Pros and cons, and potentials of citizen science in mapping of biodiversity at a local level: case study of South Stoke Parish, UK

Abstract

Despite the importance, contribution, and impact of Citizen Science, little is known about its utilization for biodiversity mapping at the local level. This study evaluates the Pros and Cons, and Potentials of such a scheme, using South Stoke Parish, UK, as a case study. The Parish biodiversity data collected over the last decade through Citizen Science by the South Stoke Wildlife and Conservation Group was used for biodiversity mapping using ArcGIS. Additionally, habitat quality modelling of the area was conducted using InVEST modelling software. The results revealed over 750 species of terrestrial organisms in the Parish. These include Annelids; Arthropods [(Centipedes and Millipedes, Arachnids (mites, harvestmen, spiders, scorpions), Insects, Terrestrial Crustacean)]; Mollusc; and Vertebrates (Aves, Terrestrial mammals, Reptiles and amphibians). The Citizen Science data facilitated the establishment of the current biodiversity status and the creation of spatial biodiversity maps for the area. In conjunction with InVEST modelling, it helped identify key factors influencing biodiversity distribution (mainly Land use pattern, transportation facilities, and green spaces); as well as environmental variables responsible for localisation of habitat sensitive species (e.g. amphibians). The study results are further discussed alongside other literatures, and appropriate recommendations and conclusions are made for improved actions, and best practices in such schemes to ensure data reliability. It is thus concluded that robust sampling strategies, well-defined monitoring methodologies, training of Citizen Science participants, and collaboration with volunteer experts such as practicing professionals and academia, will help harness the invaluable potential of Citizen Science for local biodiversity mapping.

Keywords

Citizen science / Biodiversity mapping / South stoke Parish / Pros and cons / Potential

References

[1] AiY, SunC, TieJ, CaiX. Research on recognition model of crop diseases and insect pests based on deep learning in harsh environments. IEEE Access, 2020, 8: 171686-171693.

[2] AlfeusM, IrishJ, BirkhoferK. Recognition and completeness metrics from iNaturalist and GBIF can inform future citizen science and research projects: a case study on arthropods in Namibia. Biodivers Conserv, 2024.

[3] AltieriMA. How best can we use biodiversity in agroecosystems?. Outlook Agric, 1991, 20(1): 15-23.

[4] AnđelkovićA, Lawson HandleyL, MarchanteE, AdriaensT, BrownP, TricarioE, VerbruggeL. A review of volunteers’ motivations to monitor and control invasive alien species. NeoBiota, 2022, 73: 153-175.

[5] ArazyO, Kaplan-MintzK, MalkinsonD, NagarY. A local community on a global collective intelligence platform: a case study of individual preferences and collective bias in ecological citizen science. PLoS ONE, 2024, 198. e0308552

[6] Armstrong H (2015) The benefits of woodland: unlocking the potential of the Scottish uplands. Part II–supporting evidence. Penecuik, Midlothian, pp 153

[7] AttisanoA, TregenzaT, MooreAJ, MoorePJ. Oosorption and migratory strategy of the milkweed bug, Oncopeltus fasciatus. Anim Behav, 2013, 86(3): 651-657.

[8] AugustT, FoxR, RoyDB, PocockMJO. Data-derived metrics describing the behaviour of field-based citizen scientists provide insights for project design and modelling bias. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 77-83.

[9] AzmySN, TarmidiZ, HassanN, JohariSA, Shamsir OmarMS. Biodiversity data crowdsourcing: a way forward. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci, 2024, 14121. 012023

[10] BaiH, WengL. Do more efficient transport facilities improve habitat quality? Evidence from China. Sustain Cities Soc, 2024, 102. 105243

[11] BaileyS. Increasing connectivity in fragmented landscapes: an investigation of evidence for biodiversity gain in woodlands. For Ecol Manag, 2007, 238(1–3): 7-23.

[12] BaleJS, WaltersKFA. Overwintering biology as a guide to the establishment potential of non-native arthropods in the UK. Environ Anim Dev, 2024.

[13] BalmfordA, GastonKJ. Why biodiversity surveys are good value. Nature, 1999, 398(6724): 204-205.

[14] BaralH, KeenanRJ, SharmaSK, StorkNE, KaselS. Spatial assessment and mapping of biodiversity and conservation priorities in a heavily modified and fragmented production landscape in north-central Victoria, Australia. Ecol Ind, 2014, 36: 552-562.

