top of page
Search

Fragmented Flora: The Urgent Need for a Global Botanical Data Ecosystem.

Transparent domes with tropical plants, cacti, and gardens float over a blurred globe. Light trails connect them, suggesting global networks.

1. Introduction: The Paradox of the Living Museum

In the early weeks of January 2026, a consortium of researchers from the world's leading botanical institutions released a report that fundamentally challenged the operational status quo of plant science. Published in the journal Nature Plants, the study highlighted a critical paradox: while humanity possesses an "extraordinary global network" of living plant collections—stewarding nearly one-third of all known land plant species—the scientific potential of these biological assets remains largely inaccessible.1 This vast repository of knowledge, essential for combating the twin crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, is effectively locked away behind a "fragmented, fragile, and in many cases inaccessible" digital infrastructure.1

The modern botanic garden is often perceived by the public as a place of aesthetic refuge—a manicured landscape of floral beauty and tranquility. However, beneath the canopy of these green spaces lies a complex scientific mandate. These institutions function as "living museums," maintaining documented collections of living organisms for the purposes of scientific research, conservation, display, and education.4 Unlike a traditional museum where specimens are preserved in stasis—pinned beetles or dried herbarium sheets—a botanic garden’s collection is dynamic. It grows, reproduces, interacts with local ecology, and responds to environmental stressors. This dynamism makes living collections uniquely valuable for understanding how life on Earth will respond to a rapidly warming climate.5

Yet, the 2026 report, led by Professor Samuel Brockington of the University of Cambridge in collaboration with Botanic Gardens Conservation International (BGCI), reveals that this potential is being squandered. The data systems designed to manage these collections have evolved in isolation, resulting in a "patchwork of incompatible" software architectures that cannot speak to one another.3 Information regarding a critically endangered tree in a garden in Brazil may be completely invisible to a researcher studying that same genus in the United Kingdom or Australia. In an era where "big data" has transformed fields ranging from astrophysics to genomics, plant conservation remains trapped in a pre-digital or early-digital silo, struggling to aggregate the basic information needed to save species from extinction.5

This report provides an exhaustive analysis of the "untapped knowledge" crisis in global botanic gardens. It explores the scale of the biological assets at stake, the technical nuances of the "fragmented data systems" identified by the Nature Plants study, and the geopolitical and legal complexities that hinder global data integration. Furthermore, it examines the transformative potential of a proposed "Global Data Ecosystem"—a unified meta-collection that could turn these isolated gardens into a synchronized planetary instrument for biodiversity science.3

2. The Global Estate: An Audit of Biological Capital

To understand the magnitude of the data crisis, one must first appreciate the scale of the physical assets held by the global botanic garden community. These institutions are not merely local parks; they are nodes in a massive, decentralized biological reserve.

2.1 The Scale of the Living Collection

As of 2026, the global network comprises more than 3,500 botanic gardens and arboreta distributed across every habitable continent.2 Collectively, these institutions cultivate a staggering minimum of 105,634 distinct plant species.2 To put this figure in perspective, this represents approximately 30% of all known land plant diversity on Earth.4

The significance of this holding extends beyond raw numbers. These collections function as a "Noah's Ark" for the plant kingdom. The Nature Plants study notes that approximately 40% of the world's plant diversity is currently at elevated risk of extinction.5 Botanic gardens act as a critical safety net against this loss. They hold "ex situ" (off-site) populations of species that may be vanishing or already extinct in the wild. For example, the Toromiro tree (Sophora toromiro), native to Easter Island, is extinct in its natural habitat but survives in botanic garden collections.8

However, the mere existence of a plant in a garden does not guarantee its scientific utility. For a living specimen to be scientifically valuable, it must be "documented".4 This means it must have associated metadata:

  • Taxonomic Identity: What is it? (Correctly identified to species or subspecies level).

  • Provenance: Where did it come from? (Wild-collected with GPS coordinates vs. garden-origin).

  • Genetic Lineage: Is it a clone? A sibling of another plant?

  • Collection Date: When did it enter the collection?

Without this data, a rare plant is effectively "botanically mute." It contributes to the aesthetic beauty of the garden but cannot easily be used for restoration ecology, evolutionary studies, or climate resilience research.9 The 2026 study argues that while the physical network of gardens is extraordinary, the digital network needed to manage, share, and safeguard this diversity is woefully inadequate.1

2.2 The "Dead Data" Crisis

The core finding of the Brockington et al. report is that the vast knowledge held by botanic gardens is "untapped" because the data is effectively "dead"—trapped in silos where it cannot be aggregated or analyzed.5

In other scientific disciplines, the sharing of data is foundational. Genomics researchers upload sequences to GenBank; astronomers share telescope data via the Virtual Observatory. In contrast, the botanic garden community operates on what researchers describe as a "patchwork of incompatible, or even absent, data systems".5

2.2.1 The Fragmentation of Systems

Gardens utilize a dizzying array of data management tools, often selected based on budget, historical legacy, or regional preference rather than global interoperability.

  • Proprietary Databases: Many gardens use commercial software packages like BG-BASE, BRAHMS, or IrisBG.10 While powerful individually, these systems have different underlying data models (schemas). A field labeled "Location" in one database might correspond to "Provenance_ID" in another, requiring complex translation for data to flow between them.

  • Ad Hoc Solutions: A significant number of smaller collections rely on generic office software (Microsoft Excel or Access) or even paper card catalogs.3 Data in a spreadsheet on a single computer is highly vulnerable to loss and completely invisible to the global scientific community.

  • Institutional Silos: Because systems are fragmented, vital information regarding threatened species, climate resilience, and legal status cannot be shared efficiently.3 If a curator in London discovers that a specific species is highly susceptible to a new fungal pathogen, there is no automated mechanism to warn a curator in Sydney holding the same species.

2.2.2 The Commercial Barrier

The report also highlights that many digitized collections rely on incompatible systems shaped by "commercial priorities" rather than shared scientific standards.3 Commercial software vendors may not prioritize the development of open APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) that would allow for seamless data exchange, as this could be seen as reducing the "stickiness" of their product. This stands in contrast to the open-source ethos that drives bioinformatics and other data-intensive fields.

2.3 The "Meta-Collection" Concept

The vision proposed by the Nature Plants authors is the transformation of these 3,500 isolated collections into a single "meta-collection".1 A meta-collection is a coordinated, distributed network where multiple institutions effectively manage their holdings as a single, shared resource.

In a functional meta-collection:

  • Gap Analysis: The community could instantly identify which threatened species are not currently held in any garden, prioritizing them for collection.7

  • Genetics Management: Zoos already manage "studbooks" for animals like tigers and pandas to prevent inbreeding. A unified plant data system would allow botanic gardens to manage the genetic diversity of rare trees and shrubs globally, ensuring that ex situ populations remain viable for reintroduction.5

  • Resource Efficiency: Gardens could specialize rather than duplicating efforts. If one garden knows that another institution has a secure, genetically diverse population of Species X, it can focus its limited resources on Species Y.

Currently, this level of coordination is impossible because the "digital infrastructure... wasn't designed to operate at a global scale".1

3. The Technical Bottleneck: Why Computers Don't Talk to Plants

To fully comprehend the "untapped knowledge" problem, we must delve into the technical architecture of biodiversity informatics. The difficulties in uniting botanic garden data are not merely administrative; they are rooted in the fundamental challenge of digitally representing biological complexity.

3.1 The Limits of Darwin Core

The primary international standard for sharing biodiversity data is Darwin Core (DwC). Maintained by the Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG) organization, Darwin Core provides a glossary of terms (e.g., scientificName, eventDate, decimalLatitude) intended to facilitate the exchange of information about biological diversity.12

Darwin Core has been immensely successful for natural history museums. It powers the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), which aggregates hundreds of millions of records. However, the 2026 report and associated literature suggest that DwC has significant limitations when applied to living collections.13

3.1.1 Static vs. Dynamic Entities

The fundamental mismatch lies in the nature of the specimen. Darwin Core was designed primarily for "preserved specimens"—dead organisms.15

  • The Museum Model: A dried plant on a herbarium sheet is a static object. It was collected at a single point in time and space. Its physical properties (height, flower color at time of death) are fixed. A single database record perfectly captures this "snapshot."

  • The Garden Model: A living plant is a dynamic entity with a "life history." A tree in a botanic garden may live for 200 years. During that time, it changes height, produces flowers in different years, suffers damage, is propagated (cloned), and may even be moved. A static "occurrence record" in standard Darwin Core cannot easily capture this "movie" of the plant's life.

3.1.2 The "Basis of Record" Problem

Darwin Core uses a term called basisOfRecord to categorize entries. While it includes a class for LivingSpecimen, the standard fields are often insufficient for the nuanced needs of horticulture.15

  • Cultivation Status: Living collections need detailed metadata on "biological status" (e.g., wild, landrace, cultivar, research material).13 While extensions exist, they are not universally adopted.

  • Material Entity Ambiguity: Recent updates to DwC introduced the term MaterialEntity to try and subsume both living and preserved samples.16 While this improves the semantic logic, it doesn't solve the practical issue: most aggregators (like GBIF) are optimized for mapping where species occur in the wild, not for tracking how a specific individual plant grows and changes in cultivation.

3.2 The Software Landscape

The fragmentation identified in the report is exacerbated by the diverse software ecosystem used by gardens. There is no "standard operating system" for a botanic garden.


Software Platform

Primary Focus

Strengths

Weaknesses

BG-BASE

Research & Collections Management

Strong research applications; detailed taxonomic hierarchy; handles complex accession data. 10

Steeper learning curve; often requires proprietary database backends; complex interface. 11

BRAHMS (Botanical Research and Herbarium Management System)

Systematics & Research

Excellent for integrating herbarium and living collection data; strong research tools. 10

Can be complex for non-research staff; learning curve is significant. 11

IrisBG

Collection Management & Public Engagement

User-friendly; "easy to learn"; strong training resources; integrates well with public-facing maps. 11

Research capabilities may be less granular than BG-BASE/BRAHMS for deep taxonomy. 10

ArcGIS Public Garden Data Model

Mapping & Spatial Analysis

Superior spatial visualization; industry-standard GIS integration. 10

Focuses on the "where" rather than the deep "what" (taxonomy/lineage); less specialized for botany. 10

Microsoft Excel / Access

Basic Lists

Universally available; low cost.

The "Data Silo": No interoperability; high risk of data corruption; no standard schema; zero global visibility. 3

3.2.1 The Interoperability Gap

The core technical failure is the lack of interoperability—the ability of these systems to exchange data without human intervention.

  • Export/Import Friction: To move data from a garden using IrisBG to a global analyzer, the data often has to be exported to a "flat file" (CSV or Excel). During this process, data fields must be mapped manually (e.g., matching "Location_ID" to "Asset_ID").10 This process is error-prone and labor-intensive.

  • Lack of APIs: Many older or proprietary systems lack robust Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) that would allow a central "brain" to query the garden's database in real-time.17 Instead, global aggregators like BGCI's PlantSearch rely on gardens manually uploading lists of species every few months or years. This means the global view is always out of date.

4. The Human and Legal Dimensions

The barriers to a unified global plant knowledge system are not solely technological; they are deeply entangled with geopolitics, international law, and the uneven distribution of resources between the Global North and South.

4.1 The North-South Divide and Data Equity

A stark reality of botanical science is the geographic mismatch between biodiversity and resources. The majority of the world's plant diversity is concentrated in the tropics (the Global South), particularly in nations like Brazil, Indonesia, and Madagascar. However, the majority of the world's well-funded botanic gardens—and the digital infrastructure that serves them—are located in the temperate Global North (Europe and North America).1

  • The Representation Bias: A 2017 study cited in the research context found that while 60% of temperate vascular plant species were represented in botanic gardens, only 25% of tropical species were held in ex situ collections.7

  • The Infrastructure Gap: The Nature Plants report explicitly warns that the current fragmented systems are often "inaccessible to scientists and conservationists working where most of the world's biodiversity is located".1

  • The Equity Mandate: Professor Brockington and his colleagues argue that any new global data system must be "equitable," allowing collections of all sizes in the Global South to participate on "equal terms".1 This is not merely a matter of social justice; it is a scientific imperative. A global model of plant climate resilience that excludes data from the tropics is fundamentally broken.

4.2 The Nagoya Protocol and Sovereignty

The flow of botanical data is further complicated by international treaties governing "Access and Benefit Sharing" (ABS), most notably the Nagoya Protocol. Adopted under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Nagoya Protocol aims to prevent "biopiracy"—the theft of genetic resources from developing nations by researchers or corporations in the developed world.18

While the protocol's intent is noble, its implementation has created unintended barriers to data sharing:

  • Digital Sequence Information (DSI): There is intense international debate over whether "digital sequence information" (genetic data) constitutes a "genetic resource" subject to the same strict permitting as physical plant samples. This uncertainty causes many institutions to hoard data rather than share it, fearing legal repercussions.18

  • National Regulations: Countries have devised a patchwork of national regulations. A researcher wishing to study a genus distributed across five South American countries might need to navigate five completely different permitting regimes.19

  • Reconnecting to Country: New initiatives are attempting to navigate this by focusing on Indigenous data sovereignty. For example, a partnership between the New York Botanical Garden and Indigenous Australian groups seeks to "reconnect Indigenous data back to Country," acknowledging that specimen records often lack the cultural metadata (e.g., Indigenous names and uses) that is vital for true understanding.9 A global data system must be sophisticated enough to handle these complex rights and permissions, which current flat-file standards often strip away.

4.3 The Taxonomic Impediment

Finally, the data crisis is compounded by the "Taxonomic Impediment"—the global shortage of trained taxonomists capable of correctly identifying species.20

  • The Naming Crisis: A garden may hold a rare species, but if it is misidentified (tagged with the wrong name), the data is worse than useless—it is misleading. The Nature Plants report implies that a unified system would help resolve this by allowing experts to remotely review and correct identifications across the network.21

  • Capacity Building: There is a critical need to train taxonomists in the countries where biodiversity is highest. The current "brain drain" of specimens and data to the Global North exacerbates the problem.22

5. The "Meta-Collection" in Action: Potential and Prototypes

Despite the gloom of the "dead data" crisis, the Nature Plants report and associated initiatives paint a compelling picture of what is possible if these barriers are removed. When data is successfully integrated, botanic gardens become powerful engines of discovery.

5.1 Phenology: The Climate Change Sentinel

One of the most immediate applications of untapped garden data is phenology—the study of the timing of biological events such as leafing, flowering, and fruiting.23

Botanic gardens are, in essence, ready-made "common garden experiments" distributed across the planet.24 In a traditional common garden experiment, researchers plant the same species in different environments to see how genetics and environment interact. The global network of gardens already has this setup: a specific species of Oak (Quercus) might be growing in Cambridge, St. Louis, and Melbourne simultaneously.

  • The Power of Longitudinal Data: Unlike a herbarium specimen which captures one day in 1950, a living tree in a garden may have 100 years of flowering records. This data is the "gold standard" for tracking climate change.

  • PhenObs: The PhenObs initiative is a prototype of the "meta-collection" concept. A network of botanical gardens (primarily in Germany and Europe) agreed on a standardized protocol to monitor herbaceous plants. Their combined data revealed that taller species tend to flower later than shorter ones and that flowering duration is linked to seed mass.25 This type of functional trait analysis is impossible with single-garden data.

  • Project BudBurst: In the United States, Project BudBurst (managed by the Chicago Botanic Garden) aggregates citizen science data with garden records. This massive dataset has been used to peer-reviewed effect, such as predicting the shifting timing of cherry blossoms in Washington, D.C..27

  • Breakthroughs: Analysis of such aggregated data has already yielded results. For instance, studies have shown that maize tolerance to heat stress has actually increased over time, and that floral pigmentation is rapidly responding to changes in ozone and temperature.8 These insights are only possible because of the longitudinal data preserved in living collections.

5.2 Genomics: The Library of Life

As the science of taxonomy shifts from morphology (counting petals) to genomics (sequencing DNA), botanic gardens are transforming into bio-banks.

  • GGI-Gardens: The Global Genome Initiative for Gardens (GGI-Gardens) is an ambitious project to collect and preserve genome-quality tissue from at least one species of every plant genus on Earth.30

  • The "Gap Analysis" Strategy: By using the meta-collection approach, GGI-Gardens can identify which genera are missing from the global DNA library. They found that while they had good coverage of temperate families, many tropical lineages were missing.

  • New Species Discovery: The initiative has led to the discovery of new species "hidden in plain sight" within garden collections. For example, DNA barcoding revealed new species of orchids and even a "zombie fungus" in Brazil that had gone unrecognized.31

  • The Genetic Ark: This genomic data is not just for naming plants; it is a repository for crop improvement. The wild relatives of apples (Malus) held in gardens contain genetic resistance to diseases that threaten the commercial fruit industry. Without a unified data system to tell breeders where these resistant trees are, this genetic potential remains "untapped".33

5.3 The Nurturing Nature Initiative

The Nurturing Nature Initiative, led by the New York Botanical Garden (NYBG) with support from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, represents the application of garden data to ecological restoration.34

  • The Goal: To move beyond "gardening" to "healing ecosystems." The initiative uses the taxonomic and horticultural expertise of gardens to supply the correct plant material for large-scale reforestation.

  • The Data Link: Restoration fails if the wrong plants are used (e.g., planting a genotype of tree that cannot survive the future climate of the restoration site). The initiative relies on the deep data of botanic gardens to match the "right plant to the right place" in a changing world.35

6. The Proposed Solution: A Global Data Ecosystem

The January 2026 report does not merely complain about the problem; it outlines a blueprint for a solution. The authors call for the creation of a Unified and Equitable Global Data System.3

6.1 Characteristics of the New Architecture

The proposed system is not a single, monolithic super-computer that swallows all data. Rather, it is envisioned as a decentralized "ecosystem" or an "internet of FAIR data" (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable).18

  1. Distributed but Connected: Gardens would continue to use their preferred local software (BG-BASE, IrisBG, etc.), but these systems would be upgraded to communicate via standardized APIs. This concept utilizes Digital Object Architecture (DOA), where every plant record becomes a "digital object" that can be queried globally.18

  2. Standardized Semantics: The community must agree on a "step-change" in documentation standards. This involves expanding Darwin Core or adopting new ontologies that can handle dynamic traits (phenology) and cultivation status.3

  3. Critical Public Infrastructure: The report argues that plant data should be treated like health data. In healthcare, fragmented records are seen as a life-or-death risk, justifying public investment in integration. The authors argue the same applies to biodiversity data—it is "critical public infrastructure" for planetary health.6

6.2 The Role of Institutions

  • Botanic Gardens Conservation International (BGCI): The report identifies BGCI as the natural hub for this ecosystem. BGCI already manages PlantSearch (the only global list of garden holdings) and GardenSearch.7 The proposal calls for "coordinated and considered investment" to scale these existing tools into a real-time global network.3

  • University of Cambridge: As the lead institution on the 2026 report, Cambridge is positioning itself as a thought leader, advocating for the "meta-collection" approach to be adopted by policy makers.1

6.3 Funding and Sustainability

The barrier to this vision is largely financial. Creating a global data ecosystem requires software engineering, server infrastructure, and training. The report emphasizes that this cannot be funded by short-term grants alone; it requires long-term institutional commitment, similar to the funding of the Global Seed Vault or the Human Genome Project.6

7. Conclusion: Silence or Synthesis?

The 2026 findings by Brockington and colleagues mark a pivotal moment in the history of botanical science. For centuries, botanic gardens have operated as islands of diversity—walled gardens in both the physical and digital sense. They have amassed a collection of life that is unparalleled in its richness, stewarding 105,634 species that represent the evolutionary heritage of our planet.

However, the "Silent Library" effect—caused by fragmented, incompatible, and fragile data systems—threatens to render this treasure trove irrelevant in the face of the 21st century's existential threats. A library with no catalog, or a catalog written in a thousand mutually unintelligible languages, cannot serve its purpose.

The "untapped knowledge" identified in the report is not abstract. It is the specific data point that tells a restoration ecologist which tree will survive a 2°C temperature rise. It is the genomic sequence that reveals a new source of medicine or crop resistance. It is the phenological record that confirms the accelerating pace of climate change.

Unlocking this knowledge requires more than just new software. It requires a fundamental shift in culture—from one of ownership and isolation to one of openness and connection. It requires a legal framework that balances sovereignty with scientific necessity. And it requires the recognition that the data describing a plant is as valuable as the plant itself.

If the global community can answer the call of the Nature Plants report—investing in a unified, equitable, and robust data ecosystem—the world's botanic gardens can finally function as they were intended: not just as parks for the public, but as a synchronized, planetary instrument for the survival of life on Earth.


Data Summary Tables


Table 1: The Global Botanic Garden Estate (2026 Estimate)


Metric

Value

Significance

Source

Total Institutions

> 3,500

Global distribution; "extraordinary network"

7

Species in Cultivation

> 105,634

~30% of all known land plant diversity

2

Threatened Species Held

~40% of threatened taxa

Critical "ex situ" safety net

6

Data Status

Fragmented / Incompatible

"Untapped" scientific potential

1

Table 2: Comparison of Biodiversity Data Standards


Feature

Darwin Core (Standard)

Living Collection Reality

Consequence of Mismatch

Primary Object

Preserved Specimen (Dead)

Living Organism (Dynamic)

Static data fails to capture growth/change. 15

Time Dimension

Single Point (Event Date)

Longitudinal (Life History)

Phenology trends (climate response) are lost. 23

Status

Wild / Natural

Cultivated / Clonal / Propagated

Genetic lineage and horticultural provenance are obscured. 13

Interoperability

High (for museums)

Low (for gardens)

Gardens cannot easily share data with global aggregators like GBIF. 14

Works cited

  1. World's vast plant knowledge not being fully exploited to tackle biodiversity and climate challenges, warn researchers | University of Cambridge, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/worlds-vast-plant-knowledge-not-being-fully-exploited-to-tackle-biodiversity-and-climate-challenges

  2. We Have 3,500 Plant Collections But Isolation Holds Them Back - Botany One, accessed January 11, 2026, https://botany.one/2026/01/we-have-3500-plant-collections-but-isolation-holds-them-back/

  3. Unlocking the Global Potential of Living Plant Collections | Botanic Gardens Conservation International, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.bgci.org/news-events/unlocking_the_global_potential_of_living_plant_collections/

  4. High-performance living plant collections require a globally integrated data ecosystem to meet twenty-first-century challenges. | Scilit, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.scilit.com/publications/7e3476dfc73fe6b2db0f5932b8ae6d93

  5. Botanic gardens' vast knowledge remains untapped due to fragmented data systems, say researchers - Phys.org, accessed January 11, 2026, https://phys.org/visualstories/2026-01-botanic-gardens-vast-knowledge-untapped.amp

  6. News | School of the Biological Sciences - University of Cambridge, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.bio.cam.ac.uk/aggregator/sources/1

  7. Can botanic gardens conserve all of the world's rare and threatened plant species?, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.pas.va/en/publications/scripta-varia/sv146pas/smith.html

  8. The world's living collections have collectively reached peak capacity - Tech Explorist, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.techexplorist.com/world-living-collections-collectively-reached-peak-capacity/96469/

  9. SciDataCon 2025 (13-16 October 2025) · Indico, accessed January 11, 2026, https://scidatacon.org/event/9/timetable/?view=standard

  10. MODERNIZING PLANT RECORDS MANAGEMENT | National Park Service, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/ncptt/upload/2017-02.pdf

  11. MODERNIzING PLANT RECORDS MANAGEMENT - ArbNet, accessed January 11, 2026, https://arbnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Modernizing-Plant-Record-Management_OlmstedCenter.pdf

  12. Darwin Core - Research Data Alliance GitHub, accessed January 11, 2026, https://rd-alliance.github.io/metadata-directory/standards/darwin-core.html

  13. the darwin core extension for genebanks opens up new opportunities for sharing germplasm data sets - Journals@KU, accessed January 11, 2026, https://journals.ku.edu/jbi/article/download/4095/4064/6571

  14. Chapter: 5 Generating, Integrating, and Accessing Digital Data - National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/25592/chapter/7

  15. Basis of Record - Biodiversity Data Use, accessed January 11, 2026, https://docs.gbif.org/course-data-use/en/basis-of-record.html

  16. Darwin Core List of Terms - TDWG, accessed January 11, 2026, https://dwc.tdwg.org/list/

  17. Recommendations for interoperability among infrastructures - RIO Journal, accessed January 11, 2026, https://riojournal.com/article/96180/

  18. Permits, contracts and their terms for biodiversity specimens - RIO Journal, accessed January 11, 2026, https://riojournal.com/article/114366/element/2/9196003/

  19. DELIVERABLE3.3-BEST PRACTICES FORUSING THEGGBN DATASTANDARD TOPROVIDE RESTRICTION ANDLOAN INFORMATION HANDBOOK - SYNTHESYS, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.synthesys.info/content/dam/nhm-synthesys/synthesys-plus-deliverables/Deliverable%203.3.pdf

  20. International Agenda - Botanic Gardens Conservation International, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.bgci.org/files/Worldwide/News/SeptDec12/international_agenda_web.pdf

  21. Balancing the supply and demand for taxonomy: an analysis of European taxonomic capacity and policy needs | bioRxiv, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.07.31.666655v1.full-text

  22. The Global Taxonomy Initiative: Shortening the Distance between Discovery and Delivery - Implementation - DCCEEW, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.dcceew.gov.au/science-research/abrs/publications/gti-implementation

  23. Phenology Project - Cambridge University Botanic Garden, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.botanic.cam.ac.uk/research-science/phenology-project/

  24. Analyzing Wildflower Phenology Across Botanical Gardens » Evolutionary ecology, Plants » HF&G, accessed January 11, 2026, https://holdenfg.org/blog/analyzing-wildflower-phenology-across-botanical-gardens/

  25. The PhenObs initiative - Linking plant phenology to functional traits in herbaceous species in Botanical Gardens - German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research, accessed January 11, 2026, https://idiv-biodiversity.de/fileadmin/content/Files_PhenObs/Poster_Sporbert.pdf

  26. Spatial variability in herbaceous plant phenology is mostly explained by variability in temperature but also by photoperiod and functional traits - PMC, accessed January 11, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10963576/

  27. Real Life Science with Dandelions and Project BudBurst - PMC - NIH, accessed January 11, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4798791/

  28. Publications - Budburst, accessed January 11, 2026, https://budburst.org/about-us/publications

  29. Evolution of UV reflection in bee‐ and bird‐pollinated flowers - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed January 11, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12710832/

  30. Flora of the Marquesas Islands, a multiphase project, accessed January 11, 2026, https://naturalhistory.si.edu/sites/default/files/media/file/vol23no4.pdf

  31. Zombie fungus among top 10 new species named in 2025 - Perplexity, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.perplexity.ai/page/scientists-name-top-10-new-pla-PAs9WZfySiyTeauwzNwQPQ

  32. From genes to genomes: - Botanic Gardens Conservation International, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.bgci.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/BGjournal18.1MedResRed.pdf

  33. Botanic Gardens Complement Agricultural Gene Bank in Collecting and Conserving Plant Genetic Diversity, accessed January 11, 2026, https://members.publicgardens.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/botanic-gardens-complement-agricultural.pdf

  34. Nurturing Nature | New York Botanical Garden, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.nybg.org/plant-research-and-conservation/science-strategy/plants-for-climate-resilience/nurturing-nature/

Nurturing Nature Initiative: Why Botanical Gardens are Key to Climate Resilience, accessed January 11, 2026, https://www.publicgardens.org/nurturing-nature-initiative-why-botanical-gardens-are-key-to-climate-resilience/

Comments

bottom of page