Trends
Although historical records have proved
invaluable in addressing myriad societal
challenges, societal investment in sys-
tematic collection and curation is widely
recognized to be insufficient.
Such underinvestment creates gaps in
data that will limit the ability of future
historical ecologists to understand
present-day conditions and trends,
which is especially unfortunate given
the degree of global change currently
under way.
Individual scientists, resource man-
agers, and citizen scientists can play a
critical role in filling the gap, by taking the
initiative to sample and archive the con-
temporary conditions of the places and
resources to which they have access.
A crowdsourced initiative can be
instrumental in generating the records
needed to inform a wide array of cur-
rent and future societal interests,
including biodiversity conservation.
1The Nature Conservancy, 201
Mission St., 4th Floor, San Francisco,
CA 94105, USA
2Migratory Bird Center, Smithsonian
Conservation Biology Institute,
National Zoological Park, MRC 5503,
Washington, DC 20013, USA
3Department of Biology and Graduate
Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado
State University, Fort Collins, CO
80523, USA
4Department of Anthropology,
National Museum of Natural History,
Smithsonian Institution, MRC 112,
Washington, DC 20013, USA
*Correspondence:
smorrison@tnc.org (S.A. Morrison).Opinion
Equipping the 22nd-Century
Historical Ecologist
Scott A. Morrison,1,* T. Scott Sillett,2 W. Chris Funk,3
Cameron K. Ghalambor,3 and Torben C. Rick4
Historical ecology provides information needed to understand contemporary
conditions and make science-based resource management decisions. Gaps in
historical records, however, can limit inquiries and inference. Unfortunately, the
patchiness of data that poses challenges for today’s historical ecologist may be
similarly problematic for those in the future seeking to understand what are
currently present-day conditions and trends, in part because of societal under-
investment in systematic collection and curation. We therefore highlight the
generational imperative that contemporary scientists and managers individu-
ally have – especially in this era of tremendous global change – to ensure
sufficient documentation of the past and current conditions of the places and
resources to which they have access.
Are We Setting Up Our Successors for Success?
Historical ecology seeks to understand how past conditions and interactions between people
and their environment have shaped contemporary conditions [1]. Such understanding can
provide critical context for the interpretation of environmental change and making science-
based resource management and policy decisions, today and into the future [2]. From public
health to food security, many interests in society have benefited from analyses using museum
and herbarium collections and other historical records [3–5]. The value of archived data and
materials only grows as technologies advance that can unlock information unimagined at the
time of original collection [6,7]. Molecular techniques, for example, can now provide insights
into the lives of preserved biological specimens ranging from their diet to their population
structure [8,9]; population and environmental attributes revealed through analyses of preserved
individuals can be compared with present-day patterns and help elucidate priorities for
conserving biodiversity [10]. Long-term data series can be similarly valuable [11] and help
guard against biases of contemporary experience [12].
Despite these values, investment in systematic collection, curation, and maintenance of
museums, herbaria, and long-term datasets is widely recognized to be insufficient [5,13]. That
this disparity coincides with an era of dramatic global change is especially unfortunate, given
our growing understanding of the degree of human effect on – and connection to – the
biosphere [14,15]. Observations of changes in species’ ranges, phenologies, disease dynam-
ics, and vulnerabilities are now ubiquitous (e.g., [16,17]). What is contemporaneously observed
and documented, however, is likely to be only a fraction of the social, ecological, and
evolutionary transition under way [1,2]. Although today’s scientific enterprise will ensure a
degree of knowledge capture and retention, the adequacy of efforts to document this pivotal
moment of Earth’s history is questionable, particularly for systems that are not a focus of active
research. Ironically, our current era of ‘big data’ [18] largely overlooks the archiving of sources of
data that have proved so valuable in past studies, such as biological specimens and natural
history observations [3,19].578 Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2017.05.006
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Gaps in historical, archaeological, and fossil records can limit their scientific and management
utility [20]. Indeed, the patchiness of data and collections often relegates historical ecologists to
inductive inference [1]. In this light we consider the prospects of future historical ecologists
looking back to our present time. They may face the same limitations as historical ecologists
today, because they too will be reliant on archived material and data that were not originally
collected to answer their specific question of interest. Thus, the sufficiency of the then-historical
sample may be accidental. The general lack of a systematic approach to archiving modern
material in existing collections, and time-series data in general, exacerbates this risk [21,22].
Future historical ecologists would be better equipped to undertake more deductive research
and hypothesis testing if they had access to records from systematic surveys and focused
curation of present-day conditions. We therefore echo calls for robust societal investment in
institutional curation of diverse materials that document contemporary conditions (e.g., [3,23]).
However, given the high stakes of the status quo, we also call on individuals directly, to ask
what they themselves can do to better enable the historical ecologists of tomorrow. We
specifically appeal to resource managers and field scientists because, unlike many of the
other societal beneficiaries of historical archives, they often have the access to original materials
and remote places required to undertake the collection. Motivating voluntary action can be
more successful when it aligns with personal values and interests [24], so to strengthen our
appeal we encourage scientists and managers to consider not just how enhancing collections
would serve some unforeseen societal good, but specifically how it could benefit future
practitioners in their field. In that regard we emphasize the contributions that historical ecology
can make to a societal value that many natural resource professionals are likely to share: a
desire to conserve biodiversity. Although we cannot predict with precision the ecological
conditions of the future, or the research questions that will be of most interest to scientists,
managers, and policymakers, or even which data or materials will be most valuable in
answering them, we do know how historical data are currently being used in a diversity of
contexts. Given that knowledge, today’s managers and scientists have a clear generational
imperative: to try to anticipate the information needs of their future colleagues and to take the
initiative to secure – for them – the requisite archives.
A Look Back from the Future
At the turn of the 20th century, Joseph Grinnell and colleagues conducted biological surveys
throughout California, USA with the intent of leaving specimens and detailed records for the
‘student of the future’, knowing that the value of their efforts may not ‘be realized until the lapse
of many years, possibly a century’ [25]. A century later, resurveying those locations, reviewing
those field notes, and analyzing those collections has indeed provided critical insights into the
biological effects of climate and land use change (e.g., [26]).
Looking back, one might wish that scientific surveyors of past centuries left more comprehen-
sive records of the conditions of that time. With that recognition, however, we also can look
forward and expect the scientists and resource managers of the future to wish the same of our
present time. For example, just as conservationists today want to have the information they
need to make informed management decisions, they want the conservationists of the future to
be similarly equipped. Thus, we encourage managers and scientists working today to under-
take an inquiry in which they imagine themselves working at the turn of the next century and ask
‘What would our future selves most want our present-day selves to be sure to do?’ We suggest
they would want present-day scientists and managers to answer three questions. (i) How could
we better document the past? (ii) How could we better document the present? (iii) How could
we better use historical and contemporary materials to improve understanding of current
ecological conditions and make more informed resource management decisions? Below, we
elaborate on this inquiry.Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8 579
Defining the Focal Place and Resources of Interest
To keep their query from becoming unproductively expansive, those undertaking the inquiry we
propose should first establish some geographic and thematic sideboards, by specifying the
spatial extent and resources of their interest. Either can be the starting point. For example,
resource managers may be interested in a specific place, such as a protected area, and use the
boundaries of the place to define the resources of their interest and to hypothesize what
environmental changes may be expected within and near that place over time. Alternatively, a
manager may be interested in a specific resource (e.g., a species) and then seek to define its
spatial extent (e.g., its past, present, and future range) and the environmental conditions of
interest affecting it, today and in the future. Speculating about the research questions or
management scenarios that future resource managers are likely to face is helpful; modeling and
environmental horizon scanning methods can be used to generate hypotheses about future
conditions [27]. Those scenarios, in turn, can help further define the places and resources that
should be considered in this inquiry.
Documenting the Past
We posit that future historical ecologists would want present-day scientists and mangers to
ensure that information pertaining to past conditions is secured and archived. Because we
are temporally closer to that past than our future colleagues, we are likely to be in a better
position to access and preserve historical data and materials, given that conditions change,
memories fade, sites deteriorate, and records are lost. Many places and resources will have
a considerable historical record already established and in further development by active
researchers. Those undertaking this inquiry might first seek to identify those initiatives, as
present-day historical ecologists, anthropologists, archaeologists, ethnobiologists, paleo-
biologists, historical societies, and natural history museums are ideal collaborators in this
effort. Our emphasis here is to identify what would be needed to complement existing
initiatives: what from past decades or centuries needs additional concerted effort to
preserve?
To spur this portion of the inquiry, managers and scientists might find it helpful to identify
questions important for resource management today that could be investigated using historical
collections or data (Box 1). Priorities for better documentation might include processing
already-collected materials that have yet to be properly accessioned, cataloguing private
collections, including those of local scientists [28], digitizing historical documents such as
field notes, and investigating sites or materials that are vulnerable to environmental change or
degradation (e.g., Box 2). Particular attention might be paid to information that could be lost
with generational transitions such as staff retirements. Providing interns to assist late-career
researchers process and archive materials could reduce the risk of important data being
forgotten or discarded. We also encourage managers and scientists to consider the seemingly
ordinary or inconsequential. Ephemera and non-traditional data sources that pertain to the
place and resources of interest – personal photographs, business records, diaries, video tapes,
and oral histories – may be especially vulnerable to loss and yet prove useful to future scientists
(e.g., [29]). For example, McClenachan [30] used historical photographs to document long-
term declines in the size of trophy fish.
Documenting the Present
Although future historical ecologists will have access to products from the broad scientific
enterprise currently under way, including a variety of increasingly automated environmental
data streams such as satellite imagery, they would also be likely to benefit from a more
concerted effort to document present-day conditions related to the focal place and resources.
Managers and scientists could initiate this portion of the inquiry by identifying questions they
believe might be important to colleagues of the future (Box 1). Survey priorities for a modern580 Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8
Box 1. Guiding Questions to Examine the Sufficiency of Documentation Regarding the Past and
Present Conditions of a Focal Place or Resources
We call on managers and scientists to imagine performing their job at the turn of the next century and to ask ‘What do we
need to leave behind today to position our future selves for success?’ An interdisciplinary workshop may be a productive
way of elucidating priorities. Below are questions to spur discussion.
Questions to Prompt Discussion about Priorities for Better Documentation of the Past and for the Use of Such Data

 What information regarding past species distributions, environmental conditions, and human environmental inter-
actions should we collect and analyze to inform today’s management of natural and cultural resources?

 Are initiatives already under way to capture and archive data regarding past conditions?

 What additional efforts are needed to secure knowledge about the past?

 What are important or interesting research questions that could leverage historical collections and data (e.g., by
applying modern molecular technologies)?

 For the place and resources that are the focus of the inquiry, what are the best examples of insights gained using
existing collections and historical data?

 Are information management systems in place to ensure long-term data security and accessibility?
Questions to Prompt Discussion about Priorities for Better Documentation of the Present and for the Use of Such Data

 How might conditions change over the near and longer term for the resources and places of interest?

 What kinds of data, specimens, and other objects should we gather in the years ahead to establish a baseline for
future comparison?

 How could we analyze those materials to inform current resource management?

 Do past or ongoing systematic surveys exist that could offer a useful baseline (e.g., opportunities to create a longer-
term time series)?

 What are the big questions colleagues in 2100 are likely to need to answer for effective resource management?

 What are the questions we need to address now that a contemporary systematic survey can inform?

 How could we systematize and streamline the collection of priority data streams?series could be established with a gap analysis of existing collections [31]. A consideration of
emerging technologies might catalyze other ideas (e.g., Box 3). Possibilities are as numerous as
they are exciting, spanning microbiome analysis, genetic barcoding, and environmental DNA,
to acoustic monitoring and portable weather stations, to frozen zoos and seed banks. We
should be careful, however, not to undervalue traditional methods and materials. For example,
systematically collected field observations can sometimes capture even more information than
the original author was aware of (e.g., [26,32]) and help future historical ecologists avoid the
conundrum of trying to distinguish between evidence of absence and absence of evidence
(e.g., [29]).
Non-traditional data sources and ephemera may provide other helpful records, such as
personal photographs and videos, harvest data for extracted resources, email and social
media dialog, and oral histories [33]. Materials that may seem unimportant when addressing
current research questions may become illuminating under a future lens. For instance, Van
Houtan et al. [34] analyzed hundreds of seafood menus through time to infer changes in the
availability and abundance of marine resources. Generating hypotheses of how the resources
or places of interest might change could help determine which types of materials should be
prioritized [35] and enhance the likelihood that the resulting archive will be useful and not merely
a hoard of historical clutter.
In addition to prompting the identification of documentation priorities, this inquiry should
encourage an examination of how data collection might be systematized to capture information
regarding present conditions on an ongoing basis. For example, natural resource managers
can incorporate record management protocols into site access and researcher permission
processes. Permit conditions could stipulate metadata standards, with particular emphasis on
collecting robust locational information for field observations [36], and require eventual public
accessibility of physical materials and digital data. Managers and scientists might examine howTrends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8 581
existing monitoring programs can be adapted or supplemented to better meet the needs of
future practitioners [11,35]. Given the environmental dynamism expected in the century ahead,
baseline datasets and systems for monitoring species arrivals (including pathogens) and
phenological changes are likely to be especially useful [37,38]. Advances in mobile technolo-
gies, remote sensing, and citizen science offer promising means of efficiently creating valuable
data streams [39].
As climates change and historical conditions become less practical or appropriate as man-
agement goals, resource managers will need to redefine their objectives and how best to
achieve them [40,41]. We expect future scientists and managers to be interested in how
today’s managers are navigating this uncertainty, determining priorities, and intervening in the
system. That information will help them understand why the place and resources of their
interest have come to look the way they do. At the least, managers today should document
decisions and actions. Better still, they should document the values, assumptions, and
constraints underpinning those decisions, as that would provide future historical ecologists
with important socioecological context. Overlooking the historical significance of present-day
activity is commonplace. We encourage managers to recognize that by virtue of their everyday
actions (and inactions) they are participants in what will become history, and to develop
systems to memorialize what they do – and, importantly, why.Box 2. Example of Documenting the Past to Inform Contemporary and Future Conservation
Archaeology provides a vehicle to reconstruct past ecosystems and the role of people in shaping ecological change. Animal and plant remains recovered from
archaeological sites contain evidence of past abundance, ecosystem structure and function, the timing of introductions and extirpations, and other variables that can
be used to provide baselines or reference points for restoration and conservation. Non-renewable archaeological sites are often threatened by a variety of processes,
including development and landscape alteration, looting, and marine erosion, that can destroy or compromise archaeological sites before they are studied.
Some of these processes, especially erosion of coastal archaeological sites, are particularly apparent in coastal areas like California’s Channel Islands. Native
Americans lived on California’s Channel Islands for at least 13 000 years, leaving behind a remarkable record of human–environmental interactions, including
thousands of shell middens (Figure I) [48]. Shell middens – ancient refuse piles containing bones, shellfish, plant remains, and other materials – are crucial for the
documentation of socioecological relationships through time and across space; they provide material that can be sampled for ancient DNA, proteomics, and stable
isotope research. Like other coastal areas around the world, archaeological sites around the Channel Islands seacoast are being destroyed by marine erosion, which
is intensifying due to sea level rise [49]. Geographic information system (GIS)-based predicative modeling and field assessment can help identify and prioritize the
most vulnerable sites [50]. Focused sampling and recording of such sites can enhance our understanding not only of human cultural adaptations but also of past
human–environmental interactions, which can inform current and future conservation [51,52].
0 2.5 5 7.5 10
km
Highest risk
High risk
Moderate risk
Low risk
Lowest risk
(A)
582 Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8
(B)
(C)
Figure I. Geographic Information System (GIS) Model of Archaeological Site Vulnerability to Marine and Stream Erosion on Santa Cruz Island
(Inset Shows the Location of the Island in California, USA) (A), Eroding Shell Midden on the Island (B), and an Archived Sample of Shell Midden
Awaiting Detailed Analysis and Identification (C). Map: Leslie Reeder-Myers; photographs: T.C. Rick.
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8 583
Capitalizing on Historical and Contemporary Data and Materials
Our call to position future colleagues for success includes asking how we might better use the
materials available today to advance science and apply it in resource management. That, in
turn, should increase the likelihood that what we deem to be the most important natural,Box 3. Example of Documenting the Present to Inform Contemporary and Future Conservation
Understanding the biogeographic distribution of species is a critical first step in conserving biodiversity [53], but the
majority of species have gone undetected and undescribed [54]. Part of the reason for the poor understanding of
biodiversity is that many species are cryptic: two or more species may be morphologically similar but erroneously
classified as one species. Integrative taxonomy, which combines genetics, morphology, and other types of phenotypic
data, has become a powerful approach in uncovering cryptic diversity [55].
Ecuador, a country the size of Colorado, has 523 described frog species – approximately five times as many as the USA
and Canada combined (http://amphibiaweb.org). Many more may remain undescribed. For example, using an
integrative taxonomic approach, one frog population thought to be the ornate rainfrog (Pristimatnis ornattissimus)
was found to be a distinct species, the Ecuadorian rainfrog (Pristimatnis ecuadorensis; Figure I) [56]. Due to its extremely
small range and rarity and habitat loss from agriculture and logging, the newly discovered species may be ‘Endangered’
[56] under criteria established by the IUCN (http://www.iucnredlist.org). The discovery of cryptic species using genetics
is essential for contemporary conservation prioritization, providing species-specific genetic markers that allow con-
servation scientists to identify and monitor these species.
New genomic techniques that use thousands of loci allow a much richer inquiry than traditional genetic approaches,
which typically use 1–20 loci. For example, they can help identify genes underlying adaptive differences among
populations [8,57]. Characterizing adaptive genetic variation can help determine a species’ potential for adaptation
to environmental change, help identify appropriate source populations for assisted gene flow, and inform the design of
reserve networks to maximize adaptive potential [58].
Genomics can be used to identify loci underlying adaptation to climatic variation. For example, a cross-latitudinal and
elevational examination of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) and interior spruce (Picea glauca, Picea engelmannii, and
their hybrids) in western Canada (Figure I) identified dozens of genes associated with spatial variation in temperature or
cold hardiness, many of which were shared in both species despite their ancient divergence [59]. Such results can
inform contemporary strategies to conserve spatial variation in adaptive genetic variation in key species and allow future
conservation scientists to track how the geographic distribution of this variation shifts as climates change.
(A)
584 Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8
(B)
Figure I. Newly Discovered Cryptic Frog Species from Ecuador (Pristimantis ecuadorensis) (A) and the
Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta) and Interior Spruce (Picea spp.) from Western North America (B).
Photographs: Elicio Tapia, Sally Aitken.cultural, and physical resources will be stewarded successfully into the future. Timely investi-
gation and application of findings is especially critical in the context of biodiversity conservation;
clearly, its aim is not just to preserve biological specimens and descriptions but to ensure the in
vivo and in situ persistence of biological diversity. An important outcome of undertaking the
inquiry we describe may be a heightened awareness of the assets that exist in archived
materials that can be deployed to inform decision-making. Interdisciplinary discussion may
reveal ways that collaborative research and emerging technologies can help generate knowl-
edge needed to guide management (Boxes 2 and 3). When historical materials do demonstrate
value in contemporary applications, we encourage broad dissemination of those examples, to
highlight the relevance of such records and build a constituency for their upkeep.
Managing Records and Materials
Information management systems are essential to ensure that data and materials are not lost
and opportunities to use them are not overlooked. Fortunately, increasing attention is being
paid to archiving data used in published ecological studies [42]. However, many of the materials
that future historical ecologists will need are physical objects and other data. Accredited
research institutions have limited space and budgets and will not be able to prioritize many
important materials. Consequently, it will be necessary to explore less traditional means ofTrends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8 585
Box 4. Ten Actions Managers and Scientists Can Undertake Today to Better Equip Future Historical
Ecologists

 Use the inquiry framework outlined here to structure an interdisciplinary workshop focused on a place or resources of
interest; collaborate to advance priority research needs.

 Integrate citizen science, crowdsourcing, and public education and outreach in the implementation of
recommendations.

 Maintain a list of priority research needs; share with existing and potential research partners and students.

 Review existing collections of key taxa, artifacts, and historical documents; conduct gap analyses to identify priorities
for augmentation of those collections; advance efforts to fill gaps.

 Foster partnerships to collect, receive, and curate specimens and samples from the place and resources of interest.

 Specify in research permits protocols for cataloguing field samples and for the disposition of data to ensure their
security and accessibility.

 Institute salvage collection protocols (e.g., for roadkill), including cataloguing and preservation instructions.

 Develop guidelines for destructive uses of samples (e.g., blood, tissue) that consider their value over the long term.

 Ensure digital duplication of data and robust information management systems to guard against catastrophic loss.

 Build a constituency for further investment by publicizing examples of how archived materials have been valuable in
resource management decisions.securing some of the records generated by the inquiry we propose, and it may require
managers and scientists investing in their own record retention and accessibility systems
[43]. We recognize the risks and limitations associated with reliance on such decentralized and
potentially ad hoc systems and reiterate how important some partnership with – and investment
by – governmental agencies, research institutions, funding entities, and NGOs will be in
ensuring that data are properly secured and discoverable. Research funders could foster
greater discipline in information management by requiring an explanation of a researcher’s
record retention plans and providing funding for archivists.
Emerging mobile and networking technologies may offer means of streamlining the collection
and management of digital data that are cost-effective and accessible. Digitizing records and
effective use of web platforms can facilitate searchability and guard against catastrophic loss of
original material. Computer technologies evolve rapidly, however, so vigilance will be required
to ensure the durability of any data platform [44]. We hope our call to crowdsource better
documentation will also spur creative solutions to the concomitant archiving challenge.
Concluding Remarks
Managers and scientists who undertake – and act on – the inquiry we propose would contribute
to an archive with innumerable contemporary and future applications. They could also design
their effort to produce additional collateral benefits. For example, the effort could be initiated as
a facilitated conversation among researchers and managers to reveal documentation priorities
and opportunities for collaboration (Boxes 1 and 4). Advancing the subsequent implementation
as a programmatic initiative could enhance coordination among participating scientists and
create opportunities to further crowdsource the effort. Events and activities such as field
expeditions and the deployment of citizen scientists could advance the needed work while
engaging the broader public [39]. All could be elements of an outreach strategy to focus media
and public attention and foster a constituency for public and private investment in science and
conservation. Funding for such an enterprise might be more forthcoming if it is marketed as an
initiative evocative to the public: for example, under a banner of ‘discovery’ to secure a legacy
for the future. Disseminating a portfolio of compelling insights gained through such initiatives
could increase awareness of the myriad and invaluable societal benefits that robust historical
archives provide.586 Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8
One unquestionable beneficiary of such an initiative would be conservation. Even in the face of
increasing ecological novelty spurred by global change [40], information about past conditions
will remain an important input when setting priorities for ecosystem restoration and biodiversity
conservation [20,45–47]. Records from today may well prove to be essential to the success of
conservationists working in the future. However, that will only be the case if the scientists and
managers working today step up to provide them. We – collectively – need to be deliberate
about documenting this moment of extraordinary global change, before the opportunities to do
so are lost. Although it may be challenging to anticipate what future generations would consider
to be the best gift we could have left for them from our present day, we nevertheless must rise to
that challenge and try to deliver it.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank John Randall, Morgan Tingley, and an anonymous reviewer for comments that greatly improved the
manuscript.
References
1. Szabó, P. (2015) Historical ecology: past, present and future. Biol.
Rev. 90, 997–1014
2. Rick, T.C. and Lockwood, R. (2013) Integrating paleobiology,
archeology, and history to inform biological conservation.
Conserv. Biol. 27, 45–54
3. Suarez, A.V. and Tsutsui, N.D. (2004) The value of museum
collections for research and society. Bioscience 54, 66–74
4. Bradley, R.D. et al. (2014) Assessing the value of natural history
collections and addressing issues regarding long-term growth
and care. Bioscience 64, 1150–1158
5. Sholts, S.B. et al. (2016) Ecce Homo: science and society
need anthropological collections. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31,
580–583
6. Lavoie, C. (2013) Biological collections in an ever changing world:
herbaria as tools for biogeographical and environmental studies.
Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 15, 68–76
7. Holmes, M.W. et al. (2016) Natural history collections as windows
on evolutionary processes. Mol. Ecol. 25, 864–881
8. Allendorf, F.W. et al. (2010) Genomics and the future of
conservation genetics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 697–709
9. Barak, R.S. et al. (2016) Taking the long view: integrating
recorded, archeological, paleoecological, and evolutionary data
into ecological restoration. Int. J. Plant Sci. 177, 90–102
10. Wandeler, P. et al. (2007) Back to the future: museum specimens
in population genetics. Trends Ecol. Evol. 22, 634–642
11. Lindenmayer, D.B. and Likens, G.E. (2009) Adaptive monitoring:
a new paradigm for long-term research and monitoring. Trends
Ecol. Evol. 24, 482–486
12. Pauly, D. (1995) Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of
fisheries. Trends Ecol. Evol. 10, 430
13. DiEuliis, D. et al. (2016) Opinion: specimen collections should
have a much bigger role in infectious disease research and
response. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 113, 4–7
14. Crutzen, P.J. (2002) Geology of mankind. Nature 415, 23
15. Liu, J. et al. (2007) Complexity of coupled human and natural
systems. Science 317, 1513–1516
16. Parmesan, C. and Yohe, G. (2003) A globally coherent fingerprint
of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 421,
37–42
17. Rohr, J.R. et al. (2011) Frontiers in climate change–disease
research. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 270–277
18. Boyd, D. and Crawford, K. (2012) Critical questions for big data.
Inform. Commun. Soc. 15, 662–679
19. Tewksbury, J.J. et al. (2014) Natural history’s place in science and
society. Bioscience 64, 300–310
20. Swetnam, T.W. et al. (1999) Applied historical ecology: using the
past to manage for the future. Ecol. Appl. 9, 1189–1206
21. Wehi, P.M. et al. (2012) Artefacts, biology and bias in museum
collection research. Mol. Ecol. 21, 3103–310922. Brodersen, J. and Seehausen, O. (2014) Why evolutionary
biologists should get seriously involved in ecological monitoring
and applied biodiversity assessment programs. Evol. Appl. 7,
968–983
23. Shaffer, H.B. et al. (1998) The role of natural history collections in
documenting species declines. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 27–30
24. Steg, L. et al. (2014) An integrated framework for encouraging
pro-environmental behaviour: the role of values, situational
factors and goals. J. Environ. Psychol. 38, 104–115
25. Grinnell, J. (1910) The methods and uses of a research museum.
Pop. Sci. Monthly 77, 163–169
26. Tingley, M.W. et al. (2009) Birds track their Grinnellian niche
through a century of climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U. S. A. 106 (Suppl. 2), 19637–19643
27. Sutherland, W.J. and Woodroof, H.J. (2009) The need for
environmental horizon scanning. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24,
523–527
28. Casas-Marce, M. et al. (2012) The value of hidden scientific
resources: preserved animal specimens from private collections
and small museums. Bioscience 62, 1077–1082
29. Morrison, S.A. (2014) A bird in our hand: weighing uncertainty
about the past against uncertainty about the future in Channel
Islands National Park. George Wright Forum 31, 77–93
30. McClenachan, L. (2009) Documenting loss of large trophy fish
from the Florida Keys with historical photographs. Conserv. Biol.
23, 636–643
31. Funk, V.A. et al. (2005) Survey-gap analysis in expeditionary
research: where do we go from here? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 85,
549–567
32. Primack, R.B. and Miller-Rushing, A.J. (2012) Uncovering,
collecting, and analyzing records to investigate the ecological
impacts of climate change: a template from Thoreau’s Concord.
Bioscience 62, 170–181
33. Vellend, M. et al. (2013) Historical ecology: using unconventional
data sources to test for effects of global environmental change.
Am. J. Bot. 100, 1294–1305
34. Van Houtan, K.S. (2013) Seafood menus reflect long-term ocean
changes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 11, 289–290
35. Nichols, J.D. and Williams, B.K. (2006) Monitoring for
conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 668–673
36. Shavit, A. and Griesemer, J. (2009) There and back again, or
the problem of locality in biodiversity surveys. Philos. Sci. 76,
273–294
37. Morisette, J.T. et al. (2009) Tracking the rhythm of the seasons in
the face of global change: phenological research in the 21st
century. Front. Ecol. Environ. 7, 253–260
38. Magurran, A.E. et al. (2010) Long-term datasets in
biodiversity research and monitoring: assessing change in
ecological communities through time. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25,
574–582Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 8 587
39. Ballard, H.L. et al. (2017) Contributions to conservation outcomes
by natural history museum-led citizen science: examining
evidence and next steps. Biol. Conserv. 208, 87–97
40. Hobbs, R.J. et al. (2006) Novel ecosystems: theoretical and
management aspects of the new ecological world order. Glob.
Ecol. Biogeogr. 15, 11–17
41. Millar, C.I. et al. (2007) Climate change and forests of the future:
managing in the face of uncertainty. Ecol. Appl. 17, 2145–2151
42. Whitlock, M.C. (2011) Data archiving in ecology and evolution:
best practices. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 61–65
43. Cragin, M.H. et al. (2010) Data sharing, small science and insti-
tutional repositories. Philos. Trans. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 368,
4023–4038
44. Hashem, I.A.T. et al. (2015) The rise of “big data” on cloud
computing: review and open research issues. Inform. Syst. 47,
98–115
45. Higgs, E. et al. (2014) The changing role of history in restoration
ecology. Front. Ecol. Environ. 12, 499–506
46. Dietl, G.P. et al. (2015) Conservation paleobiology: leveraging
knowledge of the past to inform conservation and restoration.
Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 43, 79–103
47. McClenachan, L. et al. (2015) The importance of surprising results
and best practices in historical ecology. Bioscience 65, 932–939
48. Erlandson, J.M. et al. (2011) Paleocoastal seafaring, maritime
technologies, and coastal foraging on California’s Channel
Islands. Science 331, 1181–1185
49. Erlandson, J.M. (2008) Racing a rising tide: global warming, rising
seas, and the erosion of human history. J. Island Coastal Arch. 3,
167–169588 Trends in Ecology & Evolution, August 2017, Vol. 32, No. 850. Reeder, L.A. et al. (2012) Our disappearing past: a GIS analysis
of the vulnerability of coastal archaeological resources in
California’s Santa Barbara Channel region. J. Coast. Conserv.
16, 187–197
51. Lepofsky, D. and Caldwell, M. (2013) Indigenous marine resource
management on the northwest coast of North America. Ecol.
Process. 2, 1–12
52. Rick, T.C. et al. (2014) Ecological change on California’s Channel
Islands from the Pleistocene to the Anthropocene. Bioscience 64,
680–692
53. Jenkins, C.N. et al. (2013) Global patterns of terrestrial vertebrate
diversity and conservation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 110,
E2602–E2610
54. Pimm, S.L. et al. (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates
of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344, 1246752
55. Padial, J.M. et al. (2010) The integrative future of taxonomy. Front.
Zool. 7, 16
56. Guayasamin, J.M. et al. (2017) Diversification of the rainfrog
Pristimantis ornatissimus in the lowlands and Andean foothills
of Ecuador. PLoS One 12, e0172615
57. Funk, W.C. et al. (2012) Harnessing genomics for delineating
conservation units. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27, 489–496
58. Aitken, S.N. and Whitlock, M.C. (2013) Assisted gene flow to
facilitate local adaptation to climate change. Annu. Rev. Ecol.
Evol. Syst. 44, 367–388
59. Yeaman, S. et al. (2016) Convergent local adaptation to climate in
distantly related conifers. Science 353, 1431–1433