Geographic biases undermine environmental representativeness of European biodiversity data.

Biases and gaps in biodiversity data lead to significant disparities in species descriptions and distribution patterns across taxonomic groups. Although various modelling approaches can help address these gaps, they require the available data to be environmentally representative. In this study, we use data from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) to examine geographical biases, data gaps, and spatial completeness patterns in species distribution records for the 20 main classes of terrestrial organism in Europe-the world's oldest region for taxonomic and natural history research. By identifying spatial units with complete inventories for each class, we assess their quantity, distribution, and capacity to represent the environmental variability of the European subcontinent. Our results reveal high spatial heterogeneity and substantial variation among taxa in the number of well-surveyed units. Vertebrates and vascular plants have several times more well-surveyed cells than invertebrates and mosses. In terms of environmental representativeness, the findings highlight the uncoordinated and opportunistic accumulation of biodiversity data and the urgent need for improved coverage. This situation raises concerns about the reliability of current biodiversity data for accurately characterizing species distributions and limits the effectiveness of species distribution models. Given the scale and urgency of the biodiversity crisis, waiting for complete and reliable data before taking conservation action is not a viable option.

• Publication year

  2025

• Venue

  Science of the Total Environment

• Publication date

  2025-07-30

• Fields of study

  Geography, Medicine, Environmental Science

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.180178PMID 40743755
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar, PubMed

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Optimising occurrence data in species distribution models: sample size, positional uncertainty, and sampling bias matter

  2024cited by this paper
• Big data, big problems? How to circumvent problems in biodiversity mapping and ensure meaningful results

  2024cited by this paper
• Top ten hazards to avoid when modeling species distributions: a didactic guide of assumptions, problems, and recommendations

  2024cited by this paper
• A quixotic view of spatial bias in modelling the distribution of species and their diversity

  2023cited by this paper
• On the end of evolution – Humankind and the annihilation of species

  2023cited by this paper
• The Silent Extinction of Species and Taxonomists—An Appeal to Science Policymakers and Legislators

  2023cited by this paper
• The biased distribution of existing information on biodiversity hinders its use in conservation, and we need an integrative approach to act urgently

  2023cited by this paper
• A review of the heterogeneous landscape of biodiversity databases: opportunities and challenges for a synthesized biodiversity knowledge base

  2021cited by this paper
• Drivers of taxonomic bias in conservation research: a global analysis of terrestrial mammals

  2020cited by this paper
• No one-size-fits-all solution to clean GBIF

  2020cited by this paper
• Towards a catalogue of biodiversity databases: An ontological case study

  2020cited by this paper
• Sampling biases shape our view of the natural world

  2020cited by this paper
• Optimizing biodiversity informatics to improve information flow, data quality, and utility for science and society

  2020cited by this paper
• A strategy for the next decade to address data deficiency in neglected biodiversity

  2020cited by this paper
• KnowBR: An application to map the geographical variation of survey effort and identify well-surveyed areas from biodiversity databases

  2018cited by this paper
• WorldClim 2: new 1‐km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas

  2017cited by this paper
• Scientific research on animal biodiversity is systematically biased towards vertebrates and temperate regions

  2017cited by this paper
• Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences

  2017cited by this paper
• Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences

  2017cited by this paper
• Multidimensional biases, gaps and uncertainties in global plant occurrence information.

  2016cited by this paper
• The use of occurrence data to predict the effects of climate change on insects.

  2016cited by this paper
• Reconsidering environmental diversity (ED) as a biodiversity surrogacy strategy

  2016cited by this paper
• ENVIREM: An expanded set of bioclimatic and topographic variables increases flexibility and improves performance of ecological niche modeling

  2016cited by this paper
• A Higher Level Classification of All Living Organisms

  2015cited by this paper
• Using modestr to download, import and clean species distribution records

  2014cited by this paper
• ModestR: a software tool for managing and analyzing species distribution map databases

  2013cited by this paper
• To boldly go where no volunteer has gone before: predicting volunteer activity to prioritize surveys at the landscape scale

  2013cited by this paper
• New measures for assessing model equilibrium and prediction mismatch in species distribution models

  2013cited by this paper
• Presence‐only modelling using MAXENT: when can we trust the inferences?

  2013cited by this paper
• CONTENT ASSESSMENT OF THE PRIMARY BIODIVERSITY DATA PUBLISHED THROUGH GBIF NETWORK : STATUS , CHALLENGES AND POTENTIALS

  2013cited by this paper
• Discrimination capacity in species distribution models depends on the representativeness of the environmental domain

  2013cited by this paper
• Biodiversity data should be published, cited, and peer reviewed.

  2013cited by this paper
• Integrating biodiversity distribution knowledge: toward a global map of life.

  2012cited by this paper
• Models and estimators linking individual-based and sample-based rarefaction, extrapolation and comparison of assemblages

  2012cited by this paper
• The art of modelling range‐shifting species

  2010cited by this paper
• Database records as a surrogate for sampling effort provide higher species richness estimations

  2008cited by this paper
• An ED-based Protocol for Optimal Sampling of Biodiversity

  2005cited by this paper
• The species–accumulation curve and estimation of species richness

  2003cited by this paper
• Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities

  2000cited by this paper
• Bias in Butterfly Distribution Maps: The Influence of Hot Spots and Recorder's Home Range

  2000cited by this paper
• Fitting species-accumulation functions and assessing regional land use impacts on avian diversity

  1996cited by this paper
• Environmental diversity: on the best-possible use of surrogate data for assessing the relative biodiversity of sets of areas

  1996cited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.