Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Martin Harvey is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Martin Harvey.


Global Change Biology | 2014

Horizon scanning for invasive alien species with the potential to threaten biodiversity in Great Britain

Helen E. Roy; Jodey Peyton; David C. Aldridge; Tristan Bantock; Tim M. Blackburn; Robert Britton; Paul F. Clark; Elizabeth Cook; Katharina Dehnen‐Schmutz; Trevor Dines; Michael Dobson; Francois Edwards; Colin Harrower; Martin Harvey; Dan Minchin; David G. Noble; Dave Parrott; Michael J. O. Pocock; Christopher D. Preston; Sugoto Roy; Andrew Salisbury; Karsten Schönrogge; Jack Sewell; Richard Shaw; Paul Stebbing; Alan J. A. Stewart; Kevin J. Walker

Invasive alien species (IAS) are considered one of the greatest threats to biodiversity, particularly through their interactions with other drivers of change. Horizon scanning, the systematic examination of future potential threats and opportunities, leading to prioritization of IAS threats is seen as an essential component of IAS management. Our aim was to consider IAS that were likely to impact on native biodiversity but were not yet established in the wild in Great Britain. To achieve this, we developed an approach which coupled consensus methods (which have previously been used for collaboratively identifying priorities in other contexts) with rapid risk assessment. The process involved two distinct phases: Preliminary consultation with experts within five groups (plants, terrestrial invertebrates, freshwater invertebrates, vertebrates and marine species) to derive ranked lists of potential IAS. Consensus-building across expert groups to compile and rank the entire list of potential IAS. Five hundred and ninety-one species not native to Great Britain were considered. Ninety-three of these species were agreed to constitute at least a medium risk (based on score and consensus) with respect to them arriving, establishing and posing a threat to native biodiversity. The quagga mussel, Dreissena rostriformis bugensis, received maximum scores for risk of arrival, establishment and impact; following discussions the unanimous consensus was to rank it in the top position. A further 29 species were considered to constitute a high risk and were grouped according to their ranked risk. The remaining 63 species were considered as medium risk, and included in an unranked long list. The information collated through this novel extension of the consensus method for horizon scanning provides evidence for underpinning and prioritizing management both for the species and, perhaps more importantly, their pathways of arrival. Although our study focused on Great Britain, we suggest that the methods adopted are applicable globally.


ZooKeys | 2015

Crowdsourcing the identification of organisms: A case-study of iSpot

Jonathan Silvertown; Martin Harvey; Richard M. Greenwood; Mike Dodd; Jonathan Rosewell; Tony Rebelo; Janice Ansine; Kevin McConway

Abstract Accurate species identification is fundamental to biodiversity science, but the natural history skills required for this are neglected in formal education at all levels. In this paper we describe how the web application ispotnature.org and its sister site ispot.org.za (collectively, “iSpot”) are helping to solve this problem by combining learning technology with crowdsourcing to connect beginners with experts. Over 94% of observations submitted to iSpot receive a determination. External checking of a sample of 3,287 iSpot records verified > 92% of them. To mid 2014, iSpot crowdsourced the identification of 30,000 taxa (>80% at species level) in > 390,000 observations with a global community numbering > 42,000 registered participants. More than half the observations on ispotnature.org were named within an hour of submission. iSpot uses a unique, 9-dimensional reputation system to motivate and reward participants and to verify determinations. Taxon-specific reputation points are earned when a participant proposes an identification that achieves agreement from other participants, weighted by the agreers’ own reputation scores for the taxon. This system is able to discriminate effectively between competing determinations when two or more are proposed for the same observation. In 57% of such cases the reputation system improved the accuracy of the determination, while in the remainder it either improved precision (e.g. by adding a species name to a genus) or revealed false precision, for example where a determination to species level was not supported by the available evidence. We propose that the success of iSpot arises from the structure of its social network that efficiently connects beginners and experts, overcoming the social as well as geographic barriers that normally separate the two.


Journal of Applied Ecology | 2015

Developing and enhancing biodiversity monitoring programmes: a collaborative assessment of priorities

Michael J. O. Pocock; Stuart E. Newson; Ian G. Henderson; Jodey Peyton; William J. Sutherland; David G. Noble; Stuart G. Ball; Björn C. Beckmann; Jeremy Biggs; Tom Brereton; David J. Bullock; Stephen T. Buckland; Mike Edwards; Mark A. Eaton; Martin Harvey; M. O. Hill; Martin Horlock; David S. Hubble; Angela M. Julian; Edward C. Mackey; Darren J. Mann; Matthew J. Marshall; Jolyon M. Medlock; Elaine O'mahony; Marina Pacheco; Keith Porter; Steve Prentice; Deborah A. Procter; Helen E. Roy; Sue E. Southway

Summary Biodiversity is changing at unprecedented rates, and it is increasingly important that these changes are quantified through monitoring programmes. Previous recommendations for developing or enhancing these programmes focus either on the end goals, that is the intended use of the data, or on how these goals are achieved, for example through volunteer involvement in citizen science, but not both. These recommendations are rarely prioritized. We used a collaborative approach, involving 52 experts in biodiversity monitoring in the UK, to develop a list of attributes of relevance to any biodiversity monitoring programme and to order these attributes by their priority. We also ranked the attributes according to their importance in monitoring biodiversity in the UK. Experts involved included data users, funders, programme organizers and participants in data collection. They covered expertise in a wide range of taxa. We developed a final list of 25 attributes of biodiversity monitoring schemes, ordered from the most elemental (those essential for monitoring schemes; e.g. articulate the objectives and gain sufficient participants) to the most aspirational (e.g. electronic data capture in the field, reporting change annually). This ordered list is a practical framework which can be used to support the development of monitoring programmes. Peoples ranking of attributes revealed a difference between those who considered attributes with benefits to end users to be most important (e.g. people from governmental organizations) and those who considered attributes with greatest benefit to participants to be most important (e.g. people involved with volunteer biological recording schemes). This reveals a distinction between focussing on aims and the pragmatism in achieving those aims. Synthesis and applications. The ordered list of attributes developed in this study will assist in prioritizing resources to develop biodiversity monitoring programmes (including citizen science). The potential conflict between end users of data and participants in data collection that we discovered should be addressed by involving the diversity of stakeholders at all stages of programme development. This will maximize the chance of successfully achieving the goals of biodiversity monitoring programmes.


Scientific Reports | 2016

Patterns of contribution to citizen science biodiversity projects increase understanding of volunteers’ recording behaviour

Elizabeth H. Boakes; Gianfranco Gliozzo; Valentine Seymour; Martin Harvey; Chloë Smith; David B. Roy; Muki Haklay

The often opportunistic nature of biological recording via citizen science leads to taxonomic, spatial and temporal biases which add uncertainty to biodiversity estimates. However, such biases may also give valuable insight into volunteers’ recording behaviour. Using Greater London as a case-study we examined the composition of three citizen science datasets – from Greenspace Information for Greater London CIC, iSpot and iRecord - with respect to recorder contribution and spatial and taxonomic biases, i.e. when, where and what volunteers record. We found most volunteers contributed few records and were active for just one day. Each dataset had its own taxonomic and spatial signature suggesting that volunteers’ personal recording preferences may attract them towards particular schemes. There were also patterns across datasets: species’ abundance and ease of identification were positively associated with number of records, as was plant height. We found clear hotspots of recording activity, the 10 most popular sites containing open water. We note that biases are accrued as part of the recording process (e.g. species’ detectability) as well as from volunteer preferences. An increased understanding of volunteer behaviour gained from analysing the composition of records could thus enhance the fit between volunteers’ interests and the needs of scientific projects.


BMC Ecology | 2016

Differences between urban and rural hedges in England revealed by a citizen science project

Laura Gosling; Tim Sparks; Yoseph N. Araya; Martin Harvey; Janice Ansine

BackgroundHedges are both ecologically and culturally important and are a distinctive feature of the British landscape. However the overall length of hedges across Great Britain is decreasing. Current challenges in studying hedges relate to the dominance of research on rural, as opposed to urban, hedges, and their variability and geographical breadth. To help address these challenges and to educate the public on the importance of hedge habitats for wildlife, in 2010 the Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) programme coordinated a hedge-focused citizen science survey.ResultsResults from 2891 surveys were analysed. Woody plant species differed significantly between urban and rural areas. Beech, Holly, Ivy, Laurel, Privet and Yew were more commonly recorded in urban hedges whereas Blackthorn, Bramble, Dog Rose, Elder and Hawthorn were recorded more often in rural hedges. Urban and rural differences were shown for some groups of invertebrates. Ants, earwigs and shieldbugs were recorded more frequently in urban hedges whereas blowflies, caterpillars, harvestmen, other beetles, spiders and weevils were recorded more frequently in rural hedges. Spiders were the most frequently recorded invertebrate across all surveys. The presence of hard surfaces adjacent to the hedge was influential on hedge structure, number and diversity of plant species, amount of food available for wildlife and invertebrate number and diversity. In urban hedges with one adjacent hard surface, the food available for wildlife was significantly reduced and in rural hedges, one adjacent hard surface affected the diversity of invertebrates.ConclusionsThis research highlights that urban hedges may be important habitats for wildlife and that hard surfaces may have an impact on both the number and diversity of plant species and the number and diversity of invertebrates. This study demonstrates that citizen science programmes that focus on hedge surveillance can work and have the added benefit of educating the public on the importance of hedgerow habitats.


Biological Journal of The Linnean Society | 2015

Emerging technologies for biological recording

Tom A. August; Martin Harvey; Paula Lightfoot; David Kilbey; Timos Papadopoulos; Paul Jepson


Advances in Ecological Research | 2016

The Visualisation of Ecological Networks, and Their Use as a Tool for Engagement, Advocacy and Management

Michael J. O. Pocock; Darren M. Evans; Colin Fontaine; Martin Harvey; Romain Julliard; Órla B. McLaughlin; Jonathan Silvertown; Alireza Tamaddoni-Nezhad; Piran C. L. White; David A. Bohan


Archive | 2007

Hand pollination to increase seed-set of red helleborine Cephalanthera rubra in the Chiltern Hills, Buckinghamshire, England

R D Newman; A J Showler; Martin Harvey; D A Showler


Archive | 2016

Design and testing of a national pollinator and pollination monitoring framework

Claire Carvell; Nick J. B. Isaac; Mark Jitlal; Jodey Peyton; Gary D. Powney; David B. Roy; Adam J. Vanbergen; Rory S. O'Connor; Catherine Jones; Bill Kunin; Tom D. Breeze; Michael P. D. Garratt; Simon G. Potts; Martin Harvey; Janet Ansine; Richard F. Comont; Paul Lee; Mike Edwards; Stuart Roberts; Roger Morris; Andy J. Musgrove; Tom Brereton; Cathy Hawes; Helen E. Roy


Archive | 2017

Pantheon: a new resource for invertebrate survey standards and analysis

David Heaver; Jon Webb; David B. Roy; Hannah Dean; Martin Harvey; Craig Macadam; Jon Curson

Collaboration


Dive into the Martin Harvey's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David B. Roy

Natural Environment Research Council

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Helen E. Roy

Anglia Ruskin University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jodey Peyton

Natural Environment Research Council

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David G. Noble

British Trust for Ornithology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge