Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 753–756 | Cite as

Understanding sampling and taxonomic biases recorded by citizen scientists

SHORT COMMUNICATION

Abstract

Projects involving citizen scientists have greatly increased over the last decade and understanding errors associated with such projects has been identified as an important step. NatureWatch NZ is a biodiversity recording system accessible to members of the public. The “NZ wasps, ants, bees and parasitoids (Hymenoptera) project” was initiated within NatureWatch NZ in December 2012, and comparisons were analysed between these records and the known Hymenoptera fauna of the New Zealand region. Over the course of 1 year 25 members contributed 360 records from 186 taxa, including the discovery of several introduced species new to New Zealand. There was a strong geographical bias to the records, with the majority being based around the major cities. Aculeates (stinging wasps) were significantly over-represented in the NatureWatch records. Only half (55 %) of taxa were identified to species level, with a further 28 % at genus level, and 17 % identified above genus level (family, order). Furthermore, the majority (65 %) of taxa were recorded only once, and only a few taxa were recorded >5 times (top records were “Ichneumonidae”, “Hymenoptera”, Anthidium manicatum, and Apis mellifera). It is probable that these same biases also exist for many other taxonomic groups in projects operated by citizen scientists lacking set protocols. Caution should be exercised on the subsequent use, compilation, and analysis of citizen science, especially without prior examination of records and potential biases.

Keywords

Conservation Public Hymenoptera New Zealand Observation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to all the NatureWatch NZ contributors of the Hymenoptera project. Thanks to the two anonymous reviewers for improving the manuscript. This work was supported by the MBIE through funding of the “Defining New Zealand’s Land Biota” programme. The project and its details are available to view at http://naturewatch.org.nz/projects/nz-wasps-ants-bees-and-parasitoids-hymenoptera (registration required).

References

  1. Berry JA (2010) Order Hymenoptera: sawflies, wasps, ants, and bees. In: Gordon DP (ed) New Zealand inventory of biodiversity. Volume 2. Kingdom Animalia. Chaetognatha, Ecdysozoa, Ichnofossils. Canterbury University Press, Christchurch, pp 350–359Google Scholar
  2. Cohn JP (2008) Citizen science: can volunteers do real research? Bioscience 58:192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dennis RLH, Thomas CD (2000) Bias in butterfly distribution maps: the influence of hot spots and recorder’s home range. J Insect Conserv 4:73–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dennis RLH, Sparks TH, Hardy PB (1999) Bias in butterfly distribution maps: the effects of sampling effort. J Insect Conserv 3:33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dennis RLH, Shreeve TG, Isaac NJB, Roy DB, Hardy PB, Fox R, Asher J (2006) The effects of visual apparency on bias in butterfly recording and monitoring. Biol Conserv 128:486–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dickinson JL, Zuckerber B, Bonter DN (2010) Citizen science as an ecological research tool: challenges and benefits. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:149–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fitzpatrick M, Preisser E, Ellison A, Elkinton J (2009) Observer bias and the detection of low-density populations. Ecol Appl 19:1673–1679PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Isaac NJB, Cruickshanks KL, Weddle AM, Rowcliffe JM, Brereton TM, Dennis RLH, Shuker DM, Thomas CD (2011) Distance sampling and the challenge of monitoring butterfly populations. Methods Ecol Evol 2:585–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lester PJ, Brown SDJ, Edwards ED, Holwell GI, Pawson S, Ward DF, Watts CH (2014) Critical issues facing New Zealand entomology. N Z Entomol 37. doi:10.1080/00779962.2014.861789
  10. New TR (2009) Insect species conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shaw MR, Hochberg ME (2001) The neglect of parasitic Hymenoptera in insect conservation strategies: the British fauna as a prime example. J Insect Conserv 5:253–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Silvertown J (2009) A new dawn for citizen science. Trends Ecol Evol 24:67–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Thorpe S (2013a) Cheiloneurus flaccus (Walker, 1847) (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), new to New Zealand. Biodivers Data J 1:e958PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Thorpe S (2013b) Scutellista caerulea (Fonscolombe, 1832) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae), new to New Zealand for the second time! Biodivers Data J 1:e959PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ward DF (2012) More than just records: analysing natural history collections for biodiversity planning. PLoS One 7:e50346. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050346 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ward DF, Early JW, Schnitzler F-R, Hitchmough RA, Stringer IAN (2012) The conservation status of New Zealand Hymenoptera. N Z Entomol 35:116–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.New Zealand Arthropod CollectionLandcare ResearchAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations