, a new genus in Asteraceae (Inuleae). J Adelaide Bot Gard 3:183–186Google Scholar
  9. Dunlop CR (1981b) A revision of the genus Streptoglossa (Asteraceae: Inuleae). J Adelaide Bot Gard 3:167–182Google Scholar
  10. Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM (2000) Pattern and process in macroecology. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gonzalez-Oroczo CE, Brown AHD, Knerr N, Miller JT, Doyle JJ (2012) Hotspots of diversity of wild Australian soybean relatives and their conservation in situ. Conserv Genet 12:1269–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Graham CH, Ferrier S, Huettman F, Moritz C, Townsend Peterson A (2004) New developments in museum-based informatics and applications in biodiversity analysis. Trends Ecol Evol 19:497–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guralnick R, Van Cleve J (2005) Strengths and weaknesses of museum and national survey data sets for predicting regional species richness: comparative and combined approaches. Divers Distrib 11:349–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holzapfel S (1994) A revision of the genus Picris (Asteraceae, Lactuceae) s.l. in Australia. Willdenowia 24:97–218Google Scholar
  15. Hortal J, Jimenez-Valverde A, Gomez JF, Lobo JM, Baselga A (2008) Historical bias in biodiversity inventories affects the observed environmental niche of the species. Oikos 117:847–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hunger S (1996) The Pluchea tetranthera complex (Compositae, Plucheeae) from Australia. Willdenowia 26:273–282Google Scholar
  17. Jeanes JA (1999) Asteraceae. In: Walsh NG, Entwisle TJ (eds) Flora of Victoria vol. 4. Inkata Press, Melbourne, pp 652–984Google Scholar
  18. Jessop JP (1981) Compositae (Asteraceae). In: Jessop JP (ed) Flora of Central Australia. Reed, Sydney, pp 363–414Google Scholar
  19. Kadmon R, Farber O, Danin A (2003) Effect of roadside bias on the accuracy of predictive maps produced by bioclimatic models. Ecol Appl 14:401–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keighery GJ (2002) A new species of Blennospora (Asteraceae: Gnaphalieae) from the Swan and Scott coastal plains of Western Australia. Nuytsia 15:33–36Google Scholar
  21. Lander NS, Barry R (1980) A review of the genus Minuria (Asteraceae, Astereae). Nuytsia 3:221–237Google Scholar
  22. Loiselle BA, Jørgensen PM, Consiglio T, Jimenez I, Blake JG, Lohmann LG, Montiel OM (2008) Predicting species distributions from herbarium collections: does climate bias in collection sampling influence model outcomes? J Biogeo 35:105–116Google Scholar
  23. Nelson BW, Ferreira CAC, da Silva MF, Kawasaki ML (1990) Endemism centres, refugia and botanical collection density in Brazilian Amazonia. Nature 345:714–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Parsons WT, Cuthbertson EG (1992) Noxious weeds of Australia. Inkata Press, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  25. R Core Team (2012) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Accessed 4 April 2012
  26. Reddy S, Davalos LM (2003) Geographical sampling bias and its implications for conservation priorities in Africa. J Biogeo 30:1719–1727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sanchez-Fernandez D, Lobo JM, Abellan P, Ribera I, Millan A (2008) Bias in freshwater biodiversity sampling: the case of Iberian water beetles. Divers Distrib 14:754–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schmidt-Lebuhn AN, Knerr NJ, González-Orozco CE (2012) Distorted perception of the spatial distribution of plant diversity through uneven collecting efforts: the example of Asteraceae in Australia. J Biogeo 39(11):2072–2080. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2012.02756.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Short PS (1983a) A revision of Angianthus Wendl., sensu lato (Compositae: Inuleae: Gnaphaliinae), 1. Muelleria 5:143–183Google Scholar
  30. Short PS (1983b) A revision of Angianthus Wendl., sensu lato (Compositae: Inuleae: Gnaphaliinae), 2. Muelleria 5:185–214Google Scholar
  31. Short PS (1985) A revision of Actinobole Fenzl ex Endl. (Compositae: Inuleae: Gnaphaliinae). Muelleria 6:9–22Google Scholar
  32. Short PS (1987) A revision of Blennospora A. Gray (Compositae: Inuleae: Gnaphaliinae). Muelleria 6:349–358Google Scholar
  33. Short PS (1989) A revision of Podotheca Cass. (Compositae: Inuleae: Gnaphaliinae). Muelleria 7:39–56Google Scholar
  34. Short PS (1990a) A revision of the genus Chthonocephalus Steetz (Compositae: Inuleae: Gnaphaliinae). Muelleria 7:225–238Google Scholar
  35. Short PS (1990b) New taxa and new combinations in Australian Gnaphaliinae (Inuleae: Asteraceae). Muelleria 7:239–252Google Scholar
  36. Short PS (1995) A revision of Millotia (Asteraceae-Gnaphalieae). Austr Syst Bot 8:1–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Short PS (2000a) Notes on Myriocephalus Benth. s. lat. (Asteraceae: Gnaphalieae). Aust Syst Bot 13:729–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Short PS (2000b) Two new species of Asteridea Lindl. (Asteraceae: Gnaphalieae). Aust Syst Bot 13:739–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Soria RW, Kessler M (2008) The influence of sampling intensity on the perception of the spatial distribution of tropical diversity and endemism: a case study of ferns from Bolivia. Divers Distrib 14:123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Thompson IR (2004a) Taxonomic studies of Australian Senecio (Asteraceae): 1. The disciform species. Muelleria 19:101–214Google Scholar
  41. Thompson IR (2004b) Taxonomic studies of Australian Senecio (Asteraceae): 2. The shrubby, discoid species and the allied radiate species Senecio linearifolius. Muelleria 20:67–110Google Scholar
  42. Thompson IR (2004c) Taxonomic studies of Australian Senecio (Asteraceae): 3. Radiate, arid region species allied to S. magnificus and the radiate, alpine species S. pectinatus. Muelleria 20:111–138Google Scholar
  43. Thompson IR (2005a) Taxonomic studies of Australian Senecio (Asteraceae): 4. A revision of Senecio glossanthus and recognition of an allied species with long ligules. Muelleria 21:3–22Google Scholar
  44. Thompson IR (2005b) Taxonomic studies of Australian Senecio (Asteraceae): 5. The S. pinnatifolius/S. lautus complex. Muelleria 21:23–76Google Scholar
  45. Thompson IR (2006) A taxonomic treatment of tribe Senecioneae (Asteraceae) in Australia. Muelleria 24:51–110Google Scholar
  46. Tobler M, Honorio E, Janovec J, Reynel C (2007) Implications of collection patterns of botanical specimens on their usefulness for conservation planning: an example of two neotropical plant families (Moraceae and Myristicaceae) in Peru. Biodivers Conserv 16:659–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Walsh NG (1999) New species in Asteraceae from the subalps of southeastern Australia. Muelleria 12:223–228Google Scholar
  48. Walsh NG (2007) A revision of Eriochlamys (Asteraceae, Gnaphalieae). Muelleria 25:101–114Google Scholar
  49. Wheeler JR, Marchant NG, Lewington M, Graham L (2002) Flora of the south west: Bunbury—Augusta—Denmark, vol 2: dicotyledons. ABRS and W.A. Herbarium in association with UWA Press, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  50. Williams PH, Margules CR, Hilbert DW (2002) Data requirements and data sources for biodiversity priority area selection. J Biosci 27:327–338PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilson PG (1989) Erymophyllum (Asteraceae: Inuleae: Gnaphaliinae), a new Australian genus in the Helipterum complex. Nuytsia 7:103–116Google Scholar
  52. Wilson PG (2008a) Coronidium, a new Australian genus in the Gnaphalieae (Asteraceae). Nuytsia 18:295–329Google Scholar
  53. Wilson PG (2008b) Notes on the genus Chrysocephalum (Angianthinae: Asteraceae) with the description of one new species from Western Australia, and a new combination. Nuytsia 18:331–338Google Scholar
  54. Zopfi H-J (1993) Ecotypic variation in Rhinanthus alectorolophus (Scopoli) Pollich (Scrophulariaceae) in relation to grassland management. Flora 188:15–39Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander N. Schmidt-Lebuhn
    • 1
  • Nunzio J. Knerr
    • 1
  • Michael Kessler
    • 2
  1. 1.CSIRO Plant Industry/Centre for Australian National Biodiversity ResearchCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.Institute of Systematic Botany, University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations