Extending Specimens to save Plant DNA: structuring Department DNA collections in times of Biodiversity loss

Extending Specimens to save Plant DNA: structuring Department DNA collections in times of Biodiversity loss | bioRxiv /* */ /* */ <!-- <!-- /*! * yepnope1.5.4 * (c) WTFPL, GPLv2 */ (function(a,b,c){function d(a){return"[object Function]"==o.call(a)}function e(a){return"string"==typeof a}function f(){}function g(a){return!a||"loaded"==a||"complete"==a||"uninitialized"==a}function h(){var a=p.shift();q=1,a?a.t?m(function(){("c"==a.t?B.injectCss:B.injectJs)(a.s,0,a.a,a.x,a.e,1)},0):(a(),h()):q=0}function i(a,c,d,e,f,i,j){function k(b){if(!o&&g(l.readyState)&&(u.r=o=1,!q&&h(),l.onload=l.onreadystatechange=null,b)){"img"!=a&&m(function(){t.removeChild(l)},50);for(var d in y[c])y[c].hasOwnProperty(d)&&y[c][d].onload()}}var j=j||B.errorTimeout,l=b.createElement(a),o=0,r=0,u={t:d,s:c,e:f,a:i,x:j};1===y[c]&&(r=1,y[c]=[]),"object"==a?l.data=c:(l.src=c,l.type=a),l.width=l.height="0",l.onerror=l.onload=l.onreadystatechange=function(){k.call(this,r)},p.splice(e,0,u),"img"!=a&&(r||2===y[c]?(t.insertBefore(l,s?null:n),m(k,j)):y[c].push(l))}function j(a,b,c,d,f){return q=0,b=b||"j",e(a)?i("c"==b?v:u,a,b,this.i++,c,d,f):(p.splice(this.i++,0,a),1==p.length&&h()),this}function k(){var a=B;return a.loader={load:j,i:0},a}var l=b.documentElement,m=a.setTimeout,n=b.getElementsByTagName("script")[0],o={}.toString,p=[],q=0,r="MozAppearance"in l.style,s=r&&!!b.createRange().compareNode,t=s?l:n.parentNode,l=a.opera&&"[object Opera]"==o.call(a.opera),l=!!b.attachEvent&&!l,u=r?"object":l?"script":"img",v=l?"script":u,w=Array.isArray||function(a){return"[object Array]"==o.call(a)},x=[],y={},z={timeout:function(a,b){return b.length&&(a.timeout=b[0]),a}},A,B;B=function(a){function b(a){var a=a.split("!"),b=x.length,c=a.pop(),d=a.length,c={url:c,origUrl:c,prefixes:a},e,f,g;for(f=0;f<d;f++)g=a[f].split("="),(e=z[g.shift()])&&(c=e(c,g));for(f=0;f<b;f++)c=x[f](c);return c}function g(a,e,f,g,h){var i=b(a),j=i.autoCallback;i.url.split(".").pop().split("?").shift(),i.bypass||(e&&(e=d(e)?e:e[a]||e[g]||e[a.split("/").pop().split("?")[0]]),i.instead?i.instead(a,e,f,g,h):(y[i.url]?i.noexec=!0:y[i.url]=1,f.load(i.url,i.forceCSS||!i.forceJS&&"css"==i.url.split(".").pop().split("?").shift()?"c":c,i.noexec,i.attrs,i.timeout),(d(e)||d(j))&&f.load(function(){k(),e&&e(i.origUrl,h,g),j&&j(i.origUrl,h,g),y[i.url]=2})))}function h(a,b){function c(a,c){if(a){if(e(a))c||(j=function(){var a=[].slice.call(arguments);k.apply(this,a),l()}),g(a,j,b,0,h);else if(Object(a)===a)for(n in m=function(){var b=0,c;for(c in a)a.hasOwnProperty(c)&&b++;return b}(),a)a.hasOwnProperty(n)&&(!c&&!--m&&(d(j)?j=function(){var a=[].slice.call(arguments);k.apply(this,a),l()}:j[n]=function(a){return function(){var b=[].slice.call(arguments);a&&a.apply(this,b),l()}}(k[n])),g(a[n],j,b,n,h))}else!c&&l()}var h=!!a.test,i=a.load||a.both,j=a.callback||f,k=j,l=a.complete||f,m,n;c(h?a.yep:a.nope,!!i),i&&c(i)}var i,j,l=this.yepnope.loader;if(e(a))g(a,0,l,0);else if(w(a))for(i=0;i (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];var j=d.createElement(s);var dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.src='//www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;j.type='text/javascript';j.async=true;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-M677548'); Skip to main content Home About Submit ALERTS / RSS Search for this keyword Advanced Search New Results Extending Specimens to save Plant DNA: structuring Department DNA collections in times of Biodiversity loss View ORCID Profile Claudia González-Toral , View ORCID Profile Eduardo Cires doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.05.20.655165 Claudia González-Toral 1 Royal Botanic Gardens , Kew, Richmond, TW9 3AE, UK Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site ORCID record for Claudia González-Toral For correspondence: C.Gonzalez_Toral{at}kew.org claudiagonto93{at}gmail.com cireseduardo{at}uniovi.es Eduardo Cires 2 Department of Organisms and Systems Biology, University of Oviedo , C/. Catedrático Rodrigo Uría s/n, 33071, Oviedo, Spain 3 Institute of Natural Resources and Territorial Planning (INDUROT) , Campus de Mieres, C/. Gonzalo Gutiérrez Quirós s/n, 33600 Mieres, Spain Find this author on Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for this author on this site ORCID record for Eduardo Cires Abstract Full Text Info/History Metrics Preview PDF Abstract Plant biodiversity DNA banks are scarce despite the current plant biodiversity loss, their value for ex situ conservation, DNA preservation progress and the rapid growth of DNA-dependent research fields. We explore the principles and basic organization of plant biodiversity DNA banking and propose new ways of addressing the biodiversity loss through their implementation. Small Department collections could be created through a 6-step holistic process aiming to interconnect 3 types of collections (DNA extracts, DNA-rich tissues and herbarium vouchers) while generating Extended Specimens that would contribute to local and global plant biodiversity knowledge and conservation efforts. We propose a change in the international biobanking strategy (the Dynamo scheme) as interconnecting many small Department collections would put fewer samples at risk in case of catastrophe, optimise sampling strategies and cover in depth more taxa and distribution ranges, while encouraging national and international collaborations. Introduction Biological collections surged three centuries ago, becoming fundamental for scientific advances in fields like medicine, taxonomy, ecology, evolutionary biology or genetics ( Pyke & Ehrlich, 2010 ; Holetschek et al., 2012 ; Kang et al., 2013 ; Martin & Kaye, 2000 ). Biobanks—research-oriented facilities for long-term storage of collections of well-preserved samples and their associated data—appeared in 1948 in the United States of America (USA) when a human specimens collection was systematised into the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) blood bank ( Thormann et al., 2006 ; Kang et al., 2013 ; Parodi, 2015 ). The advances in preservation technologies led to the transformation of rudimentary human specimens collections into biobanks ( Kang et al., 2013 ; Souza & Greenspan, 2013), resulting in the establishment of many biobanks types during the following decades (e. g. tissue, disease-specific or population specific biobanks) ( Parodi, 2015 ). During the late 1960s, international organizations like the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) regarded the loss of animal and plant genetic diversity as a potential conservational problem, drawing the attention of scientific institutions towards genetic biorepositories during the following two decades, due to their potential as ex situ conservation tool for genetic diversity ( Wildt et al., 1993 ; Heywood, 1995 ; Thormann et al., 2006 ; León-Lobos et al ., 2012 ; Seberg et al., 2016 ; Singh & Singh, 2017 ). This prompted the appearance of animal and plant germplasm collections associated to biodiversity-centred institutions (e. g. museums, zoos, botanic gardens and university departments) aiming to mitigate the biodiversity loss due to anthropic activities (also known as the Biological Diversity Crisis (BDC)) and ensure populations and species future viability ( Wilson, 1985 ; Wildt et al., 1993 ; Krauss et al., 2002 ; Palacio-Mejía, 2006 ; Souza & Greenspan, 2013; Leigh et al., 2019 ). Collections evolved into systematised biobanks preserving various types of high-quality organic material and their associated information: germplasm banks (explants storage), seed banks, gene banks (vegetative propagules), tissue banks, pollen banks or DNA banks ( Wildt et al., 1993 ; Adams, 1997 ; Palacio-Mejía, 2006 ; Rice, Henry & Rossetto, 2006 ; Thormann et al., 2006 ; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Rajasekharan et al., 2013 ; Souza & Greenspan, 2013; Dröge et al., 2016 ; Comizzoli & Wildt, 2017 ; Ruta et al., 2020 ). Biodiversity DNA biobanks focus on wild and/or commercial species complete other collections (e. g. universities, Botanic Gardens) and may hold DNA libraries, cloned fragments or complete plant genomes ( Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2001 ; Rice, Shepherd et al., 2006; Jain et al., 2012 ; Droege et al., 2014; Watson, 2014 ; International and Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER), 2018). The 1990s and 2000s DNA technology advances and costs reductions allowed extending the use of DNA sequences for phylogenetic and genetic diversity studies, prompting the appearance of department private DNA and/or DNA-rich plant tissue collections associated to ecological data ( Adams, 1997 ; Karp et al., 1997 ; Jenkins, 2003 ; Rice, Shepherd et al., 2006; Palacio-Mejía, 2006 ; Gaudeul & Rouhan, 2013 ; Shaw et al., 2014 ; Watson, 2014 ; Rabeler, 2017 ). These department private DNA collections were the precursors of the modern DNA Plant Biodiversity Banks or Biobanks (PBBs), institutions specialised in the long-term storage and preservation of high-quality DNA samples (DNA extracts, DNA-rich tissue material or both) and theirs associated information, which are fundamental tools for addressing the botanical problems arisen from the BDC ( Blackmore, 2002 ; Thormann et al., 2006 ; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Gaudeul & Rouhan, 2013 ; Dröge et al., 2016 ). Nevertheless, despite of prompting accessibility to high-quality and properly managed genomic samples, complementing conservation strategies and the 2000s claims and estimations of the proportionally low costs of establishing DNA biobanks at global scale, PBBs have not been fully integrated in the already existing biodiversity preservation facilities ( Savolainen, 2004 ; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Brown, 2011 ; Astrin et al., 2013 ). The BDC has aggravated during the last four decades due to The intensification of processes directly associated to high extinction rates of animals, plants and fungi, habitat loss and fragmentation has aggravated the BDC during the last decades(e.g. Peres, 2001 ; Mortelliti et al., 2011 ), introduction of alien species with invasive potential (e.g. Manenti et al., 2018 ; Muthukrishnan & Larkin, 2020 ), species overexploitation (e.g. Bodeker et al., 2014 ; Chuanwu et al., 2019 ), changes in land use and Climate Change (e.g. Sekercioglu et al., 2008 ; Feeley & Silman, 2010 ; De Baan et al., 2013 ) (De Vos et al., 2015; Eichenberg et al., 2021 ; International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 2024 ). These synergetic processes are boosting the extinction rates by 1,000 times the background rates, with expectations of reaching 10,000 times in the future and no signs of deceleration due to financial crises (De Vos et al., 2015; Steffen et al., 2015 ). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projections for terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems are daunting, as estimations suggest a global mean temperature raise of 2-4°C, a 35-40% and 15-35% increase of wildfires and biome shifts while a 5°C increase would trigger the extinction of 60% of the species inhabiting the affected ecosystems ( Parmesan et al., 2022 ). Currently, 129 plant species have gone completely extinct, 45 are extinct in the wild and over 320,000 flowering plant species are comprised in IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, in a context were 77% of the estimated 100,000 plant species unknown to science are estimated to be under extinction threat and global risk assessments have not reached 45% of the threatened red-listed vascular plants ( Nic Lughadha et al., 2020 ; Antonelli et al., 2023 ; IUCN, 2024). Furthermore, other factors like pollinators abundance decrease could accelerate plants decline, something with potentially devastating and with unforeseeable consequences for ecosystems given plants’ fundamental ecosystemic role ( Grime, 2002 ; Schleuning et al., 2016 ; Traveset et al., 2017 ). BDC and Climate Change interact synergistically and have economic, social and ecological consequences at global scale; thus becoming main concerns for biodiversity-focused research ( Mace et al., 2014 ; Urban, 2015 ; Román-Palacios & Wiens, 2020 ; Kedward et al., 2023 ; Schlaepfer et al., 2023). The biodiversity loss statistics and risk assessments do not usually take into account the genetic dimension, a relevant aspect for species and population survival as genetic diversity loss is intimately related to extinction debt, which is one of the main issues for plant extinctions estimations ( Helm et al., 2009 ; Garner et al., 2020 ; Nic Lughadha et al., 2020 ). Unfortunately, the deficit in plant biosiversity biobanking (PB biobanking) reported by Hodkinson et al . (2007) is still happening in a context were biodiversity loss poses an ecological and financial threat to human society, plant extinctions have unpredictable ecosystemic effects, global risk assessment are insufficient and tend not to include genetic data, and there is a chronic insufficient funding for non-commercial plants research and conservation (Suarez & Tsutsui, 2004; Bradley et al., 2014 ; Urban, 2015 ; Schleuning et al., 2016 ; Roberson & Meyer, 2020 ; Kedward et al., 2023 ). Moreover, despite its potential for boosting basic science and plant conservation, PB biobanking principles have not been fully implemented within the existing biological collections ( Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Gaudeul & Rouhan, 2013 ; Droege et al., 2014; González-Toral & Cires, 2022 ). In this context, we aim to explore (1) how PB biobanking principles and activities meet the current scientific and social goals for biodiversity presrvation and information sharing and (2) new ways in which the scientific community can address the biodiversity loss through the implementation of PB biobanking principles. Methods We conducted a search of English and Spanish language scientific papers and books in “Google Scholar” ( https://scholar.google.com/ ) and “Web of Science” ( https://webofscience.com/wos/ ) from March 2020 to May 2024. We used the key words: “Biobank”, “DNA Bank”, “Plant Biodiversity”, “DNA preservation”, “biobanking”, “Nagoya Protocol”, “Access and Benefit-Sharing”, “Biological Diversity Crisis” and “Plant Conservation”. PBBs structure, functioning and classic global scheme PBBs are instrumental for the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (= Nagoya Protocol) implementation, complementing conservation strategies, providing accessibility to properly-managed genomic samples, and generating new phylogenetic knowledge ( Blackmore, 2002 ; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 2010; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Droege et al., 2014; Consortium of Europena Taxonomic Facilities (CETAF), 2020). This is accomplished thanks to their structure and functioning, which are based on a series of “Major Operational Activities” (MOAs) implemented through “standardized operating procedures” (SOPs) ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Watson, 2014 ). PB biobanking usually involve 5 MOAs—(1) material collection, (2) storage of the plant tissue, (3) DNA extraction, (4) DNA banking and (5) DNA utilisation—integrated in a two-node structure consisting in a Working Node (WN) and a Reserve Node (RN) ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Adams, 1997 ; Rice, Shepherd et al., 2006; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Watson, 2014 ; Zimkus & Ford, 2014a ) ( Figure 1 ). The WN is responsible for sample collection and acquisition, DNA extraction, banking and utilization under controlled conditions (i. e. loans, shipments and interactions with researchers and institutions); meaning that its SOPs are directly related to the Nagoya Protocol implementation ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Mattick, Ablett & Edmonson, 1992 ; Adams, 1997 ; Rice, Henry et al., 2006; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ). The RN focuses mainly on tissue banking, usually acts as a backup for the WN and/or for other biobanks with different scopes ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Adams, 1997 ; Caujapé-Castells et al., 2006; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Zimkus & Ford, 2014a ; South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), 2020). Samples and metadata are connected through an effective labelling system to secure specimens’ traceability (Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN), 2015; Funk et al., 2017 ; ISBER, 2018; CETAF, 2020). Download figure Open in new tab Figure 1. Scheme depicting the main Major Operational Activities (MOAs) of a plant DNA biobanks described as described by Hodkinson et al., (2007) and the main functions of the working and reserved nodes as proposed by Adams (1997) for the DNA bank-Net. The main MOAs correspond to the name in the black cage, while the working node and the reserve node correspond to the blue and red cages respectably. Preservation techniques improvements resulted in the establishment of various types of plant biobanks storing different tissues: explants under controlled sterile conditions for slow or suspended growth (germplasm biobanks), viable seeds of crops and their wild relative (e.g. Millennium seed bank), vegetative propagules (gene banks), different types of tissue (e. g. Alexander von Humboldt Institute (AvHI) tissue bank), pollen (e.g. the pollen collection of the ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources (ICAR- NBPGR) of India) or DNA extracts (e.g. Kew Royal Botanic Garden) ( Palacio-Mejía, 2006 ; Thormann et al., 2006 ; Rajasekharan et al., 2013 ; Ruta et al., 2020 ). PBBs may focus on certain type of organisms, on a specific scientific sampling strategy or even have specific geographic scope. For instance, the Japanese National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences (NIAS) Genebank ( https://www.gene.affrc.go.jp/about_en.php ) focuses on agricultural taxa and their wild relatives, while Kew DNA Bank ( https://dnabank.science.kew.org/homepage.html ) gather samples from wild species (NIAS, 2024). The Kostrzyca Forest Gene Bank ( https://www.lasy.gov.pl/en/information/news/kostrzyca-forest-gene-bank-collects-dna-of-endangered-plants-in-the-bialowieza-forest ) gathers samples from the eastern European Białowieża Forest, The Pacific Center for Molecular Biodiversity (PCMB) ( https://www.bishopmuseum.org/pcmb/ ) focuses on a concrete bioclimatic region, while Kew DNA Bank ( https://dnabank.science.kew.org/homepage.html ) has a wider scope and accepts samples from all over the world (Campbell et al., , 2018a). In other cases, eDNA collections like the Chicago Botanical Garden’s DNA Biorepository ( https://www.chicagobotanic.org/ ) comprise several individuals from each taxa, making them adequate for phylogenetic and taxonomic purposes. In the recent years, the relevance of physical vouchers for DNA-based studies has been highlighted (e. g. Dick & Webb, 2012 ; Culley, 2013 ; Gostel et al., 2016 ; Buckner et al., 2021 ), leading to the appearance of new terms referring to their relationship to genetic samples ( Pleijel et al., 2008 ; Funk et al., 2018 ) ( Table 1 ) or to their interconnection to all their natural and derived information ( Webster, 2017 ; Lendemer et al., 2020 ). These theoretical frameworks sustain that vouchers and genetic samples should ideally be the same individual—i. e. hologenophore direct voucher or, slightly suboptimally, a isogenophore direct voucher ( Table 1 )—, that besides phenotype and genotype, the ecological context should be preserved through metadata creating Extended Specimens (ESs); and that all direct and derived samples (e. g. genetic samples or histologic samples) and their data (e. g. site of collection and DNA sequence or histologic images) should be connected for a better understanding of species and populations, generating Extended Specimens Networks (ESNs) ( Pleijel et al., 2008 ; Webster, 2017 ; Funk et al., 2018 ; Lendemer et al., 2020 ). PBBs internal functioning generate de facto a collection of ESs and ESNs (mainly hologenophore direct vouchers) preserved under controlled conditions and available for researchers, something that contributes to the reproducibility of results without taxa resampling (GGBN, 2015; Funk et al., 2017 ; ISBER, 2018; CETAF, 2020). Besides, PBBs can contribute to natural collections by promoting large expeditions in collaboration with specialists from museums and botanic gardens—reducing the costs of plant biodiversity DNA-based studies— and to scientific studies by providing services to researchers unfamiliar with molecular techniques and by generating MOAs and SOPs protocols’ rankings ( Mattick et al., 1992 ; Palacio- Mejía, 2006; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Zimkus & Ford, 2014a , 2014b ; Spooner & Ruess, 2014a , 2014b ; Lear et al., 2018 ; ISBER, 2018; Abdaljaleel et al., 2019 ; SANBI, 2020; CETAF, 2020). The reliability and low costs of DNA-rich tissues preservation in silica gel allows sparing morphological voucher destruction ( Staats et al., 2011 ; Gaudeul & Rouhan, 2013 ; González-Toral et al., 2021) and represents a great opportunity to compare its basal decay with that of DNA extracts preserved under controlled conditions. View this table: View inline View popup Download powerpoint Table 1. Types of morphological voucher regarding its relation to the samples of molecular studies and their taxonomic value described by Pleijel et al. (2008) and by Funk et al. (2018) . The BDC triggered the appearance of regulatory international legislation for biodiversity, wild life and genetic resources such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (IUCN, 1973), the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) (FAO, 2001) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the specifications of the Nagoya Protocol (CBD, 2010). Since expeditions, donations and samples exchanges are essential parts of biobanks’ material collection and DNA utilisation MOAs, PBBs activities makes them play an important role in the implementation of these international legislations (Droege et al., 2014; Zimkus & Ford, 2014a , 2014b ; Campbell et al., 2018; CETAF, 2020). The CBD and the Nagoya Protocol (ratified by 126 countries) are the most relevant international legislations for PBBs, as they guarantee equality and justice by clarifying genetic resources’ accessing and benefit-sharing terms (CBD, 2010; GGBN, 2015; Biber-Klemm et al., 2016 ; Davis & Borisenko, 2017 ). Nagoya Protocol elaborated the CBD principles for the Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) through Prior Informed Consents (PICs), which abides the local legislation of the community holding the sovereign right over the sample and specifies the accessibility terms, and Mutually Agreed Terms (MATs), which unambiguously defines provider’s monitoring process and usually includes genetic material and traditional knowledge accessibility, publishing and storage policies (GGBN, 2015; Biber-Klemm et al., 2016 ; Davis & Borisenko, 2017 ; ISBER, 2018). Once the PICs and MATs for the ABS are reached, its information is published in the Access and Benefit- sharing Clearing-House ( https://absch.cbd.int/ ) by the provider’s national competent authority to generate an Internationally Recognized Certificate of Compliance (IRCC) number, which should always be associated to samples ( Davis & Borisenko, 2017 ). The PICs and MATs terms have to be reflected in the biobank’s Material Transfer Agreements (MTAs) when loaning samples in compliance with the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol (Rice, Shepherd et al., 2006; Zimkus & Ford, 2014a ; Biber-Klemm et al., 2016 ; Davis & Borisenko, 2017 ) ( Figure 2 ). All ABS agreements require: (1) internal protocols for establishing relationships with the provider’s competent authorities and implementing their policies, (2) settling technical approaches and the potential extent of scientific research and (3) determining the benefits-sharing terms, usually not commercial for PBBs (e. g. scientific training or future collaborations) (GGBN, 2015; Davis & Borisenko, 2017 ; Campbell et al., 2018; ISBER, 2018; Williams, 2019 ; CETAF, 2020). Download figure Open in new tab Figure 2. Scheme representing the different agreements required by the Nagoya Protocol for acquiring, donating and loaning samples to a DNA bank while conveying with the international legislation. Therefore, PBBs are fundamental for generating and sharing tissue and DNA preservation SOPs, the creation of ESs and ESNs and the implementation of national and international legislation for plant biodiversity preservation. Changing the scheme of PBBs networks The idea of creating a network that would facilitate the connection between the existing biobanks emerged in the early days of DNA biobanking, being DNA-Bank Net— an ambitious project aiming to preserve endangered tropical plants DNA in all continents— the first initiative of this kind ( Adams 1988 , 1993 ; Spooner & Ruess, 2014a ). Initially, few scientists expressed interest however, with time, its scientific interest grew so that by the early 1990s scientists from 40 institutions from all continents were compelled, leading to a 1991 meeting in which the nodes-structure and the idea of physically separating RN (or ideally the two RNs) from the WN by harbouring them in the facilities of DNA banks found at different continents were proposed ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Adams 1993 , 1997 ; Graner et al., 2006 ; Spooner & Ruess, 2014a ). Despite its useful contributions and the 2000s estimations of the proportionally low costs of establishing DNA biobanks at global scale, DNA-Bank Net remained inactive by the mid-2000s ( Savolainen, 2004 ; Graner et al., 2006 ; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Brown, 2011 ; Spooner & Ruess, 2014a ). Furthermore, during these decades, public funding of taxonomic and systematics research declined up to a point in which the existing specimens’ collections generated during decades were threatened, despite of their many social and scientific benefits ( Dalton, 2003 ; Suarez & Tsutsui, 2004). Later on, the creation of a network of biodiversity biobanks was reassumed by the decentralised pilot project DNA Bank Network, in which all types of biodiversity independent DNA collections coordinated to make their data accessible through the internet and generate a larger and more diverse pool of vouchers-linked sequences ( Gemeinholzer et al., 2011 ). In 2011, the DNA Bank Network evolved into the Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) an association that aims to standardize sharing procedures, ethical use and best practices while encouraging knowledge exchange and recruiting new members (Droege et al., 2014; Seberg et al ., 2016 ; GGBN, 2024). The GGBN has been growing in the recent years: from 24 members in 2014 to 112 biorepositories from 38 countries, including at least 29 plant and fungi collections and 2 department collections ( Dröge, et al., 2014 ; GGBN, 2024). A part from providing guides and SOPs implementation models and the ABS, GGBN’s compromise with the Tree of Life led to the creation of the GGBN data portal, which addressed the problem of DNA banks samples information availability by allowing taxa and samples searches within the members’ standing collections (having over 185,000 accessions from Kingdom Plantae)— and by creating data standards (e. g. Sample PREanalytical Code (SPREC) or ABCD-DNA) ( Benson et al., 2010 , 2011 ; Betsou et al., 2010 ; Dröge et al., 2014 , 2016 ; Seberg et al ., 2016 ; GGBN, 2024). However, despite the GGBN globalization efforts, most members are not located within the highest plant biodiversity richness regions ( Barthlott et al., 2005 ), but rather in western richer countries (GGBN, 2024). On the other hand, there is no information on whether GGBN follows the RN relocation scheme of Adams (1997) . The Adams (1997) RN relocation scheme was based on the idea of preserving plant biodiversity by securing biobanks samples from all sorts of threats, including natural disasters. As one of the main aims of DNA-Bank Net was to preserve as many species as possible at reduced costs, it focused on large collections (i. e. herbaria and botanic gardens) since their personnel is already familiarised with sampling SOPs ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Adams, 1997 ). However, although this was a well-thought scheme that addressed the main problems of plant biodiversity loss using large collections as backbone, it has not been implemented. Moreover, during the 1990s and 2000s, when the scientific community and the society were aware of the BDC, biodiversity collections faced founding reductions or even closures that have tremendously affected the scientific value of the remaining collections ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Dalton, 2003 ; Lavoie, 2013 ). Hence, the success of using large collections as backbone for preserving plant biodiversity depends, in part, on funding, the potential financial crises and political will. Since the Adams (1997) scheme has not been implemented worldwide (although there exist examples like the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) (SANBI, 2020)), any disaster at any large collection would represent the loss of a large proportion of genetic information in a context were world biodiversity is on decline ( Eichenberg et al., 2021 ). It should also be highlighted that smaller DNA collections (i. e. Department collections) would be of interest for meeting the goal of preserving genetic material and metadata of as many species as possible. These collections have many appealing features to fulfil this task as they may (1) focus on a specific biogeographic unit and their related areas and/or on specific groups of families, (2) present samples from species, subspecies or populations of conservational value (e. g. endemisms, relictic populations), (3) have associated morphological voucher material deposited in Index Herbariorum listed Herbaria, (4) many of the data derived from those samples has been published and is publically available (e. g. Genbank sequences. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/ ) and (5) samples are usually preserved as tissues in silica gel and/or as DNA extracts in cold. For example, our DNA collection at the area of Botany of the department of Biology of Organisms and Systems of the University of Oviedo is formed by DNA extracts preserved at -20°C and foliar tissue preserved in silica gel at room temperature from taxa and populations of taxonomic and conservational interest (e. g. Cires Rodríguez, Cuesta Moliner & Fernández Prieto, 2012 ; Cires & Prieto, 2015 ; González-Toral et al., 2023 ) occurring in the Mountains Cantabrian and in the European Atlantic Biogeographic unit and others related to it (e. g. Mediterranean) and associated to morphological herbarium vouchers, most of them deposited in the Index Herbariorum listed Herbario de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Universidad de Oviedo (FCO) (Index Herbariorum, 2023; Universidad de Oviedo, 2023 ). These two ways of preserving DNA and DNA-rich tissues represent an opportunity for following the Adams & Adams (1992) and Adams (1997) two-node scheme from an early stage, as the WN could be formed by the DNA extracts and the RN could be built from the tissues preserved at room temperature. Furthermore, the MOAs could have a holistic approach focused not only on generating ESs ( Webster, 2017 ), but also on ESNs ( Lendemer et al., 2020 ) by connecting the published data with the curated specimens (i. e. DNA and DNA-rich samples with DNA sequences and herbarium vouchers). Given their potential, smaller Department DNA collections like ours may have an important role to play in plant biodiversity conservation as the combination of many of these collections could (1) cover greater areas of floras and biogeographic regions than the larger existing collections, (2) cover lower taxonomic levels (e. g. subspecies, formas ) and (3) focus on the genetic diversity of populations with local and/or regional conservational interest. Besides, given the critical funding-dependence of large collections witnessed in the last decades and the chronical underfunding of plant conversation programs (Suarez & Tsutsui, 2004; Balding & Williams, 2016 ; Roberson & Meyer, 2020 ), the existence and maintenance of many smaller collections would secure samples survival. We believe that the current situation of PB biobanking is analogous to the 1940 Dunkirk evacuation (also known as Operation Dynamo): having a small number of larger collections as suggested by Adams (1997) allows for the preservation of many species at one place; however, this put at risk many samples at once if there was any catastrophe (including financial) to happen. On the other hand, having a large number of smaller collections requires many more institutions involved and a higher level of coordination but, allows to preserve substratially more samples and puts at risk a smaller number of samples in case of catastrophe. Thus, this “Dynamo scheme” is based on the existence of many interconnected smaller collections that could all in all preserve more samples from taxa and populations. Therefore, although the current number of Department DNA collections is unknown, they may be of vital importance in future scenarios of Climate Change, species extinctions and population and species loss of genetic diversity. Developing a department PBB from tissue and DNA collections Given all the features and potential of department collections, we present a 6-step process for creating a small PBB focused on a specific floristic area and on generating ESs and ESNs ( Figure 3 ). These phases aim to set the PBB’s structure and functioning and to gather and assess the current knowledge of its target floristic area, while gradually cataloguing specimens and making them available. As we pursue a holistic approach that facilitates information sharing and the Dynamo scheme, collaborating with existing PBBs and digitalizing and centralising specimens’ open-access information will be a fundamental to this process. Download figure Open in new tab Figure 3. Scheme depicting the different phases of the process for transforming 3 separate collections into a Department Plant Biodiveristy DNA biobank using the collections of the area of Botany of the department of Biology of Organisms and Systems of the University of Oviedo as example. Phase 1: Connecting DNA collections to herbarium vouchers and metadata: creating an ESs collection Initially, the DNA collection specimens (e. g. the DNA extract and/or the DNA-tissue samples) should be connected to their herbarium vouchers and metadata, their publically-available genetic information (e. g. Genbank ID number) and the published scientific works from in which they derive. This is essential for creating ESs and ESNs and implies generating an inventory of published information associated to each sample. Thus, a private database connecting the three separate collections samples (or two collections if there is no tissue collection) and physically connecting the specimens via ID numbers and barcodes or QR codes would be the PBB basis. Metadata deficiencies detected during this connection process would help to polish the data gathering process, impacting positively on SOPs, ESs, ESNs and FAIR data and implementing the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) principles ( Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Owen, Macnaghten, & Stilgoe, 2012 ; Funk et al., 2017 ; Williams et al., 2020 ). Three fundamental aspects should be taken into account during this phase: (1) taxa names update and standardization, (2) metadata gathering and standardization and (3) sampling strategy. The first aspect could be solved by following the criteria of World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP) and World Flora Online (WFO) (Govaerts et al., , 2021; Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, 2023;WFO, 2023) during an initial state and then modifying it according to the latest literature. The DNA collection’s specimens initial database should ideally include: (1) taxon name, (2) taxonomy (i.e. kingdom, division, class, order), (3) accepted genus (including author(s)), (3) species accepted (including author(s)), (4) infraspecific accepted taxon, if applicable, (5) accepted species WCPV number and its url, (6) location (including coordinates and altitude), (7) collection date, (8) collector(s), (9) voucher ID number, (10) DNA extract and/or tissue sample ID, (11) type of study conducted on samples (i. e. phylogenetic vs genetic diversity), (12) molecular information obtained from the sample (i. e. sequenced markers or genomic sequencing), (13) sample’s National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) ID (i.e. GenBank number), if applicable and (14) publication (e. g. Title, doi) ( Table 2 ). The future acquisitions would benefit from the addition ecological data during the collection process, including generating photovouchers as nowadays they can be easily obtained with cell phones. Special attention should be given to the recommendation of Gemeinholzer et al . (2010) , Davis (2011) , Culley (2013) , Gostel et al . (2016) and Funk et al. (2017) regarding recording the presence of water streams, the soil type or the habitat ( Table 3 ). Regarding sampling strategies, we found three categories in which our samples from the University of Oviedo collection can be classified: (1) taxonomic sampling, consisting in one or few individuals from various taxa sometimes including type locations (e.g. Rivasmartinezia vazquezii Fern.Prieto & Cires (2014), Micranthes stellaris (L.) Galasso, Banfi & Soldano (2005)), (2) genetic diversity sampling, comprising several individuals from the same taxa belonging to various populations (e.g. Cochlearia pyrenaica DC. (1821), Ranunculus cabrerensis Rothm. (1934)) and (3) distribution validation sampling, consisting in numerous individuals from one or more taxa throughout a wide geographical range (e.g. Cytisus dieckii (Lange) Fern.Prieto, Nava, Fern.Casado, M.Herrera, Bueno Sánchez, Sanna & Cires (2017), Ulex cantabricus Álv.Mart., Fern.Casado, Fern.Prieto, Nava & Vera (1988)). Hence, some taxa are represented by few individuals, while others count with dozens of individuals. Moreover, samples collected following a genetic diversity or a distribution validation sampling schemes are more likely to have associated ecological information than those obtained during taxonomic sampling. Besides, genetic diversity studies raw results have not been made publicly available in most cases, only the genetic parameters or statistical genetic analyses have been published, suggesting that a method of publishing these raw data should be developed to generate ESs and ESNs. View this table: View inline View popup Download powerpoint Table 2. Summarised example of the data gathered from each of the DNA extracts and/or tissue samples of the 1182 collections of the area of Botany of the department of Biology of Organisms and Systems of the University of Oviedo. View this table: View inline View popup Table 3. Modifications of the main categories of collection data proposed by previous authors and additions to the specific information. Phase 2: Determining the specific aims and the target area of the PBB Given the current conservational necessities and the biodiversity loss projections for the next decades (De Vos et al., 2015; Nic Lughadha et al., 2020 ), establishing target areas and conservational aims should be a keystone for PBBs. Consequently, besides inventorying the already collected taxa, efforts should focus on comprehensively cataloguing the target area flora to determine conservational and scientific priorities. We classified these taxonomic, phylogenetic and conservational priorities in six groups: (1) target area endemisms, (2) subendemisms shared with other floristic regions, (3) putative endemic taxa with non-molecularly validated taxonomic status, (4) relictic and/or isolated populations, (5) taxa at conservational global risk and (6) taxa at conservational local risk. Furthermore, a detailed inventory could unveil understudied and/or undersampled taxa and areas, which would be relevant for future conservation strategies in collaboration with other biobanks. Invasive Alien Species (IAS) are capable of causing a negative impact on biodiversity, socioeconomic activities and human health during their establishment and dissemination outside their native range ( Kolar & Lodge, 2001 ; Keller et al., 2011 ; Ricciardi, 2013 ). The IASs presence throughout the planet is intimately related to human activities such as international commerce and to some features like their capacity of modifying nutrient cycles and soil features, which explains the fact that they pose the second most important threat to biodiversity ( Westphal et al., 2008 ; CBD, 2000; Vilà et al., 2011 ; Ricciardi, 2013 ; Castro-Díez et al., 2019; Shabani et al., 2020 ). IASs genetic material collection at various locations within invaded areas will be of aid in understanding biological invasions features: (1) number of introduction events, (2) colonization waves potential origins, (3) temporal and spatial invasion dynamics, (4) predominant reproduction type (i. e. vegetative vs. sexual) and (5) genetic diversity difference between their invasive and natural ranges. Consequently, IASs sampling should be part of the PBB conservational priorities, given the genetic diversity’s crucial role in understanding and monitoring IAS spread. Phase 3: PBB structuring and setting the SOPs of the MOAs DNA extracts and DNA-rich tissue collections can be organised into the recommended two-node PBB using the created inventories: DNA extracts collection would constitute the WN and the tissue collection would form the RN ( Adams & Adams, 1992 ; Mattick et al., 1992 ; Adams, 1997 ; Rice, Henry et al., 2006; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Zimkus & Ford, 2014a , 2014b ; ISBER, 2018). Thus, DNA and tissue banking would be the first MOAs sensu Hodkinson et al . (2007) to have their SOPs set. Reasonable high-quality DNA preservation at low costs could be achieved by preserving DNA extracts at -20°C and DNA-rich tissues at room temperature in silica gel ( Prendini et al., 2002 ; Corthals & Desalle, 2005; Hodkinson et al., 2007 ; Zimkus & Ford, 2014a , 2014b ). Building the ESs collection would require high levels of traceability that could be achieved by implementing the Funk et al . (2017) double identifying number scheme, in which each sample has two identifying numbers: a primary identifying number derived from the voucher collecting number that connects ES samples and a second DNA Bank collection identifying number unique to each sample ( Figure 4 ) (Caujapé-Castells et al., 2006; ISBER, 2018). At this early stage, the labelling system should also follow the loaning samples recommendations of international organization (e. g. World Health Organization (WHO), 2003 ; ISBER, 2018; Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt (IPT IAvH), 2020 ). Download figure Open in new tab Figure 4. Scheme depicting an example of the Funk et al., (2017) scheme for the system of double identifying number. The collecting number of a voucher used as primary identifier number of all the derived vouchers and the sample ID numbers of all tissues in DNA bank storage derived from the same sample. The collection number or primary identifier number connects the voucher and the samples since it is formed by the collecting number (in this case De Tal 00001) plus an additional number (e.g. De Tal 00001.1). When acquired by the DNA bank, another unique internal number, the sample ID number, analog to the Herbarium catalog number, is given to each of sample (in this case FCOD008). A preliminary label design for the ESs collection should include: (1) product type (DNA, RNA or tissue), (2) collection number (=primary identifying number), (3) biobank ID number, (4) accepted genus, (5) accepted species, (6) sample origin and (7) an assigned barcode or QR code (WHO, 2003; Caujapé-Castells et al., 2006; Campbell et al., 2018; IPT IAvH, 2020) ( Figure 5 ). Following the double identifying number system (Caujapé-Castells et al., 2006; Funk et al., 2017 ) and taking into account that at this stage there exist samples obtained before and after collection centralization, three different labels could be used: (1) the labels of samples collected before the centralization (i. e. initial ESs), (2) the collection labels (i. e. samples adquired after the SOPs were set) and (3) the loan labels. These three label types should be easily recognised (e.g. by using different colours or patterns) to guarantee sample’s traceability. Download figure Open in new tab Figure 5. Example of potential label of loaned samples following the instructions of Wolrd Health Organization (WHO) (2003), Caujapé-Castells et al., (2010) , Campbell et al., (2018a) and Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt (IPT IAvH), (2020). This authors believe that the label of a loaned sample should specify: the type of product (DNA, RNA or tissue) (1), the sample ID number of the biobank (2), the collection number (3), the genus of the sample (4), the species of the sample (5), the origin of the sample (6) and a barcode (7 Establishing the aims and priorities and the three collections interconnection (phases 1 and 2) would benefit material collection, data gathering and sample labelling SOPs by highlighting new ways of improving ESs and ESNs to match the scientific necessities. For example, updating the Flora checklist brings the opportunity to centralize ecological (e.g. European Nature Information System (EUNIS) habitats ( https://eunis.eea.europa.eu/ ), IUCN Habitats Classification Scheme ( https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/habitat-classification-scheme ), or floristic subprovince), distributional (e.g. endemisms, subendemisms or isolated populations) and conservational data (e.g. IUCN ( https://iucn.org/ ) assessments or local assessments); while implementing local legislation and the Protocol of Nagoya. As we believe this information should be part of the SOPs related to ESs and ESNs, we propose to combine and extend the data collection items suggested by previous authors (e. g. Prendini et al., 2002 ; Culley, 2013 ; Lear et al., 2018 ) to specify: (1) national and international conservational status, (2) sampling location features regarding distribution range, (3) the sampling scheme and (4) habitat features and classification ( Table 2 ). At a second stage, sample collection and DNA extraction and utilization SOPs could be established, implementing legal documents for donations, collections and loans while abiding regional, national and international legislations (e. g. the Protocol of Nagoya) ( Davis & Borisenko, 2017 ; CETAF, 2020). Thus, enforcing the ABS agreements by establishing the guidelines to generate PICs, MATs and MTAs, which are essential to sample collection and DNA utilization (CBD, 2010; GGBN, 2015; Biber-Klemm et al., 2016 ; Davis & Borisenko, 2017 ). International organizations such as the Middle Eastern and African Society for Biopreservation and Biobanking (ESSB) ( https://esbb.org/ ), the Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities (CETAF) ( https://cetaf.org/ ) or the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) ( https://www.isber.org/ ) can facilitate this thanks to their remarkable contributions to DNA biobanking like producing documents for the ABS agreements implementation and especially DNA samples MTAs (e.g. GGBN, 2015; CETAF, 2020) or the ISBER Best Practices Guidelines (ISBER, 2018). Phase 4: Go public: from three collections to ESs and ESNs Once the SOPs are established and the three collections connected, a website should be built with the following characteristics: (1) be user-friendly, (2) interconnect specimens’ data generating ESs and ESNs and (3) be informative regarding the biobank functioning, samples’ availability and the donation/request process. The best practice guides and ABS agreements guidelines generated during phase 4, would be of capital importance for the informative and user-friendly aspects. Furthermore, generating ESs and ESNs from herbarium voucher would upgrade the ongoing herbarium digitalization processes by producing and fomenting FAIR data and the RRI ( Owen et al., 2012 ; Wilkinson et al., 2016 ; Lannom et al., 2019 ). Opening the website to the public would be the final step of the three collections interconnection. Phase 5: Becoming part of GGBN and other organizations and establishing collaborations Once the PBB is functioning, becoming part of the GGBN should be the next step as this is opened to recruiting new members and aims to standarise the MOAs ( Dröge et al., 2014 ; Seberg et al., 2016 ; GGBN, 2024). This membership would improve the PBB visilibity among reasearchers and encourage collaborations other biorepositories. During this phase, the PBB could also aim to become part of other associations like ESSB ( https://esbb.org/ ), CETAF ( https://cetaf.org/ ) or ISBER ( https://www.isber.org/ ). Relocating the RN in other countries or harbouring samples from other biobanks was suggested during the early days of biodiversity DNA biobanking ( Adams, 1997 ; Graner et al., 2006 ; SANBI, 2020) and has been implemented by some PBBs like the SANBI DNA bank ( https://www.sanbi.org/biodiversity/foundations/genetics-services/ ) and the Kew DNA Bank ( https://dnabank.science.kew.org/homepage.html ) ). While other PBBs are willing to do so (e. g. Jardín Botánico Canario “Viera y Clavijo” ( http://www.jardincanario.org/banco-de-adn-motivacion )). In this sense, sharing and exchanging samples would benefit both biobanks, especially when both share floristic elements. For instance, two different PBBs could harbour samples of closely related taxa occurring in different bioclimatic regions or of relictic and non-relictic populations or samples from non-native taxa at locations where they behave as IASs and at locations where they are innocuous species. In this way, active interactions and partnerships with other biobanks have the potential of boosting research in fields like biogeography, conservation biology or taxonomy. Phase 6: Keep improving Since high-quality DNA preservation is a key aspect of biobanking, the PBB should focus some of its research activity on finding and assessing new preservation methods to lower costs and risks. The performances of different solutions allowing storing DNA at room temperature ( Wan et al., 2010 ; Clermont et al., 2014 ) or DNA extraction methods applied to different plant groups could be assessed, making methodological contributions to the scientific community. Similarly, new ways of improving ESs and ESNs should an aim of PBBs. Discussion The BDC—one of the main ecosystemic, societal and economic threats to humanity— is characterised by extinction rates 1000 times higher than expected and has been exacerbated during the past decades by factors such as Climate Change, habitat loss and fragmentation or IAS; leading to predictions of reaching 10000 times the background extinction rate ( Feeley & Silman, 2010 ; Dullinger et al., 2012 ; De Vos et al., 2015; Ceballos et al., 2017 ; Muthukrishnan & Larkin, 2020 ; Shabani et al., 2020 ; Bellard et al., 2021 ; Eichenberg et al., 2021 ; Prakash & Verma, 2022 ; Pörtner et al., 2023 ; Williams et al., 2023 ). The scientific community addressed this threat by generating and making available new phylogenetic knowledge, while national administrations and international organizations set different aims and funded biodiversity conservation programs like the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) of the United Nations ( Blackmore, 2002 ; United Nations (UN), 2021). All these efforts have not decelerated plant species decline and extinctions, which can have unpredictable and disproportioned effect on ecosystems ( Grime, 2002 ; Schleuning et al., 2016 ; Eichenberg et al., 2021 ). More than 170 plant species have gone extinct in the wild since the 1960s, around 50,000-75,000 may currently be at risk of extinction and many could go extinct before even been described ( Cronk 2016 ; Pimm & Raven, 2017 ; Willis, 2017 ; Ruta et al., 2020 ; IUCN, 2024). Moreover, the prevention of local and global plant extinctions faces various additional problems: (1) chronical lack of funding (Suarez & Tsutsui, 2004; Balding & Williams, 2016 ; Roberson & Meyer, 2020 ), (2) lack of time for sampling the declining species and populations due to the synergetic interactions between extinction- driving factors (e .g. climate change and IAS), (4) absence of unified species conservation and IAS erradication strategies sometimes even within the same country (e. g. Acacia mearnsii De Wild. (1925), Cortaderia selloana (Schult. & Schult.f.) Asch. & Graebn. (1900)), (5) inefficient or incomplete systems of information sharing (i. e. there is not a conservation strategies database that facilitates decision-making based on previous experiences), and (6) the reduced percentage of species with genetic information ( Nic Lughadha et al., 2020 ). Species and populations genetic data is as relevant for plant species conservation as habitat restauration and landscape dispersal securing ( Aavik & Helm, 2018 ). Centralizing and systematizing Department DNA collections would be of aid in implementing the genetic information use in conservation programs and would also improve IUCN assessments’ accuracy ( Garner et al., 2020 ). Furthermore, the Dynamo scheme, by connecting smaller collections, could boost collaborations in genetic diversity studies and conservation efforts as different collections could contribute by sampling local populations, thus covering a larger proportion of the distribution range. Moreover, prioritarian taxa inventories would encourage conservational information sharing, including IAS dynamics and erradication strategies. In this context, more efficient conservation plans and the ABS agreements implementation (CBD, 2010) would also benefit society by preserving and regulating the plant genetic and biodiversity heritage, while addressing the GSPC goals (UN, 2021). During the last decade, iniciatives of international organizations like the GGBN’s Global Genome Initiative-Gardens (GGI-Gardens) ( https://naturalhistory.si.edu/research/global-genome-initiative ), the Biodiversity Collections Network (BCoN) ( https://bcon.aibs.org/ ) or the Distributed System of Scientific Collections (DiSSCO) ( https://www.dissco.eu/what-is-dissco/the-collections ) have contributed to natural collections digitalization and to completion of the vascular plants genetic barcoding ( Gostel et al., 2016 ; Zúñiga et al., 2017 ). In the actual context, generating ESs collections and ESNs databases and providing updated inventories at a global scale could be viewed as the next logical step to these digitalization initiatives. Nevertheless, the proposed initial steps to this process, like creating a common database similar to the Index Herbariorum ( http://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/ ) listing the existing PBBs, have not been implemented at a global scale ( Spooner & Ruess, 2014a ), although the USA chieved this through the Integrated Digitized Biocollections ( https://www.idigbio.org/ ). Our 6-step plan for transforming 3 separate collections into a ESs and ESNs PBB would benefit several scientific fields—e. g. molecular taxonomy, conservational biology, DNA barcoding or eDNA—thanks to its positive impact on research results reproducibility and reliability (Corthals & Desalle, 2005; Rice, Henry et al., 2006; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Spooner & Ruess, 2014b ; De Vere et al., 2016 ; Lear et al., 2018 ). This process represents additional advantages for local and regional conservational and research goals. For instance, our collection focuses on the Cantabrian Mountains flora (northern Iberian Peninsula), establishing an small PBB would imply the application FAIR data and RRI principals and achieving some the goals for research improvement and sustainability of European Union’s (EU) Horizon Europe ( Owen et al., 2012 ; Wilkinson et al., 2016 ; Lannom et al., 2019 ; European Union (EU), 2021), while giving a new dimension to the EU initiative Innovation and Consolidation for large scale Digitisation of natural heritage (ICEDIG) ( European Commission, 2023 ) by generating ESNs (e. g. connecting herbarium voucher occurrences with their genetic data). Moreover, PBBs would make the goals of international barcoding projects such as the International Barcode of Life Project (iBOL) ( https://ibol.org/ ), Encyclopedia of Life (EOL) ( https://eol.org/ ) or The Barcode of Life Data System (BOLD) ( https://www.boldsystems.org/ ) easier to achieve, while other fields like eDNA, SNPs genotyping, transcriptomics or phylogenomics would enhance their accuracy ( Adams, 1997 ; Rice, Shepherd et al., 2006; Hanner & Gregory, 2007 ; Pleijel et al., 2008 ; Rice, Kasem & Henry, 2008 ; Astrin et al., 2013 ; Spooner & Ruess, 2014b ; De Vere et al., 2016 ). Our 6-step process was designed to improve our knowledge on the relatively unstudied local Cantabrian Mountains vascular flora through the generation of a database and an updated inventory ( Izco, 1980 ; Fernández Prieto & Vázquez, 2007 ; Fernández Prieto et al., 2014 ; Gómez Durán, 2014 ), aiming to unveil taxonomic knowledge gaps and the factors associated to local biodiversity hotspots. With this information, the promotion of large expeditions focused on understudied areas and taxonomic groups would simultaneously contribute to the Leipzig Catalogue of Vascular Plants and tackle one of the major bottlenecks for genetics-based studies ( Mattick et al ., 1992 ; Lear et al., 2018 ; SANBI, 2020; Freiberg et al., 2020 ). Particularly, ecology and molecular taxonomy would potentially profit from an updated species catalogue thanks to data accuracy refinement and the possibility of sampling the type localities of taxa with scientific interest. In this sense, University of Oviedo department collections holds a very good example of the relevance of implementing DNA sampling when describing new taxa. Our collections includes specimens from the only two known species of the subendemic genus Rivasmartinezia Fern.Prieto & Cires (2014)— Rivasmartinezia vazquezii Fern.Prieto & Cires (2014) and Rivasmartinezia cazorlana Blanca, Cueto, Benavente & J.Fuentes (2016)— collected from their type localities ( Fernández Prieto & Cires, 2013 ; Blanca et al., 2016 ). Consequently, we could provide new molecular information (e. g. sequencing new different molecular markers) to the already available data at GenBank extending de facto ESs and ESNs without resampling. In this way, many small department PBBs connected through the Dynamo scheme could enhance information sharing by generating and expanding ESs and ESNs, even when they are type specimens. Furthermore, international digitalization and biodiversity proyects would progress more rapidly in our biodiversity loss contexts if there existed many small department PBBs able to provide this type of specimens following standardized protocols. Data Accessibility Statement All data used for this review has been exposed in the text. Funding statement Claudia González-Toral had the initial financial support of the Government of Asturias (2002166- Programa Severo Ochoa) and is currently supported by the Ramón Areces Foundation PostDoctoral Fellowship program (XXXVI Convocatoria para Ampliación de Estudios en el Extranjero en Ciencias de la Vida y de la Materia). Conflict of interest disclosure The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Acknowledgements Claudia González-Toral had the initial financial support of the Government of Asturias (2002166- Programa Severo Ochoa) and is currently supported by the Ramón Areces Foundation PostDoctoral Fellowship program (XXXVI Convocatoria para Ampliación de Estudios en el Extranjero en Ciencias de la Vida y de la Materia). The authors would also like to thank Estrella Alfaro-Saiz, Juan Arroyo, Juan Viruel, Pablo Muñoz, Herminio S. Nava and Candela Cuesta for their useful comments and advice. Funder Information Declared Gobierno del Principado de Asturias, https://ror.org/05mj4yh71 , 2002166- Programa Severo Ochoa Fundación Ramón Areces , Ramón Areces Foundation PostDoctoral Fellowship program (XXXVI Convocatoria para Ampliación de Estudios en el Extranjero en Ciencias de la Vida y de la Materia) References ↵ Aavik , T. & Helm , A . ( 2018 ). Restoration of plant species and genetic diversity depends on landscape-scale dispersal . Restoration Ecology 26 , S92 – S102 . OpenUrl ↵ Yong , W.H Abdaljaleel , M. , Singer , E. J. & Yong , W. H . ( 2019 ). Sustainability in biobanking . In Yong , W.H . (ed.) Biobanking. Methods and protocols . New York, NY : Humana Press , 1 – 6 . ↵ Adams , R. P. ( 1988 ). The preservation of genomic DNA: DNA Bank-Net . in Abstr. AIBS Meeting University of California, Davis . ↵ Gustafson J. P. , Appels R. , R. P Adams , R. P . ( 1993 ). The Conservation and Utilization of Genes From Endangered and Extinct Plants: DNA Bank-Net . In Gustafson J. P. , Appels R. , R. P . (eds.) Gene Conservation and Exploitation. Stadler Genetics Symposia Series . Boston, MA : Springer 35 – 52 . ↵ Callow , J.A. , Ford- Lloyd , B.V. Newbury , H.J Adams , R. P . ( 1997 ). Conservation of DNA: DNA banking . In Callow , J.A. , Ford- Lloyd , B.V. & Newbury , H.J . (eds) Biotechnology in Agriculture series N° 19 . Cab International , 163 – 174 . ↵ Adams , R. P. & Adams , J. E . ( 1992 ). Conservation of plant genes: DNA banking and in vitro biotechnology . Conservation of plant genes 1 . San Diego, CA : Academic Press . ↵ Antonelli , A. , Fry , C. , Smith , R. J. , Eden , J. , Govaerts , R. H. A. , Kersey , P. , Nic Lughadha , E . Onstein , R. E. , Simmonds , M. S. J. , Zizka , A. , Ackerman , J. D. , Adams , V. M. , Ainsworth , A. M. , Albouy , C. , Allen , A. P. , Allen , S. P. , et al. , ( 2023 ) State of the World’s Plants and Fungi 2023. Tackling the Nature Emergency: Evidence, gaps and priorities. Kew (UK): Royal Botanic Gardens , Kew; The Sfumato Foundation . ↵ Astrin , J. J. , Zhou , X. & Misof , B . ( 2013 ). The importance of biobanking in molecular taxonomy, with proposed definitions for vouchers in a molecular context . ZooKeys 365 , 67 – 70 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ De Baan , L. , Mutel , C. L. , Curran , M. , Hellweg , S. , & Koellner , T. ( 2013 ). Land use in life cycle assessment: global characterization factors based on regional and global potential species extinction . Environmental science & technology 47 , 9281 – 9290 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Balding , M. & Williams , K. J. H . ( 2016 ). Plant blindness and the implications for plant conservation . Conservation Biology 30 , 1192 – 1199 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Barthlott , W. , Mutke , J. , Daud Rafiqpoor , M. , Rafiqpoor , D. , Kier , G. & Kreft , H . ( 2005 ). Global centers of vascular plant diversity Biodiversity . Nova Acta Leopoldina NF 92 , 61 – 83 . OpenUrl ↵ Bellard , C. , Bernery , C. , & Leclerc , C . ( 2021 ). Looming extinctions due to invasive species: Irreversible loss of ecological strategy and evolutionary history . Global Change Biology 27 , 4967 – 4979 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Benson , E. E. , Betsou , F. , Amaral , R. , Santos , L. M. A. & Harding , K . ( 2011 ). Standard PREanalytical codes: A new paradigm for environmental biobanking sectors explored in algal culture collections . Biopreservation and biobanking 9 , 399 – 410 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Benson , E. E. , Betsou , F. & Harding , K . ( 2010 ). Exploring standard preanalytical coding for environmental biospecimens using algal cryobanks as a case study . Cryobiology 3 , 401 . OpenUrl ↵ Betsou , F. , Lehmann , S. , Ashton , G. , Barnes , M. , Benson , E. E. , Coppola , D. , De Souza , Y. , Eliason , J. , Glazer , B. , Guadagni , F. , Harding , K. , Horsfall , D. J. , Kleeberger , C. , Nanni , U. , Prasad , A. , et al. , ( 2010 ). Standard Preanalytical Coding for Biospecimens: Defining the Sample PREanalytical Code . Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers 19 , 1004 – 1015 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Biber-Klemm , S. , Martinez , S. I. , Jacob , A. , & Jevtic , A . ( 2016 ). Agreement on Access and Benefit-sharing for academic research a toolbox for drafting Mutually Agreed Terms for access to genetic resources and to associated traditional knowledge and benefit-sharing . Swiss Academies Reports 11 . ↵ Blackmore , S . ( 2002 ). Biodiversity update-progress in taxonomy downloaded from . Science 298 , 365 . OpenUrl FREE Full Text ↵ Blanca , G. , Cueto , M. , Benavente , A. , & Fuentes , J . ( 2016 ). Rivasmartinezia cazorlana sp. nov .( Apiaceae) from southern Spain. Nordic Journal of Botany 34 , 517 – 521 . OpenUrl ↵ Bodeker , G. , Van’T Klooster , C. & Weisbord , E . ( 2014 ). Prunus africana (Hook.f.) Kalkman: The overexploitation of a medicinal plant species and its legal context . Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 20 , 810 – 822 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Bradley , R. D. , Bradley , L. C. , Garner , H. J. & Baker , R. J . ( 2014 ). Assessing the value of natural history collections and addressing issues regarding long-term growth and care . 64 , 1150 – 1158 . OpenUrl ↵ Brown , W. Y . ( 2011 ). Conservation: Invest in a DNA bank for all species . Nature 476 , 399 . OpenUrl PubMed ↵ Buckner , J. C. , Sanders , R. C. , Faircloth , B. C. , & Chakrabarty , P . ( 2021 ). The critical importance of vouchers in genomics . Elife 10 , e68264 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Campbell , L. D. , Astrin , J. J. , Brody , R. , De Souza , Y. , Giri , J . Patel , A. A. , Rawley-Payne , A. , Rush , M. A. & Sieffert , N . ( 2018a ). Best Practices: Recommendations for Repositories . 4th edn . Vancouver, Canada : ISBER Head Office . Campbell , L. D. , Astrin , J. J. , De Souza , Y. , Giri , J. , Patel , A. A. , Rawley-Payne , M. , Rush , A. & Sieffert , N . ( 2018b ). The 2018 revision of the ISBER Best Practices L: Summary of changes and the editorial team’s development process . Biopreservation and Biobanking 16 , 3 – 6 . OpenUrl CrossRef CastroLDíez , P. , Vaz , A. S. , Silva , J. S. , Van Loo , M. , Alonso , Á. , Aponte , C. , Bayón , A. , Bellingham , P. J. , Chiuffo , M. C. , DiManno , N. , Julian , K. , Kandert , S. , La Porta , N. , Marchante , H. , Hamish G . Maule , H. G. , et al. , ( 2019 ). Global effects of nonLnative tree species on multiple ecosystem services . Biological Reviews 94 , 1477 – 1501 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Caujapé-Castells , J. , Molina , R. J. , Nereida , Y. & García , C . ( 2010 ). El Banco de ADN de la flora canaria: creación, progresos y líneas futuras de desarrollo . Botánica Macaronésica 26 , 3 – 18 . OpenUrl ↵ Ceballos , G. , Ehrlich , P. R. & Dirzo , R . ( 2017 ). Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines . Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 114 , E6089 – E6096 . OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text Consortium of Europena Taxonomic Facilities (CETAF). ( 2020 ). Code of conduct & best practices for Access and Beneficr-Sharing. Exploring and Documenting Diversity in Nature . https://www.cetaf.org/wp-content/uploads/CETAF-Code-of-conduct-Best-practice-for-ABS-A4-leaflet.pdf (Date Accessed: 2020-07-16 ). ↵ Chuanwu , C. , Yanfu , Q. , Xianfeng , Z. & Yanping , W . ( 2019 ). Human overexploitation and extinction risk correlates of Chinese snakes . Ecography 42 , 1777 – 1788 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Cires , E. , & Prieto , J. A. F . ( 2015 ). Phylogenetic relationships of Petrocoptis A. Braun ex Endl.(Caryophyllaceae), a discussed genus from the Iberian Peninsula . Journal of plant research 128 , 223 – 238 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Cires Rodríguez , E. , Cuesta Moliner , C. , & Fernández Prieto , J. A. ( 2012 ). Conservation genetics of the endangered endemic Ranunculus cabrerensis subsp. muniellensis (Ranunculaceae) in the Northwest of Spain . Boletín de Ciencias de la Naturaleza 52 , 117 – 134 . OpenUrl ↵ Clermont , D. , Santoni , S. , Saker , S. , Gomard , M. , Gardais , E. & Bizet , C. ( 2014 ). Assessment of DNA encapsulation, a new room-temperature DNA storage method . Biopreservation and Biobanking 12 , 176 – 183 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Hainaut P. , Vaught J. , Zatloukal K. Pasterk , M Comizzoli , P. & Wildt , D. E . ( 2017 ). Cryobanking biomaterials from wild animal species to conserve genes and biodiversity: relevance to human biobanking and biomedical research . In Hainaut P. , Vaught J. , Zatloukal K. & Pasterk , M . (eds) Biobanking of Human Biospecimens . Springer , 217 – 235 . Corthals , A. & De Salle , R. ( 2005 ). An application of tissue and DNA banking for genomics and conservation: the Ambrose Monell Cryo-Collection (AMCC) . Systematic biology 54 , 819 – 823 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Cronk , Q . ( 2016 ). Plant extinctions take time: Many plant species may already be functionally extinct . Science 353 , 446 – 447 . OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text ↵ Culley , T. M . ( 2013 ). Why vouchers matter in botanical research . Applications in Plant Sciences 1 , 1300076 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Dalton , R . ( 2003 ). Natural history collections in crisis as funding is slashed . Nature 423 , 575 – 576 . OpenUrl PubMed Web of Science ↵ Davis , A. P. ( 2011 ). Collecting herbarium vouchers . In Goldberg , E . (ed.) Collecting Plant Genetic Diversity: technical guidelines--2011 update . Crop Genebank knowledge base , 1 – 9 . ↵ Davis , K. & Borisenko , A . ( 2017 ). Introduction to Access and Benefit-Sharing and the Nagoya Protocol: What DNA barcoding researchers need to know . Advanced Books 1 , e2257 . OpenUrl ↵ Kress , W. Erickson , D Dick , C. W. & Webb , C. O . ( 2012 ). Plant DNA barcodes, taxonomic management, and species discovery in tropical forests . In Kress , W. & Erickson , D . (eds) DNA Barcodes. Methods in Molecular Biology (Methods and Protocols) . Totowa : Humana Press , 379 – 393 . ↵ Dröge , G. , Barker , K. , Astrin , J. J. , Bartels , P. , Butler , C. , Cantrill , D. , Coddington , J. , Forest , F. , Gemeinholzer , B. , Hobern , D. , Mackenzie-Dodds , J. , Ó Tuama , É. , Petersen , G. , Sanjur , O. , Schindel , D., et al. , ( 2014 ). The Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) Data Portal . Nucleic Acids Research 42 , D607 – D612 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Dröge , G. , Barker , K. , Seberg , O. , Coddington , J. , Benson , E. , Berendsohn , W. G. , Bunk , B. , Butler , C. , Cawsey , E. M. , Deck , J. , Döring , M. , Flemons , P. , Gemeinholzer , B. , Güntsch , A. , Hollowell , T. , et al. , ( 2016 ). The Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) Data Standard specification . Database 201 , baw125. ↵ Dullinger , S. , Gattringer , A. , Thuiller , W. , Moser , D. , Zimmermann , N. E. , Guisan , A. , Willner , W. , Plutzar , C. , Leitner , M. , Mang , T. , Caccianiga , M. , Dirnböck , T. , Ertl , S. , Fischer , A. , Lenoir , J. , et al. , ( 2012 ). Extinction debt of high-mountain plants under twenty-first-century climate change . Nature Clim Change 2 , 619 – 622 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Eichenberg , D. , Bowler , D. E. , Bonn , A. , Bruelheide , H. , Grescho , V. , Harter , D. , Jandt , U. , May , R. , Winter , M. & Jansen , F . ( 2021 ). Widespread decline in Central European plant diversity across six decades . Global Change Biology 27 , 1097 – 1110 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ European Commission ( 2023 ) Innovation and consolidation for large scale digitisation of natural heritage (ICEDIG Project) . https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/777483 (Date accessed: 2023-03-05 ). European Union (EU ) ( 2021 ) Horizon Europe . The next EU research and innovation invest programme (2021-2027) . https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/research_and_innovation/ec_rtd_he-presentation_062019_en.pdf (Date accessed: 2021-09-19 ). ↵ Feeley , K. J. & Silman , M. R . ( 2010 ). Land-use and climate change effects on population size and extinction risk of Andean plants . Global Change Biology 16 , 3215 – 3222 . OpenUrl CrossRef Web of Science ↵ Fernández Prieto , J. A. & Vázquez , V. M. ( 2007 ) Claroscuros del viaje botánico por Asturias de Durieu de Maisonneuve en 1835 . In Llordén Miñambres , M. & Menéndez Llana , J. M. (eds) I Congreso de Estudios Asturiano s Vol. 6 . Oviedo : Real Instituto de Estudios Asturianos , 55 – 74 . ↵ Fernández Prieto , J. A. , & Cires , E. ( 2013 ). Phylogenetic placement of Dethawia, Meum , and Rivasmartinezia (Apioideae , Apiaceae): Evidence from nuclear and plastid DNA sequences. Plant Biosystems 148 , 975 – 987 . OpenUrl ↵ Fernández Prieto , J.A. , Cires Rodríguez , E. , Bueno Sánchez , A. , Vázquez , V. M. & Nava Fernández , H. S . ( 2014 ) Catálogo de plantas vasculares del Principado de Asturias .. Documentos del Jardín Botánico Atlántico (Gijón ) 11 , 7 – 267 . OpenUrl Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations ( 2001 ). International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) . Rome . ↵ Freiberg , M. , Winter , M. , Gentile , A. , Zizka , A. , Nora Muellner-Riehl , A. , Weigelt , A. & Wirth , C . ( 2020 ). LCVP, the Leipzig catalogue of vascular plants, a new taxonomic reference list for all known vascular plants . Scientific data 7 , 1 – 7 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Funk , V. A. , Gostel , M. , Devine , A. , Kelloff , C. L. , Wurdack , K. , Tuccinardi , C. , Radosavljevic , A. , Peters , M. & Coddington , J . ( 2017 ). Guidelines for collecting vouchers and tissues intended for genomic work (Smithsonian Institution): Botany Best Practices . Biodiversity Data Journal 5 , e11625 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Funk , V. A. , Edwards , R. & Keeley , S . ( 2018 ). The problem with(out) vouchers . Taxon 67 , 3 – 5 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Garner , B. A. , Hoban , S. & Luikart , G . ( 2020 ). IUCN Red List and the value of integrating genetics . Conservation Genetics 21 , 795 – 801 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Gaudeul , M. & Rouhan , G . ( 2013 ). A plea for modern botanical collections to include DNA-friendly material . Trends in Plant Science 18 , 184 – 185 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Gemeinholzer , B. , Dröge , G. , Zetzsche , H. , Haszprunar , G. , Klenk , H. P. , Güntsch , A. , Berendsohn , W. G. & Wägele , J. W . ( 2011 ). The DNA bank network: The start from a german initiative . Biopreservation and Biobanking 9 , 51 – 55 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Gemeinholzer , B. , Rey , I. , Weising , K. , Grundmann , M. , Muellner , A. N. , Zetzsche , H. & Dröge , G. ( 2010 ). Organizing specimen and tissue preservation in the field for subsequent molecular analyses . In Eymann , J. , Degreef , J. , Häuser , C. , Monje , J.C. , Samyn , Y. & Van den Spiegel , D . (eds) Manual on Field Recording Techniques and Protocols for All Taxa Biodiversity Inventorie s 8 ., AbcTaxa , 132 – 157 . OpenUrl Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN). ( 2015 ). Global Genome Biodiversity Network Standard Material Transfer Agreements (MTAs) . GGBN Document Library : https://library.ggbn.org/share/s/BW3F3qiiT8W9S3qeTwMMww (Date Acessed: 2020- 07-28). Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN). ( 2024 ). Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) Portal : http://data.ggbn.org/ggbn_portal/ (Date Acessed: 2024-03- 30). ↵ Gómez Durán A. J. ( 2014 ) Catálogo de la Flora Vascular de Cantabria . Colección Monografías de Botánica Ibérica 13 . González-Toral , C. , Nava , H. S. , Bueno , Á. , Fernández Prieto , J. A. & Cires , E . ( 2022 ). Molecular characterization of Hedera (Araliaceae) from Atlantic Iberian Peninsula . Plant Biosystems 156 , 769 – 775 . OpenUrl ↵ González-Toral , C. & Cires , E . ( 2022 ) Relevance of DNA preservation for future botany and ecology . Molecular Ecology 31 , 5125 – 5131 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ González-Toral , C. , Cuesta C. & Cires , E. ( 2023 ) Genetic Diversity and Population Structure Assessed Using Microsatellite (SSR) Markers from Relict Populations of Nuphar pumila (Nymphaeaceae) . Plants 12 , 1771 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Gostel , M. R. , Kelloff , C. , Wallicqk , K. & Funk , V. A . ( 2016 ). A Workflow to preserve genome-uality tissue samples from plants in botanical gardens and arboreta . Applications in Plant Sciences 4 , 1600039 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ de Vicente , M.C. Andersson , M.S Graner , A. , Andersson , M. S. & de Vicente , M. C . ( 2006 ). A model for DNA banking to enhance the management, distribution and use of ex situ stored PGR . In de Vicente , M.C. & Andersson , M.S . (eds.) DNA banks-providing novel options for genebanks? Rome , Italy : International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), 69 – 75 . ↵ Grime , J. P . ( 2002 ). Declining plant diversity: empty niches or functional shifts? Journal of Vegetation Science 13 , 457 – 460 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Hanner , R. H. & Gregory , T. R . ( 2007 ). Genomic Diversity Research and the Role of Biorepositories . Cell preservation Technology 5 , 93 – 103 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Helm , A. , Oja , T. , Saar , L. , Takkis , K. , Talve , T. & Pärtel , M . ( 2009 ). Human influence lowers plant genetic diversity in communities with extinction debt . Journal of ecology 97 , 1329 – 1336 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Heywood , V. H . ( 1995 ). A global strategy for the conservation of plant diversity . Grana 34 , 363 – 366 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Hodkinson , T. R. , Waldren , S. , Parnell , J. A. N. , Kelleher , C. T. , Salamin , K. & Salamin , N . ( 2007 ). DNA banking for plant breeding, biotechnology and biodiversity evaluation . Journal of Plant Research 120 , 17 – 29 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Web of Science ↵ Holetschek , J. , Dröge , G. , Güntsch , A. & Berendsohn , W. G . ( 2012 ). The ABCD of primary biodiversity data access . Plant Biosystems 146 , 771 – 779 . OpenUrl Index Herb ariorum ( 2023 ) Universidad de Oviedo. Available at : https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/herbarium-details/?irn=126303 (Date Accessed: 2023-03-02 ). ↵ Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt (IPT IAvH) ( 2020 ). Protocolo para depósito de muestras colleción de tejidos (Palmaria, Valle del Cauca) . http://www.humboldt.org.co/images/pdf/G_protocolodedepositodemuestras.pdf (Date Accessed: 2020-07-09 ). International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). ( 1973 ). Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Washington, D.C. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). ( 2024 ). ) International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List . https://www.iucnredlist.org/search (Date Accessed: 2024-04-29 ). ↵ Izco , J . ( 1980 ) Aportación de la botánica española a las ciencias de la vegetación . Anales del Jardín Botánico Madrid 37 , 373 – 391 . OpenUrl ↵ Jain , M. , Johnson , T. S. & Krishnan , P . ( 2012 ). Biotechnological approaches to conserve the wealth of nature: Endangered and rare medicinal plant species, a review . Journal of Natural Remedies 12 , 93 – 102 . OpenUrl ↵ Jenkins , M . ( 2003 ). Prospects for Biodiversity . Science 302 , 1175 – 1177 . OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text ↵ Kang , B. , Park , J. , Cho , S. , Lee , M. , Kim , N. , Min , H. , Lee , S. , Park , O. & Han , B . ( 2013 ). Current status, challenges, policies, and bioethics of biobanks . Genomics & Informatics 11 , 211 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Karp , A. , Edwards , K. J. , Bruford , M. , Funk , S. , Vosman , B. , Morgante , M. , Seberg , O. , Kremer , A. , Boursot , P. , Arctander , P. , Tautz , D. & Hewitt , G. M . ( 1997 ). Molecular technologies for biodiversity evaluation: opportunities and challenges . Nature biotechnology 15 , 625 – 628 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Web of Science ↵ Kedward , K. , Ryan-Collins , J. & Chenet , H . ( 2023 ) Biodiversity loss and climate change interactions: financial stability implications for central banks and financial supervisors . Climate Policy 23 , 763 – 781 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Keller , R. P. , Geist , J. , Jeschke , J. M. & Kühn , I . ( 2011 ). Invasive species in Europe: ecology, status, and policy . Environmental Sciences Europe 23 , 1 – 17 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Kolar , C. S. & Lodge , D. M . ( 2001 ). Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders . Trends in ecology & evolution 16 , 199 – 204 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Krauss , S. L. , Dixon , B. & Dixon , K. W . ( 2002 ). Rapid genetic decline in a translocated population of the endangered plant Grevillea scapigera . Conservation Biology 16 , 986 – 994 . OpenUrl CrossRef Web of Science ↵ Lannom , L. , Koureas , D. & Hardisty , A. R . ( 2019 ). FAIR data and services in biodiversity science and geoscience . Data Intelligence 2 , 122 – 130 . OpenUrl ↵ Lavoie , C . ( 2013 ). Biological collections in an ever changing world: Herbaria as tools for biogeographical and environmental studies . Perspectives in plant ecology, evolution and systematics 15 , 68 – 76 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Lear , G. , Dickie , I. , Banks , J. , Boyer , S. , Buckley , H. , Buckley , T. , Cruickshank , R. , Dopheide , A. , Handley , K. & Hermans , S . ( 2018 ). Methods for the extraction, storage, amplification and sequencing of DNA from environmental samples . New Zealand Journal of Ecology 42 , 10 – 50A . OpenUrl ↵ Leigh , D. M. , Hendry , A. P. , VázquezLDomínguez , E. & Friesen , V. L . ( 2019 ). Estimated six per cent loss of genetic variation in wild populations since the industrial revolution . Evolutionary Applications 12 , 1505 – 1512 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Lendemer , J. , Thiers , B. , Monfils , A. K. , Zaspel , J. , Ellwood , E. R. , Bentley , A. , LeVan , K. , Bates , J. , Jennings , D. , Contreras , D. , Lagomarsino , L. , Mabee , P. , Ford , L. S. , Guralnick , R. , Gropp , R. E. , et al. , ( 2020 ). The Extended Specimen Network: A strategy to enhance US biodiversity collections, promote research and education . BioScience 70 , 23 – 30 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ León-Lobos , P. , Way , M. , Aranda , P.D. & Lima-Junior , M . ( 2012 ). The role of ex situ seed banks in the conservation of plant diversity and in ecological restoration in Latin America . Plant Ecology & Diversity , 5 , 245 – 258 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Mace , G. M. , Reyers , B. , Alkemade , R. , Biggs , R. , Chapin III , F. S. , Cornell , S. E. , Cornel , S. E. , Sandra Díaz , S. , Jennings , S. , Leadley , P. , Mumby , P. J. , Purvis , A , Scholes , R. J. , Seddon , A. W. R. , Solan , M. , Steffen , W. , Woodward , G. & Woodward , G. ( 2014 ). Approaches to defining a planetary boundary for biodiversity . Global Environmental Change 28 , 289 – 297 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Manenti , R. , Ghia , D. , Fea , G. , Ficetola , G. F. , PadoaLSchioppa , E. & Canedoli , C . ( 2018 ). Causes and consequences of crayfish extinction: Stream connectivity, habitat changes, alien species and ecosystem services . Freshwater Biology 64 , 284 – 293 . OpenUrl Martin , M. D. , Gutaker , R. M. , Besnard , G. , Kidner , C. A. , Forrest , L. L. , Hart , M. L. , Hughes , M. , Wilson , H. P. , Chung , K.-F. & Tseng , Y.-H . ( 2019 ). The limits of Hyb-Seq for herbarium specimens: Impact of preservation techniques . Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7 , 439 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Martin , P. & Kaye , J . ( 2000 ). The use of large biological sample collections in genetics research: issues for public policy . New Genetics and Society 19 , 165 – 191 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Adams , R. Adams , J Mattick , J. S. , Ablett , E. M. & Edmonson , D. L . ( 1992 ). The gene library-preservation and analysis of genetic diversity in Australasia . In Adams , R. & Adams , J . (eds) Conservation of Plant GenesSan Diego , CA : Academic Press , 15 – 35 . ↵ Mortelliti , A. , Amori , G. , Capizzi , D. , Cervone , C. , Fagiani , S. , Pollini , B. & Boitani , L . ( 2011 ). Independent effects of habitat loss, habitat fragmentation and structural connectivity on the distribution of two arboreal rodents . Journal of Applied Ecology 48 , 153 – 162 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Muthukrishnan , R. & Larkin , D. J . ( 2020 ). Invasive species and biotic homogenization in temperate aquatic plant communities . Global Ecology and Biogeography 29 , 656 – 667 . OpenUrl CrossRef National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences (NIAS). ( 2024 ) About NIAS. https://www.naro.affrc.go.jp/archive/nias/eng/about/index.html (Date accessed: 2024-04-13 ). ↵ Nic Lughadha , E. N. , Bachman , S. P. , Leão , T. C. C. , Forest , F. , Halley , J. M. , Moat , J. , Acedo , C. , Bacon , K. L. , Brewer , R. F. A. , Gâteblé , G. , Gonçalves , S. C. , Govaerts , R. , Hollingsworth , P. M. , Krisai-Greilhuber , I. , de Lirio , E. J. et al. , ( 2020 ). Extinction risk and threats to plants and fungi. Plants, People , Planet 2 , 389 – 408 . OpenUrl ↵ Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) ( 2001 ). Biological Resource Centres. Underpinning the future of life sciences and biotechnology . Paris : OECD Publishing . ↵ Owen , R. , Macnaghten , P. & Stilgoe , J . ( 2012 ). Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society . Science and public policy 39 , 751 – 760 . OpenUrl CrossRef Web of Science ↵ de Vicente , M.C. Andersson , M.S Palacio-Mejía , J. D . ( 2006 ). Tissue collections as a means of storing DNA: a contribution to the conservation of Colombian biodiversity . In de Vicente , M.C. & Andersson , M.S . (eds) DNA Banks: Providing Novel Options for Genebanks? Topical reviews in agricultural biodiversity. Rome , Italy : International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), 49 – 55 . ↵ Pörtner , H.-O. , Roberts , D.C. , Tignor , M. , Poloczanska , E.S. , Mintenbeck , K , Alegría , A. , Craig , M. , Langsdorf , S Parmesan , C. , Morecroft , M.D. , Trisurat , Y. , Adrian , R. , Anshari , G.Z. , Arneth , A. , Gao , Q. , Gonzalez , P ., et al. , ( 2022 ). Terrestrial and Freshwater Ecosystems and Their Services (Chapter 2 ). In Pörtner , H.-O. , Roberts , D.C. , Tignor , M. , Poloczanska , E.S. , Mintenbeck , K , Alegría , A. , Craig , M. , Langsdorf , S ., et al. , (eds) IPCC 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge (UK)/New York (NY, USA ): Cambridge University Press , 197 – 377 . ↵ Parodi , B . ( 2015 ). Biobanks: A Definition . International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology 14 , 15 – 19 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Peres , C. A . ( 2001 ). Synergistic Effects of subsistence hunting and habitat fragmentation on Amazonian forest vertebrates . Conservation Biology 15 , 1490 – 1505 . OpenUrl CrossRef Web of Science ↵ Pimm , S. L. & Raven , P. H . ( 2017 ). The Fate of the World’s Plants . Trends in Ecology & Evolution 32 , 317 – 320 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Pleijel , F. , Jondelius , U. , Norlinder , E. , Nygren , A. , Oxelman , B. , Schander , C. , Sundberg , P. & Thollesson , M . ( 2008 ). Phylogenies without roots? A plea for the use of vouchers in molecular phylogenetic studies . Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 48 , 369 – 371 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Pörtner , H. O. , Scholes , R. J. , Arneth , A. , Barnes , D. K. A. , Burrows , M. T. , Diamond , S. E. , Duarte , C. M. , Kiessling , W. , Leadley , P. , Managi , S. , McElwee , P. , Midgley , G. , Ngo , H. T. , Obure , D. , Pascual , U. , et al. , ( 2023 ). Overcoming the coupled climate and biodiversity crises and their societal impacts . Science 380 , eabl4881. ↵ Prakash , S. & Verma , A. K . ( 2022 ). Anthropogenic activities and Biodiversity threats . International Journal of Biological Innovations 4 , 94 – 103 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ De Salle , R. , Giribet , G. & Wheeler Prendini , L. , Hanner , R. & DeSalle , R . ( 2002 ). Obtaining, storing and archiving specimens and tissue samples for use in molecular studies . In De Salle , R. , Giribet , G. & Wheeler , W.C. (eds). Techniques in Molecular Systematics and Evolution. Birkhaeuser Verlag AG ; Basel : 176 – 248 . ↵ Pyke , G. H. & Ehrlich , P. R . ( 2010 ). Biological collections and ecological/environmental research: a review, some observations and a look to the future . Biological reviews 85 , 247 – 266 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Rabeler , R. K . ( 2017 ). Making molecular specimen vouchers more accessible . Taxon 66 , 537 – 538 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Normah , M.N. , Chin , H.F. Reed , B.M Rajasekharan , P. E. , Ravish , B. S. , Kumar , T. V. & Ganeshan , S . ( 2013 ). Pollen cryobanking for tropical plant species . In Normah , M.N. , Chin , H.F. & Reed , B.M . (eds) Conservation of tropical plant species . New York : Springer , 65 – 75 . ↵ Leemans , R Ricciardi , A . ( 2013 ). Invasive species . In Leemans , R . (ed.) Ecological systems: selected entries from the Encyclopedia of sustainability science and technology . New York (NY) : Springer New York , 161 – 178 . ↵ Rice , N. , Kasem , S. & Henry , R. J. ( 2008 ). DNA Banks as a Resource for SNP Genotyping . In Henry , R.J . (ed.) Plant Genotyping II: SNP Technology . Biddles Ltd, King’s Lynn : CABI 207 – 218 . ↵ De Vicente , M.C. and Andersson Rice , N. , Henry , R. & Rossetto , M . ( 2006 ). DNA banks: a primary resource for conservation research . In De Vicente , M.C. and Andersson , M.S. (eds) DNA Banks: Providing Novel Options for Genebanks? Rome , Italy : International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), 41 – 48 . Rice , N. , Shepherd , M. , Bundock , P. C. & Henry , R. J . ( 2006 ). DNA Banks and their role in facilitating the application of genomics to plant germplasm . Plant Genetic Resources 4 , 64 – 70 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Roberson , E. & Meyer , A. H . ( 2020 ). Funding for Plant Conservation View project . Science 367 , 258 . OpenUrl FREE Full Text ↵ Román-Palacios , C. & Wiens , J. J . ( 2020 ). Recent responses to climate change reveal the drivers of species extinction and survival . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117 , 4211 – 4217 . OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text ↵ Ruta , C. , Lambardi , M. & Ozudogru , E. A . ( 2020 ). Biobanking of vegetable genetic resources by in vitro conservation and cryopreservation . Biodiversity and Conservation 29 ,. 3495 – 3532 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Savolainen , V . ( 2004 ). A Plea for DNA Banking . Science 304 , 1445 . OpenUrl Schlaepfer , M. A. & Lawler , J. J . ( 2023 ). Conserving biodiversity in the face of rapid climate change requires a shift in priorities . Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 14 , e798 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Schleuning , M. , Fründ , J. , Schweiger , O. , Welk , E. , Albrecht , J. , Albrecht , M. , Beil , M. , Benadi , G. , Blüthgen , N. , Bruelheide , H. , Böhning-Gaese , K. , Dehling , D. M. , Dormann , C. F. , Exeler , N. , Farwig , N. , et al. , ( 2016 ). Ecological networks are more sensitive to plant than to animal extinction under climate change . Nature Communications 7 , 1 – 9 . OpenUrl ↵ Seberg , O. , Dröge , G. , Barker , K. , Coddington , J.A. , Funk , V. , Gostel , M. , Petersen , G. & Smith , P. P . ( 2016 ). Global Genome Biodiversity Network: saving a blueprint of the Tree of Life–a botanical perspective . Annals of botany 118 , 393 – 399 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ( 2000 ) Alien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or species (COP 6 Decision VI/23) . The Hague , The Netherlands . Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ( 2011 ). The Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity . Montreal, Quebec : Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity , United Nations Environmental Programme ↵ Sekercioglu , C. H. , Schneider , S. H. , Fay , J. P. & Loarie , S. R . ( 2008 ). Climate Change, clevational range shifts, and bird extinctions . Conservation Biology 22 , 140 – 150 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed Web of Science ↵ Shabani , F. , Ahmadi , M. , Kumar , L. , Solhjouy-fard , S. , Tehrany , M. S. , Shabani , F. , Kalantar , B. & Esmaeili , A . ( 2020 ). Invasive weed species’ threats to global biodiversity: Future scenarios of changes in the number of invasive species in a changing climate . Ecological Indicators 116 , 106436 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Shaw , D. M. , Elger , B. S. & Colledge , F . ( 2014 ). What is a biobank? Differing definitions among biobank stakeholders . Clinical Genetics 85 , 223 – 227 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Singh , A. K Singh , A. K . ( 2017 ). Collection Strategies . In Singh , A. K . (ed.). Wild Relatives of Cultivated Plants in India. A Reservoir of Alternative Genetic Resources and More . Singapore : Springer , 233 – 248 . South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI). ( 2020 ). SANBI Plant DNA Bank . https://www.sanbi.org/biodiversity/foundations/biosystematics-collections/dna-bank/ (Date accessed: 2020-07-14 ). De Souza , Y. G. & Greenspan , J. S. ( 2013 ). Biobanking Past, Present and Future: Responsibilities andBenefits. AIDS (London , England ) 27 , 303 . OpenUrl ↵ Spooner , D. M. & Ruess , H . ( 2014a ). Curating DNA specimens . In Salick , J. , Konchar , K. & Nesbitt , M . (eds) Curating biocultural collections. A handbook . Chicago, IL : University of Chicago Press ., 97 – 106 . ↵ Spooner , D. M. & Ruess , H. ( 2014b ). DNA banking for the 21st century: proceedings of the US Workshop on DNA Banking . In Applequist , W. L. , & Campbell , L. M . (eds). DNA banking for the 21st century: proceedings of the US Workshop on DNA Banking St. Louis: Missouri Botanical Garden , 71 – 80 . ↵ Staats , M. , Cuenca , A. , Richardson , J. E. , Vrielink-Van Ginkel , R. & Petersen , G. ( 2011 ). DNA Damage in Plant Herbarium Tissue . PLoS ONE 6 , 28448 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Steffen , W. , Broadgate , W. , Deutsch , L. , Gaffney , O. , & Ludwig , C . ( 2015 ). The trajectory of the Anthropocene: the great acceleration . The anthropocene review 2 , 81 – 98 . OpenUrl CrossRef Suárez , A. V. & Tsutsui , N. D . ( 2004 ). The value of museum collections for research and society . BioScience 54 , 66 . OpenUrl CrossRef Web of Science ↵ Thormann , I. , Dullooo , M. & Engels , J . ( 2006 ). Techniques for ex situ plant conservation . In Henry , R. J . (ed.). Plant conservation genetics . Food Products Press (Crc Press ), 7 – 36 . ↵ Traveset , A. , Tur , C. & Eguíluz , V. M . ( 2017 ). Plant survival and keystone pollinator species in stochastic coextinction models: Role of intrinsic dependence on animal- pollination . Scientific Reports 7 , 1 – 10 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) ( 2024 ) Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species . https://www.iucnredlist.org/ (Date accessed: 2020-07-14 ). United Nations (UN ) ( 2021 ) The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation . chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.bgci.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/GSPC_flyer.pdf#:~:text=Target%201%3A%20An%20online%20Flora,the%20Strategy%20developed%20and%20shared. (Date accessed: 2021-03-19 ). ↵ Universidad de Oviedo ( 2023 ) Herbario del Departamento de Biología de Organismos y Sistemas-Organización general . https://herbario.uniovi.es/organizacion (Date accessed: 2023-03-02 ). ↵ Urban , M. C . ( 2015 ). Accelerating extinction risk from climate change . Science 348 , 571 – 573 . OpenUrl Abstract / FREE Full Text ↵ Batley , J De Vere , N. , Rich , T. C. G. , Trinder , S. A. & Long , C . ( 2016 ). DNA Barcoding for plants . In Batley , J . (ed.) Plant Genotyping. Methods in Molecular Biology. Methods and Protocols 1245 . New York, NY : Humana Press , 101 – 118 . OpenUrl ↵ Vilà , M. , Espinar , J. L. , Hejda , M. , Hulme , P. E. , Jarošík , V. , Maron , J. L. , Pergl , J. , Schaffner, U.,Sun, Y. & Pyšek, P. ( 2011 ). Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants: a metaLanalysis of their effects on species, communities and ecosystems . Ecology letters 14 , 702 – 708 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed De Vos , J. M. , Joppa , L. N. , ittleman, J. L., Stephens, P. R. & Pimm, S. L. ( 2015 ). Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction . Conservation Biology 29 , 452 – 462 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Wan , E. , Akana , M. , Pons , J. , Chen , J. , Musone , S. , Kwok , P. Y. & Liao , W . ( 2010 ). Green technologies for room temperature nucleic acid storage . Current Issues in Molecular Biology 12 , 135 – 142 . OpenUrl PubMed ↵ Watson , P. H . ( 2014 ). Biobank Classification: Communicating Biorepository Diversity . Biopreservation and Biobanking 12 , 163 – 164 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Webster , M. S Webster , M. S . ( 2017 ). The Extended Specimen . In Webster , M. S . (ed.) The Extended Specimen: Emerging frontiers in collections-based ornithological research . Boca Ratón : CRC Press , 1 – 9 . ↵ Westphal , M. I. , Browne , M. , MacKinnon , K. , & Noble , I . ( 2008 ). The link between international trade and the global distribution of invasive alien species . Biological invasions 10 , 391 – 398 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Zhang , X World Health Organization (WHO) ( 2003 ). Common technical aspects of good agricultutal practices for medical plantas and good collection practices for medical plants . In Zhang , X . (ed.) WHO guidelines on good agricultural and collection practices [GACP] for medicinal plants . Geneva : World Health Organization (WHO) , 17 – 26 . ↵ Cloud , J. G. Thorgaard , G. H Wildt , D. E. , Seal , U. S. & Rall , W. F . ( 1993 ). Genetic resource banks and reproductive technology for wildlife conservation . In Cloud , J. G. & Thorgaard , G. H . (eds) Genetic Conservation of Salmonid Fishes NATO ASI Series . Boston, MA : Springer , 159 – 173 . ↵ Wilkinson , M. D. , Dumontier , M. , Aalbersberg , Ij. J. , Appleton , G. , Axton , M. , Baak , A. , Blomberg , N. , Boiten , J.-W. , da Silva Santos , L. B. , Bourne , P. E. , Bouwman , J. , Brookes , A. J. , Clark , T. , Crosas , M. , Dillo , I. , et al. , ( 2016 ). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship . Scientific Data 3 , 1 – 9 . OpenUrl ↵ Williams , C. ( 2019 ). Rights over genetic resources and ways of monitoring the value chain . A case study from the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew . In Chege Kamau , E . (ed.) Implementation of the Nagoya Protocol Fulfilling new obligations among emerging issues 137 – 141 . ↵ Williams , C. , Walsh , A. , Vaglica , V. , Sirakaya , A. , Silva , M. da , Dalle , G. , Winterton , D. , Annecke , W. , Smith , P. , Kersey , P. J. , Way , M. , Antonelli , A. & Cowell , C . ( 2020 ). Conservation Policy: Helping or hindering science to unlock properties of plants and fungi. Plants, People , Planet 2 , 535 – 545 . OpenUrl ↵ Williams , P. C. , Beardsley , J. , Isaacs , D. , Preisz , A. & Marais , B. J . ( 2023 ). The impact of climate change and biodiversity loss on the health of children: An ethical perspective . Frontiers in Public Health 10 , 1048317 . OpenUrl CrossRef PubMed ↵ Willis , K.J. (ed.) ( 2017 ). State of the World’s Plants 2017. Report . Kew Royal Botanic Gardens (Kew): Sfumato Foundation . ↵ Wilson , E. O . ( 1985 ). The biological diversity crisis: A Challenge to Science . Issues in Science and Technology 2 , 20 – 29 . OpenUrl ↵ Zimkus , B. M. & Ford , L. S . ( 2014a ). Best practices for genetic resources associated with natural history collections: Recommendations for practical implementation . Collection Forum 28 , 77 – 112 . OpenUrl CrossRef ↵ Zimkus , B. M. & Ford , L. S. ( 2014b ). Genetic resource collections associated with Natural History Museums: A survey and analysis to establish a benchmark of standards 1 . In Applequist , W. L. & Campbell , L.M . (eds). DNA banking for the 21st century: Proceedings of the US workshop on DNA banking . St. Louis: Missouri Botanical Garden , 9 – 44 . ↵ Zúñiga , J. D. , Gostel , M. R. , Mulcahy , D. G. , Barker , K. , Hill , A. , Sedaghatpour , M. , Vo , S. Q. , Funk , V. A. & Coddington , J. A . ( 2017 ). Data release: DNA barcodes of plant species collected for the Global Genome Initiative for Gardens Program, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution . PhytoKeys 88 , 119 – 122 . OpenUrl CrossRef View the discussion thread. Back to top Previous Next Posted May 23, 2025. Download PDF Email Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv. NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article. Your Email * Your Name * Send To * Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas. You are going to email the following Extending Specimens to save Plant DNA: structuring Department DNA collections in times of Biodiversity loss Message Subject (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv Message Body (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website. Your Personal Message CAPTCHA This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Share Extending Specimens to save Plant DNA: structuring Department DNA collections in times of Biodiversity loss Claudia González-Toral , Eduardo Cires bioRxiv 2025.05.20.655165; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.05.20.655165 Share This Article: Copy Citation Tools Extending Specimens to save Plant DNA: structuring Department DNA collections in times of Biodiversity loss Claudia González-Toral , Eduardo Cires bioRxiv 2025.05.20.655165; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.05.20.655165 Citation Manager Formats BibTeX Bookends EasyBib EndNote (tagged) EndNote 8 (xml) Medlars Mendeley Papers RefWorks Tagged Ref Manager RIS Zotero Tweet Widget Facebook Like Google Plus One Subject Area Plant Biology Subject Areas All Articles Animal Behavior and Cognition (7640) Biochemistry (17706) Bioengineering (13902) Bioinformatics (41978) Biophysics (21465) Cancer Biology (18611) Cell Biology (25528) Clinical Trials (138) Developmental Biology (13387) Ecology (19920) Epidemiology (2067) Evolutionary Biology (24332) Genetics (15615) Genomics (22519) Immunology (17747) Microbiology (40424) Molecular Biology (17194) Neuroscience (88662) Paleontology (667) Pathology (2839) Pharmacology and Toxicology (4827) Physiology (7650) Plant Biology (15160) Scientific Communication and Education (2046) Synthetic Biology (4302) Systems Biology (9826) Zoology (2271)