Academic editor: Vincent Smith
Fauna Europaea is Europe's main zoological taxonomic index, making the scientific names and distributions of all living, currently known, multicellular, European land and freshwater animals species integrally available in one authoritative database. Fauna Europaea covers about 260,000 taxon names, including 145,000 accepted (sub)species, assembled by a large network of (>400) leading specialists, using advanced electronic tools for data collations with data quality assured through sophisticated validation routines. Fauna Europaea started in 2000 as an EC funded FP5 project and provides a unique taxonomic reference for many user-groups such as scientists, governments, industries, nature conservation communities and educational programs. Fauna Europaea was formally accepted as an INSPIRE standard for Europe, as part of the European Taxonomic Backbone established in
Fauna Europaea provides a public web portal at
The European Commission has published the
Fauna Europaea contributes to the
Fauna Europaea started in 2000 as an European Commission (EC) Fifth Framework (FP5) four-years project, delivering its first release in September 2004. Project coordination and management were in hands of the
During the initial four years, the Fauna Europaea project successfully accomplished the extensive and innovative work-plan (Suppl. material
After fifteen years of steady operation, the hosting of Fauna Europaea was migrated to the
In order to improve the dissemination of Fauna Europaea and acknowledge the Fauna Europaea contributors, this Special Issue has been compiled using novel e-Publishing tools to prepare data-papers of all major Fauna Europaea taxonomic groups. This article provides the general background of the Fauna Europaea project to date and described the release of the initial series of data-papers.
To ensure the collation of high quality data a network of specialists, including Group Coordinators coordinating the efforts in particular taxonomic groups, are contracted. Advanced on-line and off-line tools for data import and data management were developed. Sophisticated procedures for data verification were applied, including a review procedure on the inclusiveness and quality of the data sets. Further validation was taken care by a network of national Focal Points and other thematic partners, fully supported by the virtual infrastructure. The sections below will highlight some aspects of the established Fauna Europaea social and technical infrastructures.
The Fauna Europaea project provided 'Guidelines for Group Coordinators and Taxonomic Specialists' (Suppl. material
The focus is on species and subspecies where appropriate of European multicellular animals of terrestrial and freshwater environments. Recommendations are given for inclusion or exclusion of domesticated animals and exotic intruders, animals of brackish waters, extinct species etc. Classification of animal species deals with the placement of taxa in a hierarchical system of ranks. It is recommended to keep the hierarchy of taxon ranks as simple as possible, especially at higher levels, because the focus is on the species level. Nomenclature of animal species deals with the formation and treatment of scientific names. All formalities of nomenclature must follow the rules and provisions of the latest (= 4th) edition of ‘ Species names are binomial (a combination of a generic and a specific name). In zoology (after the first description) combinations are not formalised by the code of nomenclature. Also synonymy is not primary linked to the combination, but to the respected species-group, genus-group or higher rank names. Therefore also in Fauna Europaea taxonomic records are name based, meaning split into generic and specific names, and into accepted names and synonymous names (i.e. different names used for the same taxon). This is also reflected in the database model (see below).
Taxonomic scope includes issues like, (1) the definition of taxonomic and biological criteria to assure species in Fauna Europaea only includes natural, stable populations (not artefacts or incidental and unnatural occurrences), (2) the taxonomic hierarchy, i.e. the building of a classification scheme and (3) nomenclature, i.e. the structuring of detailed information about accepted and synonymous genus- and species-group names.
A general synopsis on how to deal with aspects of taxonomy and nomenclature in the Fauna Europaea project is available as part of the mentioned 'Guidelines'. An excerpt is given below.
The taxonomic scope has proved to be by far the most controversial part of this project. What satisfy the entering of a species name into Fauna Europaea database? Obviously, an “accepted species” should be living, multi-cellular, non-marine animal species with a documented occurrence in Europe. However, there is more to it. An “accepted species” in a Fauna Europaea context should also be scientifically named and described according to the regulations of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Further, if there exist two or more synonymous names for the same species, it is the oldest valid name that should be used. Even by these additional criteria it is unavoidable that specialists have to face difficult decisions, which are bat est, made on a mixture of common sense and tradition. The following are species categories that should normally be excluded, but potentially contain species that need to be included:
species occupying the marine/freshwater or marine/terrestrial transition zones rare, irregular immigrants (some birds, butterflies etc.) accidental or deliberate releases of exotic (pet)species foreign species imported and released for bio-control foreign species largely confined to hothouses
Even more problematic is the
The higher taxonomic hierarchy ranging from phylum to family for the European fauna was the first major accomplishment of Fauna Europaea project. The hierarchy includes the universally accepted Linnean hierarchy categories:
Kingdom – Subkingdom – Phylum – Subphylum – Infraphylum – Class – Subclass – Superorder – Order – Suborder – Infraorder – Superfamily – Family – Subfamily – Tribe – Subtribe – Genus – Subgenus – Species – Subspecies
All species covered by Fauna Europaea belong to Kingdom
It is important to underline that the Fauna Europaea hierarchy does not purport to be the phylogenetically “most correct” one. There is considerable disagreement between taxonomists about what is the best hierarchy, and anything like a consensus is not within view. For purely managerial purposes, however, Fauna Europaea needed to settle on one common hierarchy.
Some categories (e.g. suborder, subgenus and subspecies) are not applicable to all taxa. This may be because a category may not be generally applied in the current taxonomy of the group, or because the group coordinator has chosen not to provide this information (see below under the format of names).
The higher hierarchy (categories above superfamily) used for the project are shown in the Fauna Europaea Guidelines document. The full hierarchy can be
Group coordinators and taxonomic specialists had to deliver the names according to very specific standards. The names provided by FaEu are
The scientific name of an animal species basically consists of two parts:
For each generic name, the following information was required:
Containing family Containing subfamily, tribe and/or subtribe (optional) Author Year of publication
For a subgeneric name (located between the generic and the specific name), information was in addition required about the containing genus.
For each specific name, the following information was required
Containing genus Containing subgenus (optional) Author Year of publication Original genus, i.e., the genus in which the species was originally described Whether “Author, Year” information should be presented in parentheses or not (Y/N). Parentheses around the author citation indicate that this was not the original taxonomic placement.
For a subspecific name (appended after the specific name), information was in addition required about the containing species.
Synonymy arises when different names refer to the same taxon and is a very important issue in biosystematics. One and the same taxon (genus or species) may have been described under different names by different authors (or by the same author at different times), or a name may have been wrongly applied to a taxon due to misidentification (actually a misapplied usage of a name). In many cases, different names have traditionally been used in different European countries for the same species. In other cases, some authorities regard two taxa as different species, whereas some regard them as subspecies of the same species (so conflicting taxonomic concepts). For practising taxonomists, synonymy is a major issue resulting from subjective assertions made by authors. For Fauna Europaea however, the provision of synonymies as such is not a main goal. However, Fauna Europaea groups coordinators and taxonomic specialists were asked to provide synonyms, at least such synonyms which would be likely to cause confusion.
The relevance of including synonymy is not similar between all groups. Synonymy is much more important information in less well-understood groups than in the ones where the species are non-controversial. In Fauna Europaea group coordinators and taxonomic specialists have provided synonyms to very different degrees of completeness, ranging from no synonyms at all (Examples:
Synonyms are of two principally different kinds:
”True” synonyms are those that can be formally cited with authorship & date (see the FaEu Guidelines for examples). Variant spellings, unavailable names or misapplied names.
Synonyms of the latter category are marked in the FaEu database with “auct.”, instead of “Author, Year” information. “auct.” is short for “auctorum”, meaning “of authors” in Latin.
In order to handle synonymy FaEu chose to deal with generic (including subgeneric) names and specific (including subspecific) names separately.
It has become practice among Lepidopterologists to use the original spellings of the species names and not to follow Article 31.2 and 34.2 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (
Although generally the
During the project phase of Fauna Europaea, the Zoological Museum of Copenhagen collated the individual data sets for Fauna Europaea, which were sent to the Zoological Museum Amsterdam for merging into the integrated database.
After the project formal lifetime (2004–2014) the Zoological Museum Amsterdam took over all expert networking and data management tasks.
As a unique feature, Fauna Europaea funds were set aside for paying/compensating for the work of taxonomic specialists and group coordinators. Five euro per accepted species record was offered, although in some cases, where full data on a species could not be provided (typically when only taxonomic information, but no faunistic information, was provided), only partial payment was given. Group coordinators made their own arrangements with “their” taxonomic specialists about how the money was to be distributed between the two levels of collaborators.
Following the Fauna Europaea contract, species and subspecies should be registered at least at the level of political countries, meaning political countries. The Fauna Europaea geographical system follows basically the
The geographic boundaries includes: East: Ural (E 60°), West: Atlantic Ocean (Mid-Atlantic Ridge) (W 30°), South: Mediterranean (N 35°), North: Arctic Islands (N 82°).
For details see the FaEu Guidelines chapter 3: Geographic information (Suppl. material
Fauna Europaea data are unique in a sense that they are fully expert based, meaning that the database is build from scratch by leading experts, critically reviewing and evaluating all available information (collections, observations, research, etc.), not by simply merging data from available resources like faunas, monographs, checklists or collection data. For distributional details local checklists are only used selectively (when scrutinised). Furthermore, all Fauna Europaea data sets are intensively reviewed and scrutinised. Five basic procedures to check and improve the quality of the data have been effected:
(1) During the project phase of Fauna Europaea, the
(2) In addition, for both off-line and on-line data entry systems checks on the technical and logical correctness for all data entered by the taxonomic editors have been implemented as ‘Taxonomic Integrity Rules’. This validation tool proved to be of huge value for both the experts and project management, and significantly contributed to the preparation of a remarkably clean and consistent data set. The original set of ‘
(3) In order to have a better estimate of the present distribution of terrestrial species in Europe, to spread the Fauna Europaea information and share taxonomic knowledge with local specialists,
(4) In parallel, a program was initiated on validating Fauna Europaea with help of
(5) Finally, feedback was provided by users via the
Since the initial project set-up, Fauna Europaea contributed significantly to programs and initiatives analysing gaps in knowledge, data and expertise, to provide relevant recommendations for the European Commission for implementation in policy and research, including
In Fauna Europaea all data editing is done on a central system by the experts themselves. By evaluating team structure and life-cycle procedures (data-entry, validation, updating, etc.), clear definitions of roles of users and user-groups, according to the taxonomic framework were established, including ownership, and read and write privileges, and their status changes during the project data-flow (Fig.
To facilitate data transfer and data import within the Fauna Europaea database on-line and off-line data-entry routines have been build (Fig.
(1) An on-line Web interface data-entry tool (step-by-step through web-interfaces).
(2) An off-line data import tool by use of a pre-defined spreadsheet file; including validation checks, and inventive data import and export routines.
For details on the data-entry tool functional interfaces, please consider the respective
Based on the functional and technical requirements a database model has been developed (Fig.
The final Fauna Europaea server-infrastructure included an Oracle RDBMS transaction-server interconnected to a set of tools for data entry and data transfer, establishing an advanced virtual environment for data import and management, which well performed for more then 10 years and an Oracle RDBMS production-server linked to the Fauna Europaea web portal.
In 2009 the Fauna Europaea servers moved to a Virtual Machine. In 2013 the Fauna Europaea web portal hosting was taken over by the
In the initial part of the Fauna Europaea project it was concluded that a stronger involvement of institutes and experts, to support ‘regional/national validation’ and to harmonise on-going activities, was desirable. Therefore a network of national partner institutes was established, acting as 'Focal Points' for regional or national liaison and supporting the taxonomic framework. In most cases these institutes maintain or host national checklists and provide access to information about experts and literature resources in a country (Fig.
The importance on developing contacts with national partner institutes was particularly relevant for Eastern Europe, because in the initial phase the institutional outreach of Fauna Europaea was rather oriented on Western Europe. In the fall of 2001, a call from the European Commission was published, which asked for proposals to extend themselves to the so-called NAS countries (Newly Associated States). A Fauna Europaea proposal for such an extension was approved by the EC early 2002. As a results an extended network of Focal Points was established and a detailed work program launched on the sharing of meta-data on taxonomic resources and the validation of Fauna Europaea by cross-checking with help of local checklists and expertise.
Later, as part of the
An important aspect of the Fauna Europaea expert agreement is that experts keep the ownership on their data delivered, meaning that the rights of Fauna Europaea to disseminate the data are non-exclusive. This agreement was formalised by signing contracts Suppl. material
In addition, it was decided to search for a relevant mechanism to keep the involvement and secure the joint intellectual property rights of all contributors, which resulted in the joint membership of the "
For (the substantial number of) Fauna Europaea expert employed at European taxonomic institutes, support for their activities was received from the "
Fauna Europaea results in a unique overview of the state of art with respect to our understanding of the taxonomy and occurrence of European species and serves as a clearing house to identify taxonomic knowledge and expertise, including potential gaps. As a taxonomic data standard resource, Fauna Europaea provides a gateway serving the integration and sharing of European biodiversity data, supporting major biodiversity informatics initiatives, such as
The first release of the Fauna Europaea index was formally presented at the Fauna Europaea final meeting at the 27th of September 2004 in Paris. In the following years new releases have been published at around a yearly sequence. Since the initial release, updates includes individual data sets (smaller or larger taxonomic sectors). The most recent release (version 2.6.2) was launched at 29 August 2013. An overview of Fauna Europaea main releases can be found here:
Currently Fauna Europaea covers 221,701 accepted taxon names, including 146,288 accepted species and subspecies (Table
The
The geographic details of the Fauna Europaea data have been subject of various analyses within Europe (e.g.
Fauna Europaea data are firstly disseminated via a public web site at
In addition, Fauna Europaea is included as the terrestrial-zoological component of the
Fauna Europaea is frequently used as a taxonomic reference in scientific papers (e.g.
Around 2005, the relevance of applying unique and stable species identifiers, to secure long-term internal consistency and optimise external interoperability was recognised in the biodiversity informatics community (
Lately so-called
A practical guideline on cross-linking Fauna Europaea can be found here: Suppl. material
After the first release of Fauna Europaea in 2004, the completeness of the received taxonomic data was calculated to include 99.3% of the known European fauna (actual number of databased species 128,692; estimated number of described species 129,647). The faunistic coverage is less complete, but nevertheless including 90-95% of the total fauna. Recognised gaps for major groups are given in Table
The data-entry figures show a delay of around four years for entering newly described species into the Fauna Europaea database. Considering an average yearly increment of newly described animal species for Europe of around 670 species (figures from the Fauna Europaea gap analysis Suppl. material
The delay factor indicates that experts prefer to focus on adding older names (not yet included) or improving existing records (for instance refining distributional details), instead of including new species. This could be caused by the often unclear taxonomic 'robustness' of newly described species (new names are quickly synonymised) plus the yet unavailability of sufficient occurrence details (newly described species have a poor distributional record). It could also reflect the rather slow uptake of new taxonomic information, which could be improved when experts are served with instant information (e.g. via RSS feeds) on publications of relevant new species.
Gaps in taxonomic knowledge (species unknown to science) have been surveyed using indirect methods, with help of additional data from the European faunal inventories as recorded in the Biosis database (Suppl. material
Fauna Europaea contributed to various gap assessments in ensuing projects, like PESI (Suppl. material
Common names are the most important search terms for non-professional users to retrieve biodiversity information. By means of the extended network of national Focal Points (more then 50 Focal Points in around 40 countries), the PESI project was used to harvest additional information on European species (images, literature, conservation status, etc.). Thus the PESI portal became a major meta-data repository for local biodiversity information and resources, including a resource for non-scientific names of species with 183,622 common names in 105 languages, also accessible via the Fauna Europaea portal. This information is also shared with
As a large thematic network and centre of taxonomic excellence, Fauna Europaea contributed to different projects dealing with biodiversity topics, including the development of a virtual biodiversity research community, such as the
In the
The PESI project opened opportunities for Fauna Europaea experts to apply automated tools for validation themselves (e.g.
In the ViBRANT project the interoperability of several core taxonomic platforms has been enhanced, guaranteeing cross-platform compatibility and shared access to important publishing infrastructures and services (
At the global level Fauna Europaea contributes to the development of a next generation linked open data names architecture, also called the 'Global Names Architecture', supporting biodiversity research as a name-based science. The Fauna Europaea community especially focus on the zoological components, like the implementation of
To handle the (co-)ownership of experts over their data, all Fauna Europaea specialists became
Recently it was decided to further license the Fauna Europaea data under
The future governance of the Fauna Europaea infrastructures is integrated in major programs such as
After fifteen years of delivering a steady service to the biodiversity community, Fauna Europaea is entering a next life stage, which will require a re-evaluation of the existing starting-points, including its role and functioning in the European structure of biodiversity services.
The self-limitation of Fauna Europaea on delivering the best data for native species having a stable population in Europe, using strict guidelines (streamlining the various traditions in zoological taxonomy) worked out very well. Fauna Europaea didn't aim to install a universal model for zoological databasing neither to be complete. We have realised that including all exotics, incidental observations, occasional visitors, wrong identifications or obsolete names would have resulted in an undesirable situation ("everything occurring everywhere"). Besides, the effort on scrutinising such data would not only exceed the manageable capacity of the involved experts, but would also deliver a disfunctional product as a name standard and reference file.
This situation was later on balanced by the validation networks and services developed in FaEu-NAS and PESI, which also showed that most national/regional lists are over-complete. A significant amount of supposed Fauna Europaea 'gaps' actually pertain from local synonyms, infrequent visitors, incorrect identifications, invalid names, alternative taxonomies or 'fussy data' (records uncritically taken-over from literature) often relevant to be maintained at a regional level (because locally 'in use'), but inappropriate for inclusion in Fauna Europaea.
The restricted scope of Fauna Europaea will be re-evaluated as part of the
Other extensions in the scope of Fauna Europaea, requested by the experts, would include a further detailing of the 'present' status for occurrences (for instance also dealing with 'Native', 'Rare', and 'Introduced') and customised taxon lists (other than alphabetically) in the classification. Further the regions should be adapted to the current political situation (e.g. the breakup of Yugoslavia) and source annotations should be insertable to distributional details.
For application in the digital domain, zoological nomenclature has different advantages over botany, including a straightforward treatment of species-group names (epithet and authorship) as 'natural' nomenclatural identifiers, easing name management and resolution, independent from its generic assignment. In addition, the issue of 'potential taxon concept' (linking specimen to taxonomic concepts) is much more prominent in botany compared to zoology and complications regarding authorship changes (and derivate spellings) when introducing a new taxonomic concept, as required in botany, don’t affect zoology. However, a disadvantage of this situation is a lack of formal accounting of (past) objective synonymies in zoology. This contrast the situation in botany where the
This feature also affects Fauna Europaea that for the search function past combinations can only be estimated as 'potential combinations' that taxonomic cross-referencing with other resources only can be really efficient at the nominal level and that in-between Fauna Europaea versions different species names sharing the same species-group name (species names which are functionally objective synonyms) have the same unique identifier.
Several solutions to this situation are intended. Firstly in the new data management environment bookkeeping of combinations is proposed, including the allocation of 'species-IDs' (in addition to the existing name-IDs). For the 'species-IDs' the PESI model on constructing a GUID could be followed (in PESI a LSID is a combination of the namespace and the Fauna Europaea Id for example: “urn:lsid:faunaeur.org:taxname:93540”). Secondly, as part of a global name infrastructure a collaborative solution could be found on organising zoological nomenclature in so-called 'nomenclators', a situation corresponding to botany.
It is rather demanding for specialists to continue improving data sets and for group coordinators to keep the networks together and functioning without budget or other incentives. Nevertheless, Fauna Europaea survived through the years on a low budget, and with a minimal staff, thanks to a very effective data management system, a wonderful community commitment (both from experts and institutes) and generous, in-kind support from hosting organisations.
To ensure that Fauna Europaea's contributing experts are fully acknowledged and to expand the citability of the Fauna Europaea data, it was decided to implement certain advancements in the virtual workbench development into the Fauna Europaea work routine. This was achieved during the EC-FP7 project
Publishing data papers in biodiversity was proposed recently as a mechanism to incentivize efforts towards discovery and publishing of biodiversity data resources (
‘Contributions on Fauna Europaea’ is the second series launched by Biodiversity Data Journal after the Checklist of British and Irish
In the future publishing data papers is foreseen as a standard practice after updating a Fauna Europaea data set. Apart from the value of producing scientific output and creditability for the Fauna Europaea experts, this will also allow for a more dynamic way of (additional) expert involvement, because all relevant contributions can be more easily acknowledged than what is currently the case, which will strengthen the ownership feeling (by producing 'legacy reports' for each version) and the sense of communality.
In addition, the data papers satisfy the need for the provision of more background information on Fauna Europaea data sets, including for instance the used resources and expertise and on the taxonomic decisions taken. In this context they are valuable as 'micro-publications', acting as a landing-place for small bits and pieces of information on European species. This mostly concerns unpublished new distributional records, which are often direct or indirect spin-offs from the working on Fauna Europaea.
Last but not least the Fauna Europaea data papers could also facilitate the publication of analyses based on the project, including small treatises (like master theses) or assessments carried-out by important stakeholders.
The Fauna Europaea project bureau offers special thanks to the Fauna Europaea Management, Steering and Advisory Committees, especially to Prof. Philippe Bouchet, Prof. Daniel Goujet, Prof. Henrik Enghoff, Prof. Wieslaw Bogdanowicz, Prof. Alessandro Minelli, Anastasios Legakis, Miguel Alonso-Zarazaga, Trudy Brannan and Alfonso Nava Sanchez, for their commitment and guidance during the project phase of Fauna Europaea.
We are grateful for the many in-kind contributions from involved taxonomic institutes to Fauna Europaea. Here, the successive
Our thanks are extended to the coordinators of follow-up projects providing financial or other kinds of support, including Simon Tillier (
We express our appreciation to the
Our colleagues from
The first author would like to express his gratitude to Prof. Thierry Backeljau (
We dedicate this paper to the numerous Fauna Europaea group coordinators, specialists and other taxonomic associates who put their time and efforts on keeping this important project up to date. You are our heroes!
Fauna Europaea was funded by the European Commission under the Fifth Framework Programme and contributed to the Support for Research Infrastructures work programme with Thematic Priority Biodiversity (EVR1-1999-20001) for a period of four years (1 March 2000 - 1 March 2004), including a short 'NAS extension', allowing EU candidate accession countries to participate. Follow-up support was given by the EC-FP5 EuroCAT project (EVR1-CT-2002-20011), by the EC-FP6 ENBI project (EVK2-CT-2002-20020), by the EC-FP6 EDIT project (GCE 018340), by the EC-FP7 PESI project (RI-223806) and by the EC-FP7 ViBRANT project (RI-261532). Continuing management and hosting of the Fauna Europaea services was supported by the University of Amsterdam (Zoological Museum Amsterdam) and SARA/Vancis. Recently the hosting of Fauna Europaea is taken over by the Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin, supported by the EC-FP7 EU BON project (grant agreement №308454).
Fauna Europaea geographic coverage ('minimal Europe').
Fauna Europaea Expert network(s) versus Focal Points network(s).
PESI Focal Point network.
Definition of user-roles and data-flow within Fauna Europaea.
Fauna Europaea on-line (web-interface) and off-line (spreadsheet) data import routines.
Fauna Europaea data model.
Fauna Europaea initial Focal Points network in NAS extension.
See also:
Fauna Europaea country/region statistics.
Source data can be found at Suppl. materials
Statistics of newly described species per period in Molluscs (source: Ruud Bank) and
Potential work- and dataflows in a next generation linked open data names architecture.
Some aspects of platform interoperability as established in the ViBRANT project.
Resource:
Fauna Europaea web-portal interface (
PESI target species lists
Position of PESI as Euro-Hub in the Catalogue of Life initial architecture, proceeding from the EuroCat project.
PESI infrastructural components, Fauna Europaea representing the zoological community.
Fauna Europaea general statistics, showing taxon numbers for different taxonomic levels.
Source data can be found here Suppl. material
Taxa (level) | Accepted (No.) | Synonyms (No.) |
All taxon names | 221 701 | 52 882 |
Higher taxon names | 5 838 | 233 |
(Sub)genus names | 28 589 | 6 950 |
Species names | 132 100 | 40 354 |
Subspecies names | 14 188 | 5 564 |
Fauna Europaea taxonomic groups, listing the responsible Group Coordinators, species numbers, family numbers and expert numbers for version 2.6.2. An indication of known gaps is given according to the gap analysis done after the Fauna Europaea first release (version 1.3).
Source data can be found here Suppl. material
Taxonomic group | Group Coordinator version 1 | Group Coordinator version 2 | No. of species | No. of families | No. of experts | Known gaps |
Wojciech Magowski | Wojciech Magowski | 6642 | 299 | 14 | 505 species | |
Jean-Louis Camicas | Jean-Louis Camicas | 77 | 3 | 22 | ||
Lars Lundqvist | Lars Lundqvist | 1479 | 51 | 1 | ||
Henrik Enghoff | Henrik Enghoff | 2 | 2 | 1 | ||
Amphibians & Reptiles | Alain Dubois | Alain Dubois | 230 | 30 | 6 | |
Alessandro Minelli | Alessandro Minelli | 98 | 9 | 2 | ||
Tarmo Timm | Tarmo Timm | 268 | 8 | 1 | ||
Emilia Rota | Emilia Rota | 735 | 18 | 1 | ||
Apterygote |
Luis F. Mendes | Luis F. Mendes | 273 | 4 | 2 | |
|
Peter van Helsdingen | Peter van Helsdingen | 4517 | 63 | 6 | |
|
Cees Roselaar | Cees Roselaar | 809 | 87 | 1 | |
Jos & Gaby Massard-Geimer | Emmy Woss | 25 | 7 | 1 | ||
Wim Vervoort | Wim Vervoort | 54 | 27 | 1 | ||
Miguel A. Alonso-Zarazaga | Miguel A. Alonso-Zarazaga | 15552 | 57 | 65 | 500 species | |
Paolo Audisio | Paolo Audisio | 12425 | 80 | 45 | ||
|
Louis Deharveng | Louis Deharveng | 1941 | 23 | 10 | |
|
Geoffrey Boxshall | Geoffrey Boxshall | 3493 | 127 | 9 | |
|
Jean-Marc Thibaud | Jean-Marc Thibaud | 278 | 5 | 4 | |
Thomas Pape | Thomas Pape & Paul Beuk | 11751 | 96 | 55 | ||
Herman de Jong | Paul Beuk & Thomas Pape | 7526 | 30 | 14 | 700 species | |
|
Claus Nielsen | Claus Nielsen | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
|
Carlo Belfiore & Alain Thomas | Carlo Belfiore & Alain Thomas | 339 | 18 | 14 | |
|
Maria Balsamo | Maria Balsamo | 214 | 5 | 5 | |
Helminths (Animal parasitics) | David Gibson | David Gibson | 3986 | 214 | 19 | |
Juan M. Nieto Nafría | Juan M. Nieto Nafría | 1415 | 3 | 7 | ||
Hannelore Hoch | Hannelore Hoch | 2053 | 23 | 3 | ||
Daniel Burckhardt | Daniel Burckhardt | 1289 | 20 | 1 | ||
Berend Aukema | Berend Aukema | 2709 | 48 | 1 | ||
John Noyes | Mircea-Dan Mitroiu | 13211 | 52 | 19 | ||
Kees van Achterberg | Kees van Achterberg | 10717 | 14 | 7 | ||
Ole Karsholt & Erik van Nieukerken & Willy De Prins | Ole Karsholt & Erik van Nieukerken | 9865 | 86 | 60 | ||
|
Wieslaw Bogdanowicz | Wieslaw Bogdanowicz | 254 | 31 | 2 | |
|
Rainer Willmann | Rainer Willmann | 23 | 3 | 1 | |
Rafael Araujo | Rafael Araujo | 55 | 5 | 1 | ||
Ruud A. Bank | Ruud A. Bank | 3337 | 70 | 1 | ||
|
Henrik Enghoff | Henrik Enghoff | 2225 | 73 | 9 | |
|
Tom Bongers | Vlada Peneva | 2618 | 96 | 36 | |
|
Andreas Schmidt-Rhaesa | Andreas Schmidt-Rhaesa | 68 | 2 | 1 | |
|
Ray Gibson | Ray Gibson | 12 | 3 | 1 | |
Neuropteroid orders | Horst & Ulrike Aspöck | Horst & Ulrike Aspöck & Agostine Letardi | 397 | 15 | 3 | |
|
Jan van Tol | Jan van Tol | 131 | 11 | 8 | |
|
Jochen Martens | Jochen Martens | 330 | 11 | 1 | |
Orthopteroid orders | Klaus-Gerhard Heller | Klaus-Gerhard Heller | 1371 | 35 | 4 | |
Mark S. Harvey | Mark S. Harvey | 831 | 19 | 1 | ||
|
Eberhard Mey | Eberhard Mey | 719 | 19 | 1 | |
|
Nicolas Bailly | Jorg Freyhof | 507 | 23 | 3 | 350 species |
Anno Faubel | Carolina Noreña Janssen | 738 | 34 | 2 | ||
|
Romolo Fochetti | Romolo Fochetti | 426 | 7 | 2 | |
Renata Manconi | Ole Tendal | 18 | 3 | 1 | ||
|
Andrzej Szeptycki | Julia Shrubovych | 177 | 4 | 1 | |
|
Verner Michelsen | Verner Michelsen | 234 | 25 | 3 | |
|
Hendrik Segers | Hendrik Segers | 1288 | 30 | 7 | |
|
Pierangelo Crucitti | Pierangelo Crucitti | 23 | 4 | 2 | |
|
Maria Soledad Gomez Lopez | Maria Soledad Gomez Lopez | 266 | 7 | 1 | |
|
Hans Pohl | Hans Pohl | 30 | 7 | 1 | |
|
Sandra J. McInnes | Sandra J. McInnes | 428 | 14 | 5 | |
|
Richard zur Strassen | Bert Vierbergent | 571 | 6 | 2 | |
|
Peter Barnard | Hans Malicky | 1049 | 24 | 1 |
The Fauna Europaea (FaEu) database project – Guidelines for Group Coordinators and Taxonomic Specialists
The 'Guidelines for Group Coordinators and Taxonomic Specialists' include the standards, protocols, scope, and limits that provide the instructions for all 400 specialists contributing to the project. A first version was established in year 1 of the project. These were published in the “Guidelines for Group Coordinators and Taxonomic Specialists” as a attachment to the first annual report and improved during the project life-time.
File: oo_8432.pdf
Fauna Europaea geographic codes and mappings to other standards (TDWG, ISO) and projects (Euro+Med PlantBase).
xls
File: oo_8516.xls
Fauna Europaea standard agreement
File: oo_8522.pdf
Fauna Europaea Gap Analysis - final report (including slides)
File: oo_8549.pdf
Fauna Europaea database statistics (source file)
xlsx
File: oo_8553.xlsx
Fauna Europaea homonyms
xlslx
File: oo_8552.xls
Fauna Europaea species statistics for areas
xlsx
File: oo_8554.xlsx
Fauna Europaea Endemics
xlsx
Figures of species and subspecies in Fauna Europaea only occuring in one area/country.
File: oo_8555.xlsx
Fauna Europaea web statistics 2013
File: oo_8638.pdf
Fauna Europaea guidelines for cross-linking
File: oo_8639.pdf
Fauna Europaea higher hierarchy - version 2.6.2
xlsx
File: oo_8640.xlsx
PESI Gap Analysis
File: oo_8642.pdf
Fauna Europaea Guidelines for NAS validation
File: oo_9470.pdf
Fauna Europaea Description of Work
File: oo_9517.pdf