Biodiversity Data Journal :
Data Paper (Biosciences)
|
Corresponding author: Oleh Prylutskyi (prylutskyi@karazin.ua)
Academic editor: Pedro Cardoso
Received: 18 Mar 2022 | Accepted: 13 May 2022 | Published: 08 Jun 2022
© 2022 Oleksii Vasyliuk, Oleh Prylutskyi, Oleksii Marushchak, Anna Kuzemko, Iuliia Kutsokon, Oksana Nekrasova, Niels Raes, Mikhail Rusin
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Vasyliuk O, Prylutskyi O, Marushchak O, Kuzemko A, Kutsokon I, Nekrasova O, Raes N, Rusin M (2022) An Extended dataset of occurrences of species listed in Resolution 6 of the Bern Convention from Ukraine. Biodiversity Data Journal 10: e84002. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.10.e84002
|
The dataset includes georeferenced occurrences of species listed in Annex I of Resolution 6 of the Bern Convention and, partly, in the Red Data Book of Ukraine. The dataset was compiled within the work of NGO "Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group" aimed to prepare a Shadow list of Emerald Network (European network Areas of Special Conservation Interest) in Ukraine - newly proposed territories aimed at conservation of particular species and habitats mentioned in Resolution 4 and 6 of the Bern Convention. The list was prepared in 2017-2020 for expanding the already existing Emerald Network of Ukraine. Based on actual registrations of flora and fauna collected and gathered by scientists and naturalists in a form of dataset, which is described in the following paper.
This dataset provides information about 29,938 occurrences of species from the territory of Ukraine listed in Annex I of Resolution 6 of the Bern Convention, as well as in the Red Data Book of Ukraine. This is the largest public dataset on occurrences of rare and endangered species from Ukraine till now. Data presented here laid the foundations for the proposal of 106 approved Emerald Network sites (2019), as well as for 148 Emerald Network sites that were nominated in 2020. New insights on the endemic species Centaurea pseudoleucolepis Kleopow is provided, which was previously considered to be extinct, according to the IUCN Red List.
occurrence, Emerald Network, Bern Convention, Red Data Book of Ukraine, rare species, conservation
The main purpose of the current dataset is to provide free and open access to the data on occurrences of the species listed in Resolution 6 of the Bern Convention (
The compilation of this dataset began in 2007; since then, it has been continuously updated, based on results of recent field research. From 2007 to 2015, a group of Ukrainian biologists founded an informal group “Save Ukrainian steppes!”, which aimed to prevent forest planting in the steppe zone of Ukraine, in places of natural dry grassland habitats. Amongst other activities, the group began collecting information on the findings of steppe species protected by the Red Data Book of Ukraine.
Since 2016, group members launched a new initiative in Ukraine – expanded territories of the Emerald Network in Ukraine. The first version of the Emerald Network in Ukraine was developed without taking into account data on the distribution of species listed in Resolution 6 and in the habitats listed in Resolution 4 of the Bern Convention (hereinafter BC), but simply included existing large protected areas. The Emerald Network sites at that time almost did not cover steppe ecosystems. The authors of this article, in collaboration with other scientists, started to gather information on the distribution of species listed in Resolution 6 of the BC. We have combined the collection of new data with the existing dataset because the distribution of rare steppe species fully corresponds with the distribution of habitat types E1.2 and E1.13 of Resolution 4 of the BC. Based on these data, we prepared justifications for 106 Emerald Network sites (1.4 million ha), which were approved by the Bern Convention in December 2019 and for an additional 148 sites (2.7 million ha), which are currently under consideration (
There were relatively few publications providing exact taxon occurrence data in Ukraine before 2017. Except for the collection of papers under the general title “Records of Animals from the Red Data Book of Ukraine”, containing 1400 records (
In 2008 – 2012, one of the first Ukrainian citizen science projects “Involving the public into biodiversity monitoring” was carried out, for which we created a special webpage Biomon.org (archived copy) for submitting individual amateurs’ observations of three pilot species – Lucanus cervus L. (527 observations), Papilio machaon L. (288 observations) and Lilium martagon L. (16 observations). Additionally, in 2010, we involved young naturalists club members in data harvesting. We established a connection with the most active groups of school naturalists from Eastern Ukraine, from which we received data about 931 records of rare species of plants. Another valuable contribution was the publication of the “Records of plants listed in the Red Data Book of Ukraine in the Starobilsky steppe” (
Another important source of data was regional conservation publications, such as the “Red Data Books” of Donetsk (
Most of the processed literature sources are hardly accessible. They have been generally available only as hard copies, were not present on the Web and published in Ukrainian or Russian exclusively. Most are so-called “grey literature” – proceedings of local conferences and non-periodical paper collections of protected areas and are not indexed by any database. However, such “grey” editions often accumulate valuable biodiversity data, because most of Ukrainian peer-reviewed journals did not accept data papers until quite recently.
To facilitate data harvesting, we initiated publishing of data paper collections (
The materials of the present dataset have been widely used for conservation purposes. For example, about 60 protected areas were created in Ukraine using this information (
Mobilisation of biodiversity data from Ukraine to GBIF
Mikhail Rusin, Svetlana Miteva
Ukraine
The dataset has been organised with the support of Project nlbif2018.2019.004, funded by NLBIF to The Habitat Foundation “Mobilization of biodiversity data from Ukraine to GBIF” https://www.nlbif.nl/mobilization-of-biodiversity-data-from-ukraine-to-gbif/
Ukraine, all territory
For literature occurrences, we selected only observations which met the following conditions:
species listed in Annex I of Resolution 6 of the Bern Convention (
observation accompanied by coordinates or precise locality description;
source of identification is reliable (either reported by professional researchers or accompanied by high-quality photos for citizen-science observations).
Data were double-checked in terms of identification and georeferencing accuracy.
The dataset comprises both published data and personal observations. The following steps were taken:
Selection of reliable literature resources on species occurrences in the territory of Ukraine (total 641 sources);
Manual data extraction from published taxonomic treatments (species-date-place);
Manual georeferencing of records based on descriptions of the localities using Google Maps (
Aggregating and quality checking of citizen-science observations;
Aggregating personal observations of the authors;
Data post-processing using Darwin Core terms (
Data cleaning using OpenRefine (
The entire territory of Ukraine.
Occurrences of plant species tend to be more frequent towards the steppe (semi-arid and arid) zone of the country, while animal observation records are more evenly distributed across the territory of Ukraine (Fig.
Distribution map of the occurrences from the extended dataset of registration points of species listed in Resolution 6 of the Bern Convention. There is some sampling bias towards steppe zone in plant records, due to extensive plant data mobilisation in those regions for Emerald Network development purposes.
44.277 and 52.376 Latitude; 21.884 and 40.254 Longitude.
The dataset contains 18,553 occurrences of plants, 11,197 occurrences of animals and 188 occurrences of fungi (
Rank | Scientific Name |
---|---|
kingdom | Plantae |
kingdom | Animalia |
kingdom | Fungi |
Most of the observations (28,147, 94%) were made since 2000. (Fig.
The dataset includes a tabulation-delimited table with 26 fields in Darwin Core terms and 29,938 records in it.
Column label | Column description |
---|---|
occurrenceID | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:occurrenceID; an identifier of a particular occurrence, unique within this dataset. Since the data were collected within different data mobilisation projects, we used a combination of the project’s abbreviation and incremental numbers. |
scientificName | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:scientificName; the original names as provided in publication, but corrected for spelling mistakes using GBIF Species Matching tool. Some species which are not covered by GBIF Backbone taxonomy yet treated according to original spelling in the data source. |
kingdom | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:kingdom; The full scientific name of the kingdom in which the taxon is classified. |
phylum | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:phylum; The full scientific name of the phylum or division in which the taxon is classified. |
class | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:class; The full scientific name of the class in which the taxon is classified. |
order | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:order; The full scientific name of the order in which the taxon is classified. |
family | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:family; The full scientific name of the family in which the taxon is classified. |
genus | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:genus; The full scientific name of the genus in which the taxon is classified. |
specificEpithet | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:specificEpithet; The name of the first or species epithet of the scientificName. |
taxonRank | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:taxonRank; The taxonomic rank of the most specific name in the scientificName. |
eventDate | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:eventDate; the full date of the observation as it might be extracted from the publication. In some cases – as date ranges. Many sources we used did not contain precise information about the date of each observation, only the overall research time-window. Since intervals cannot be reduced to any particular date, GBIF.org automatically downscales such intervals to the 1st Jan of the first Year of the time-window, which may be misleading for the people referenced directly to the GBIF.org portal. Please download our data as DarwinCore archive, which contains dates as input. Any user’s download of those data, including search query results, will return true dates. Moreover, GBIF.org displays full information from all the fields for each record by clicking on it (as an example: https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/3014589991). |
basisOfRecord | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:basisOfRecord; the method in which data were acquired. Two levels: "HumanObservation" for authors' observations and personal communications, "MaterialCitation" for occurrences derived from scholarly publications. |
decimalLatitude | http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/decimalLatitude; The geographic latitude in decimal degrees. |
decimalLongitude | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:decimalLongitude; The geographic longitude in decimal degrees. |
coordinateUncertaintyInMeters | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:coordinateUncertaintyInMeters; the distance (in metres) from the given decimalLatitude and decimalLongitude describing the smallest circle containing the whole of the Location. Set as 50 m for GPS coordinates and 1000 m for the coordinates georeferenced, based on description. |
geodeticDatum | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwciri:geodeticDatum; the geodetic datum upon which the geographic coordinates are given. All values are WGS84. |
georeferencedBy | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:georeferencedBy; a person who determined the georeference. |
georeferenceProtocol | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwciri:georeferenceProtocol; A description of the method used to determine coordinates. |
recordedBy | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:recordedBy; A person or group of people who determined the georeference for the Location. |
organismQuantityType | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwciri:organismQuantityType; The type of quantification system used for the quantity of organisms. “Individuals” for the most of occurrences, but in some cases also “pairs” for birds and projected coverage for plants were used. |
organismQuantity | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:organismQuantity; A number or enumeration value for the quantity of organisms, according to the values in the organismQuantityType field. |
language | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dc:language ; A language of the resource. One value - en | uk, because each observation combined fields both in English and Ukrainian. |
associatedReferences | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:associatedReferences; bibliographic references, datasets and data collection project name associated with the Occurrence. |
countryCode | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:countryCode; one value – UA. |
country | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:country; one value – Ukraine. |
stateProvince | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:stateProvince; The name of the administrative region of Ukraine in which the Location occurs (name of the administrative region (Oblast’) or Autonomous Republic of Crimea or Kyiv City). |
municipality | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:municipality; The full name of the next smaller administrative region than Oblast’ (region of the Ukraine) in which the Location occurs. Official administrative division of Ukraine of 2020 was used. |
verbatimLocality | https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:verbatimLocality; verbal description of the locality as was provided by the authors of observations (in Ukrainian). |
The dataset comprises information on occurrences of the 384 species that are assigned to one of the IUCN conservation categories (
This species is endemic to Ukraine (
Though we attempted to consolidate the vast majority of the data on occurrences of rare and threatened species in Ukraine, it should be mentioned that there are several other continuously updated resources where such an information can be found. For example, a significant amount of data is stored by both global biodiversity data mobilisation projects like iNaturalist (link) and eBird (link) and local citizen-science initiatives like UkrBIN (link), though the first two are also available through the GBIF network.
The authors express their gratitude to O. Shynder, M. Peregrym, G. Goncharov and I. Moysiyenko for the information provided for processing; to BIOMON-2010 project that supported and organised data collecting from pupils and local residents of Luhansk Region of Ukraine.
Conceptualisation: O. Prylutskyi, O. Vasyliuk, M. Rusin; Data collecting, organising and curation: O. Vasyliuk, O. Marushchak, I. Kutsokon, O. Nekrasova, A. Kuzemko, M. Rusin, O. Prylutskyi; Dataset organising in terms of GBIF platform: O. Prylutskyi, O. Marushchak, O. Vasyliuk; Formal analysis and investigation: O. Prylutskyi, O. Vasyliuk; Funding acquisition: M. Rusin, O. Vasyliuk; Methodology: O. Vasyliuk, O. Prylutskyi, A. Kuzemko, M. Rusin, O. Marushchak; Project administration: M. Rusin, O. Vasyliuk; Resources: O. Vasyliuk, O. Nekrasova, I. Kutsokon, A. Kuzemko, M. Rusin; Software: O. Prylutskyi, O. Marushchak; Supervision: O. Prylutskyi, M. Rusin; Validation: O. Prylutskyi; Visualisation: O. Prylutskyi; Writing—original draft and Writing—review & editing, author: O. Prylutskyi, O. Vasyliuk, M. Rusin, A. Kuzemko, I. Kutsokon, O. Nekrasova, O. Marushchak, N. Raes. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.