Portuguese Moth Recording Scheme

Registros

Los datos en este recurso de registros biológicos han sido publicados como Archivo Darwin Core(DwC-A), el cual es un formato estándar para compartir datos de biodiversidad como un conjunto de una o más tablas de datos. La tabla de datos del core contiene 47.891 registros.

Este IPT archiva los datos y, por lo tanto, sirve como repositorio de datos. Los datos y los metadatos del recurso están disponibles para su descarga en la sección descargas. La tabla versiones enumera otras versiones del recurso que se han puesto a disposición del público y permite seguir los cambios realizados en el recurso a lo largo del tiempo.

Versiones

La siguiente tabla muestra sólo las versiones publicadas del recurso que son de acceso público.

¿Cómo referenciar?

Los usuarios deben citar este trabajo de la siguiente manera:

Nunes J, Cardoso H, Valadares A, Banza P, Tomás J, Valkenburg T (2025). Portuguese Moth Recording Scheme. Version 1.5. GBIF Portugal. Occurrence dataset. http://ipt.gbif.pt/ipt/resource?r=rebn2021&v=1.5

Derechos

Los usuarios deben respetar los siguientes derechos de uso:

El publicador y propietario de los derechos de este trabajo es GBIF Portugal. Esta obra está bajo una licencia Creative Commons de Atribución/Reconocimiento (CC-BY 4.0).

Registro GBIF

Este recurso ha sido registrado en GBIF con el siguiente UUID: 59161187-c444-48cd-9efc-c286e10d034e.  GBIF Portugal publica este recurso y está registrado en GBIF como un publicador de datos avalado por GBIF Portugal.

Palabras clave

Occurrence; Observation; Lepidoptera; Citizen science; Portugal

Contactos

Cobertura geográfica

The occurrences are in mainland Portugal and the Madeira Archipelago.

Cobertura taxonómica

No hay descripción disponible

Cobertura temporal

Datos del proyecto

The moth fauna of Portugal is notably diverse, with over 2600 species reported (Corley et al. 2024). Recent advances in Portuguese lepidopterology have led to numerous publications describing new species and reporting many first records of species previously unknown in Portugal or the Iberian Peninsula (Ferreira et al. 2024). However, significant gaps remain in our understanding of this group in Portugal, including its true diversity, species ecology, distribution, and phenology. To help address this issue, a group of active Portuguese moth recorders established the Portuguese Moth Recording Scheme, or “Rede de Estações de Borboletas Noturnas” (REBN), in January 2021. This citizen science project consists of a coordinated network of sampling sites across the country, known as stations, that use light trapping as the sampling method. The project aligns with other successful European initiatives that have achieved remarkable results through high levels of ongoing citizen participation (Fox et al., 2021; Groenendijk & Ellis, 2011). The data collected is highly valuable because moths are considered a crucial group for studying global biodiversity changes (Wagner et al., 2011). The ease of sampling and relatively straightforward identification of this group, compared to other less well-known insect lineages with more complex recording, combined with their taxonomic and ecological diversity, makes moths key indicators for assessing habitat impacts (Alison et al. 2017, Hill et al. 2021). The project is based on the following objectives: 1. Establishing and strengthening the Portuguese Moth Recording Scheme by developing a rigorous and robust protocol, along with standardized sampling methods, for long-term moth monitoring through citizen science; 2. Contribute to generating information and knowledge about the distribution, phenology, abundance, and trends of Portuguese moths; 3. Raising awareness about the importance of moths, their conservation, and their habitats, particularly in the context of climate change and declining biodiversity. To achieve these objectives, efforts are focused on expanding monitoring to under-sampled areas, particularly Biodiversity Hotspots and Protected Areas, while also promoting a coordinated European network of national schemes. Additionally, there is a strong effort on training citizens in moth identification, which will enhance scientific knowledge and data collection, and contribute to a robust and stable monitoring network.

Personas asociadas al proyecto:

Métodos de muestreo

Sampling procedures were based on light trapping, with some variation in methodology among volunteers. These differences can be attributed to variations in moth trap designs (e.g., Heath trap, Skinner trap, Robinson trap), light sources (e.g., actinic light, mixed light, LED), and their power. Additionally, the sampling effort may vary between sampling events. These variations are documented in the 'samplingEffort' and 'eventTime' columns. The specific method used for each record is indicated in the 'samplingProtocol' column (e.g., Skinner trap with 125 W Mercury vapor light).

Descripción de la metodología paso a paso:

1. [2021 - 2022] The data were obtained from the "Rede de Estações de Borboletas Noturnas" project database. Records were filtered in OpenRefine based on the "Por confirmar" (to be confirmed) column, selecting only those marked as "Yes", which indicates that participants considered them confirmed. Records without assigned species were also removed [2023 - ] The data were sourced from the European Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (eBMS) database, and only verified records collected before 2024 were included.
2. [2021 - 2022] To include only macro-moth records, the dataset was limited to the following families: Cossidae, Drepanidae, Erebidae, Euteliidae, Geometridae, Hepialidae, Lasiocampidae, Limacodidae, Noctuidae, Nolidae, Notodontidae, Saturniidae, and Sphingidae. [2023 - ] Duplicate entries - records of the same species at the same location and date - were removed. The individual counts from these deleted entries were then added to the corresponding remaining unique entries.
3. [2021 - 2022] All columns were formatted according to the DwC (Darwin Core) standard, and mandatory columns were added, including type, modified, license, collectionCode, datasetName, basisOfRecord, and occurrenceStatus. [2023 - ] All columns were formatted according to the DwC (Darwin Core) standard, and mandatory columns were added, including type, modified, license, collectionCode, datasetName, basisOfRecord, and occurrenceStatus. Species names were verified against Corley (2015) and subsequent annual updates.
4. [2021 - 2022] Identifications for species groups where accurate identification is only possible through dissection were reduced to the genus level. The original identifications provided by participants were retained in the 'verbatimIdentification' column. The 'taxonRank' column indicates the taxonomic rank of the most specific name listed in the 'scientificName' column. [2023 - ] Identifications for species groups where accurate identification is only possible through dissection were reduced to the genus level. The 'taxonRank' column indicates the taxonomic rank of the most specific name listed in the 'scientificName' column.
5. [2021 - 2022] Some participants use the iNaturalist social network for assistance with moth identification, either from other users or through its AI algorithm. To indicate records identified using this network, a column named 'identificationRemarks' was created and populated with 'iNaturalist.' For these records, the 'identifiedBy' column remains empty. The 'identificationRemarks' column also notes whether the identification is based on the examination of the genitalia of at least one specimen. [2023 - ] The 'identificationRemarks' column notes whether the identification is based on the examination of the genitalia of at least one specimen. The participants provide this information when submitting their records.
6. [2021 - 2023] The sampling effort for each event was calculated based on the start and end times. For example, '07 hours and 30 minutes of sampling time' in the 'samplingEffort' column is derived from '22:00:00Z/05:30:00Z' in the 'eventTime' column.
7. [2021 - 2023] The columns 'locality', 'municipality', and 'county' - corresponding to the Portuguese administrative areas "freguesia", "município", and "distrito", respectively - were populated using the "Carta Administrativa Oficial de Portugal 2023", based on the coordinates provided by the participants. The 'stateprovince' column indicates the historical province from which the record originates. Only regular sampling sites (those with more than two annual samplings) have a 'locationID' containing fewer than four digits.

Referencias bibliográficas

1. Alison, J., Duffield, S. J., Morecroft, M. D., Marss, R. H. and Hodgson, J. A. (2017). Successful restoration of moth abundance and species-richness in grassland created under agri-environment schemes. Biological Conservation 213, 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.07.003
2. Corley, M. F. V., Cardoso, H., Nunes, J., Valadares, A., and Valkenburg, T. (2022). New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2021 (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revista De lepidopterología, 50(200), 617–631. https://doi.org/10.57065/shilap.270
3. Corley, M. F. V., Nunes, J., Rosete, J., Teixeira, J. and Valadares, A. (2023). New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2022 (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, 51(204), 609–627. https://doi.org/10.57065/shilap.784
4. Corley, M. F. V., Fabião, J. L., Lemos, P., Nunes, J. and Rosete, J. (2024). New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2023 (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, 52(208), 761–786. https://doi.org/10.57065/shilap.1018
5. Fox, R., Dennis, E. B., Harrower, C. A., Blumgart, D., Bell, J. R., Shortall, C. R., Cook, P., Davis, A. M., Evans-Hill, L. J., Haynes, F., Hill, D., Isaac, N. J. B., Parsons, M. S., Pocock, M. J. O., Prescott, T., Randle, Z., Tordoff. G. M., Tuson, D. and Bourn, N. A. D. (2021). The State of Britain’s Larger Moths 2021. Butterfly Conservation, Rothamsted Research and UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology Butterfly Conservation.
6. Groenendijk, D. and Ellis, W. N. (2011). The state of the Dutch larger moth fauna. Journal of Insect Conservation, 15, 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-010-9326-y
7. Hill, G. M., Kawahara, A. Y., Daniels, J. C., Bateman, C. C. and Scheffers, B. R. (2021). Climate change effects on animal ecology: butterflies and moths as a case study. Biol Rev, 96: 2113-2126. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12746
8. Nunes, J. (2022). Moth diversity of Mata de Vilar, Lousada, Portugal (Lepidoptera). Boletín de la Sociedad Entomológica Aragonesa, 70, 367-372.
9. Wagner, D. L., Fox, R., Salcido, D. M. and Dyer, L. A. (2021). A window to the world of global insect declines: moth biodiversity trends are complex and heterogeneous. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 118, e2002549117. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002549117

Metadatos adicionales