[15] BatemanR. Current status of botanical recording in Britain and Ireland. J Hardy Orchid Soc, 2024, 21(1): 12-27

[16] BonneyR, PhillipsTB, BallardHL, EnckJW. Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science?. Public Underst Sci, 2015, 25(1): 2-16.

[17] Boundary-Line™ [SHAPE geospatial data], Scale 1:10000, Tiles: GB, Updated: 23 April 2022, Ordnance Survey (GB), Using: EDINA Digimap Ordnance Survey Service. https://digimap.edina.ac.uk. Accessed on 2022June 07

[18] Breeze T, Fernandez M, McCallum I, Morán-Ordóñez A, Pereira H, Junker J (2023) D3.4 cost-effectiveness analysis of monitoring schemes. https://doi.org/10.3897/arphapreprints.e105599

[19] Brodie A, Felstead A, Franklin J, Pinfield L, Oldfield J (eds) (2001) Directory of British architects, 1834-1914: vol. 2 (LZ) (vol 2). A&C Black, Bloomsbury Publishing, London, UK. ISBN 0-8264-5513-1

[20] BrownED, WilliamsBK. The potential for citizen science to produce reliable and useful information in ecology. Conserv Biol, 2018, 33(3): 561-569.

[21] BunceRGH, BogersMMB, EvansD, HaladaL, JongmanRHG, MucherCA, BauchB, de BlustG, ParrTW, Olsvig-WhittakerL. The significance of habitats as indicators of biodiversity and their links to species. Ecol Ind, 2013, 33: 19-25.

[22] BurbidgeA, WilliamsM, AbbottI. Mammals of Australian islands: factors influencing species richness. J Biogeogr, 1997, 24(6): 703-715.

[23] BurgessHK, DeBeyLB, FroehlichHE, SchmidtN, TheobaldEJ, EttingerAK, HilleRisLambersJ, TewksburyJ, ParrishJK. The science of citizen science: exploring barriers to use as a primary research tool. Biol Cons, 2017, 208: 113-120.

[24] BurtonV, MoseleyD, BrownC, MetzgerMJ, BellamyP. Reviewing the evidence base for the effects of woodland expansion on biodiversity and ecosystem services in the United Kingdom. For Ecol Manag, 2018, 430: 366-379.

[25] CallaghanCT, PooreAGB, HofmannM, RobertsCJ, PereiraHM. Large-bodied birds are over-represented in unstructured citizen science data. Sci Rep, 2021, 11(1): 75-89.

[26] CaroC, MarquesJC, CunhaPP, TeixeiraZ. Ecosystem services as a resilience descriptor in habitat risk assessment using the InVEST model. Ecol Ind, 2020, 115. 106426

[27] ChiY, QianT, ShengC, XiC, WangJ. Analysis of differences in the spatial distribution among Terrestrial Mammals using geodetector—a case study of China. ISPRS Int J Geo Inf, 2021, 10121.

[28] ChisomON, BiuPW, UmohAA, ObaedoBO, AdegbiteAO, AbatanA. Reviewing the role of AI in environmental monitoring and conservation: a data-driven revolution for our planet. World J Adv Res Rev, 2024, 21(1): 161-171.

[29] Christie E (2022) Analysis and geovisualisation of biodiversity monitoring data. Doctoral dissertation, Palacký University, Olomouc

[30] ConradCC, HilcheyKG. A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environ Monit Assess, 2010, 176(1–4): 273-291.

[31] CrociS, ButetA, GeorgesA, AguejdadR, ClergeauP. Small urban woodlands as biodiversity conservation hot-spot: a multi-taxon approach. Landsc Ecol, 2008, 23(10): 1171-1186.

[32] DaltonDT, BergerV, AdamsV, BothaJ, HalloyS, KirchmeirH, SovincA, SteinbauerK, ŠvaraV, JungmeierM. A conceptual framework for biodiversity monitoring programs in conservation areas. Sustainability, 2023, 1586779.

[33] DaviesZG, PullinAS. Are hedgerows effective corridors between fragments of woodland habitat? An evidence-based approach. Landsc Ecol, 2007, 22(3): 333-351.

[34] DentD, BinksRHInsect pest management, 20203New York. CABI Digital Library. .

[35] Di MarcoM, PacificiM, MaioranoL, RondininiC. Drivers of change in the realised climatic niche of terrestrial mammals. Ecography, 2021, 44(8): 1180-1190.

[36] DickinsonJL, ZuckerbergB, BonterDN. Citizen science as an ecological research tool: challenges and benefits. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst, 2010, 41(1): 149-172.

[37] DoddM. How the citizen science platform iSpot ensures data accuracy during and after collection. Biodivers Inf Sci Stand, 2022, 6. e94578

[38] EisenL, EisenRJ. Benefits and drawbacks of citizen science to complement traditional data gathering approaches for medically important hard ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) in the United States. J Med Entomol, 2021, 58(1): 1-9.

[39] FalkBG, SnowRW, ReedRN. Prospects and limitations of citizen science in invasive species management: a case study with Burmese Pythons in Everglades National Park. Southeast Nat, 2016, 15(sp8): 89-102.

[40] FraislD, HagerG, BedessemB, GoldM, HsingP-Y, DanielsenF, HitchcockCB, HulbertJM, PieraJ, SpiersH, ThielM, HaklayM. Citizen science in environmental and ecological sciences. Nat Rev Methods Primers, 2022, 2164.

[41] FrancisRJ, KingsfordRT, BrandisKJ. Using drones and citizen science counts to track colonial waterbird breeding, an indicator for ecosystem health on the Chobe River, Botswana. Glob Ecol Conserv, 2022, 38. e02231

[42] GanzevoortW, van den BornRJG, HalffmanW, TurnhoutS. Sharing biodiversity data: citizen scientists’ concerns and motivations. Biodivers Conserv, 2017, 26(12): 2821-2837.

[43] GB Woody Linear Features Framework [FileGeoDatabase geospatial data], Scale 1:50000, Tiles: GB, Updated: 7 November 2016, CEH, Using: EDINA Environment Digimap Service. https://digimap.edina.ac.uk. Accessed on 2022 Aug, 30

[44] GibbsJP. Distribution of woodland amphibians along a forest fragmentation gradient. Landsc Ecol, 1998, 13(4): 263-268.

[45] HaklayM, DörlerD, HeiglF, ManzoniM, HeckerS, VohlandK. What is citizen science? The challenges of definition. Sci Citiz Sci, 2021.

[46] HartelT, OellererK. Local turnover and factors influencing the persistence of amphibians in permanent ponds from the Saxon landscapes of Transylvania. North-Western J Zool, 2009, 5(1): 61-76

[47] HarveyM. Using iRecord to support site-based recording. Conserv Land Manag, 2018, 16(4): 25-29

[48] HillDSThe economic importance of insects, 2012, Berlin. Springer.

[49] HuangM, GongD, ZhangL, LinH, ChenY, ZhuD, XiaoC, AltanO. Spatiotemporal dynamics and forecasting of ecological security pattern under the consideration of protecting habitat: a case study of the Poyang Lake ecoregion. Int J Digital Earth, 2024, 17(1): 56-71.

[50] HughesAC, OrrMC, YangQ, QiaoH. Effectively and accurately mapping global biodiversity patterns for different regions and taxa. Glob Ecol Biogeogr, 2021, 30(7): 1375-1388.

[51] Jäckel D, Mortega KG, Sturm U, Brockmeyer U, Khorramshahi O, Voigt-Heucke SL (2021) Opportunities andlimitations: a comparative analysis of citizen science and expert recordings for bioacoustic research. Plos one 16(6):e0253763

[52] JohnstonA, MatechouE, DennisEB. Outstanding challenges and future directions for biodiversity monitoring using citizen science data. Methods Ecol Evol, 2022, 14(1): 103-116.

[53] JonesIL, BullJW, Milner-GullandEJ, EsipovAV, SuttleKB. Quantifying habitat impacts of natural gas infrastructure to facilitate biodiversity offsetting. Ecol Evol, 2014, 4(1): 79-90.

[54] JordanRC, GraySA, HoweDV, BrooksWR, EhrenfeldJG. Knowledge gain and behavioral change in citizen-science programs. Conserv Biol, 2011, 25(6): 1148-1154.

[55] JumawanJ. Mangrove biodiversity, GIS weighted overlay analysis, and mapping of suitable areas in Alabel, Sarangani Province, Philippines. J Ecosyst Sci Eco-Govern, 2022.

[56] KassJM, GuénardB, DudleyKL, JenkinsCN, AzumaF, FisherBL, ParrCL, GibbH, LonginoJT, WardPS, ChaoA, LubertazziD, WeiserM, JetzW, GuralnickR, BlatrixR, LauriersJD, DonosoDA, GeorgiadisC, EconomoEP. The global distribution of known and undiscovered ant biodiversity. Sci Adv, 2022, 831.

[57] KellingS, JohnstonA, BonnA, FinkD, Ruiz-GutierrezV, BonneyR, FernandezM, HochachkaWM, JulliardR, KraemerR, GuralnickR. Using semistructured surveys to improve Citizen science data for monitoring biodiversity. Bioscience, 2019, 69(3): 170-179.

[58] KhaliqAM, JavedM, SohailM, SagheerM. Environmental effects on insects and their population dynamics. J Entomol Zool Stud, 2014, 2(2): 1-7

[59] KötheS, SchneiderFD, BakanovN, BrühlCA, EichlerL, FickelT, GemeinholzerB, HörrenT, LuxA, MeinelG, SchäfflerL, ScherberC, SorgM, SwensonSJ, TerlauW, TurckA, ZizkaVMA, LehmannGUC, MühlethalerR. Improving insect conservation management through insect monitoring and stakeholder involvement. Biodivers Conserv, 2022, 32(2): 691-713.

[60] Lahoz-MonfortJJ, MagrathMJL. A comprehensive overview of technologies for species and habitat monitoring and conservation. Bioscience, 2021, 71(10): 1038-1062.

[61] Lobel MD (ed) (1962) A history of the county of Oxford: volume 7: Thame and Dorchester hundreds. Victoria County History, Oxford, pp 93–112

[62] Loiselle S, Bishop I, Moorhouse H, Pilat C, Koelman E, Nelson R, Clymans W, Pratt J, Lewis V (2024) Citizen scientists filling knowledge gaps of phosphate pollution dynamics in rural areas. Environ Monit Assess 196(2):220

[63] MaesMJA, PiraniM, BoothER, ShenC, MilliganB, JonesKE, ToledanoMB. Benefit of woodland and other natural environments for adolescents’ cognition and mental health. Nat Sustainab, 2021, 4(10): 851-858.

[64] OS MasterMap® Topography Layer [FileGeoDatabase geospatial data], Scale 1:1250, Tiles: GB, Updated: 18 November 2021, Ordnance Survey (GB), Using: EDINA Digimap Ordnance Survey Service. https://digimap.edina.ac.uk. Accessed on 2022 June, 07

[65] McKinleyDC, Miller-RushingAJ, BallardHL, BonneyR, BrownH, Cook-PattonSC, EvansDM, FrenchRA, ParrishJK, PhillipsTB, RyanSF, ShanleyLA, ShirkJL, StepenuckKF, WeltzinJF, WigginsA, BoyleOD, BriggsRD, ChapinSF, et al.. Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection. Biol Conserv, 2017, 208: 15-28.

[66] MengistW, SoromessaT, FeyisaGL. Landscape change effects on habitat quality in a forest biosphere reserve: implications for the conservation of native habitats. J Clean Prod, 2021, 329. 129778

[67] MillerDH, GetzLL. Factors influencing local distribution and species diversity of forest small mammals in New England. Can J Zool, 1977, 55(5): 806-814.

[68] MitchellN, TriskaM, LiberatoreA, AshcroftL, WeatherillR, LongneckerN. Benefits and challenges of incorporating citizen science into university education. PLoS ONE, 2017, 1211. e0186285

[69] NagendraH. Using remote sensing to assess biodiversity. Int J Remote Sens, 2001, 22(12): 2377-2400.

[70] NichollsCI, AltieriMA. Plant biodiversity enhances bees and other insect pollinators in agroecosystems. A review. Agron Sustain Dev, 2012, 33(2): 257-274.

[71] OuthwaiteCL, PowneyGD, AugustTA, ChandlerRE, RorkeS, PescottOL, HarveyM, RoyHE, FoxR, RoyDB, AlexanderK, BallS, BantockT, BarberT, BeckmannBC, CookT, FlanaganJ, FowlesA, HammondP, IsaacNJB. Annual estimates of occupancy for bryophytes, lichens and invertebrates in the UK, 1970–2015. Sci Data, 2019, 61. s41597

[72] PeberdyRB. From goring towards henley: the course, history and significance of a medieval Oxfordshire Routeway. Oxoniensia, 2012, 77: 91-105

[73] PeterM, DiekötterT, HöfflerT, KremerK. Biodiversity citizen science: outcomes for the participating citizens. People Nat, 2021, 3(2): 294-311.

[74] PetersonA, HerkülK. Mapping benthic biodiversity using georeferenced environmental data and predictive modeling. Mar Biodivers, 2019, 49(1): 131-146.

[75] Pocock MJ, Chapman DS, Sheppard LJ, Roy HE (2014) Choosing and Using Citizen Science: a guide to when and how to use citizen science to monitor biodiversity and the environment. NERC/Centre for Ecology & Hydrology. UKCEH Fellows, Pywell Watt. https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/510644

[76] Rahmati Y (2024) Artificial intelligence for sustainable urban biodiversity: a framework for monitoring and conservation. arXiv:2501.14766, https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.14766

[77] RocheJ, BellL, GalvãoC, GolumbicYN, KloetzerL, KnobenN, LaaksoM, LorkeJ, MannionG, MassettiL, MauchlineA, PataK, RuckA, TarabaP, WinterS. Citizen science, education, and learning: challenges and opportunities. Front Sociol, 2020, 5: 78-89.

[78] SandströmUG, AngelstamP, MikusińskiG. Ecological diversity of birds in relation to the structure of urban green space. Landsc Urban Plan, 2006, 77(1–2): 39-53.

[79] ScudderGGE. The importance of insects. Insect Biodivers, 2017.

[80] Seijmonsbergen H, McMeekin J, Rentier E, Polman E, Rijsdijk K (2019) Refining geodiversity variables for monitoring global mining. In: Proceedings of 22nd EGU general assembly. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-1699

[81] ShihW-Y, MabonL, Puppim de OliveiraJA. Assessing governance challenges of local biodiversity and ecosystem services: barriers identified by the expert community. Land Use Policy, 2020, 91. 104291

[82] SkaldinaO, SorvariJ. Ecotoxicological effects of heavy metal pollution on economically important terrestrial insects. Netw Mutagens Environ Toxicol, 2019.

[83] SofaerHR, JarnevichCS, PearseIS, SmythRL, AuerS, CookGL, EdwardsTC, GualaGF, HowardTG, MorisetteJT, HamiltonH. Development and delivery of species distribution models to inform decision-making. Bioscience, 2019, 69(7): 544-557.

[84] Soil Parent Material Model [SHAPE geospatial data], Scale 1:50000, Tiles: su48, su68, Updated: 1 December 2018, BGS, Using: EDINA Geology Digimap Service. https://digimap.edina.ac.uk. Accessed on 2022Aug 26

[85] South Stoke wildlife and conservation group (2025) https://www.southstokewildlife.org/aboutus. Accessed on 12/02/2025 @11.51 GMT

[86] StephensonP. Technological advances in biodiversity monitoring: applicability, opportunities and challenges. Curr Opin Environ Sustainab, 2020, 45: 36-41.

[87] StrasserBJ, BaudryJ, MahrD, SanchezG, TancoigneE. “Citizen science”? Rethinking science and public participation. Sci Technol Stud, 2018, 234: 52-76.

[88] Strategi® [SHAPE geospatial data], Scale 1:250000, Tiles: GB, Updated: 17 November 2015, Ordnance Survey (GB), Using: EDINA Digimap Ordnance Survey Service. https://digimap.edina.ac.uk. Accessed on 2022 June, 07

[89] TempletonAR, ShawK, RoutmanE, DavisSK. The genetic consequences of habitat fragmentation. Ann Mo Bot Gard, 1990, 77113.

[90] ThammanuS, MarodD, HanH, BhusalN, AsanokL, KetdeeP, GaewsinghaN, LeeS, ChungJ. The influence of environmental factors on species composition and distribution in a community forest in Northern Thailand. J for Res, 2020, 32(2): 649-662.

[91] ThomasS. Chromatomyia isicae (Hering)(Diptera, Agromyzidae) new to Britain with notes on the identification and distribution of the species of the Chromatomyia milii superspecies. Dipterists Digest Second Ser, 2023, 30(2): 156-163

[92] ThompsonMM, MoonK, WoodsA, RowleyJJL, PooreAGB, KingsfordRT, CallaghanCT. Citizen science participant motivations and behaviour: implications for biodiversity data coverage. Biol Cons, 2023, 282. 110079

[93] ToogoodM. Engaging publics: biodiversity data collection and the geographies of citizen science. Geogr Compass, 2013, 7(9): 611-621.

[94] TullochAIT, PossinghamHP, JosephLN, SzaboJ, MartinTG. Realising the full potential of citizen science monitoring programs. Biol Cons, 2013, 165: 128-138.

[95] TurnerW, SpectorS, GardinerN, FladelandM, SterlingE, SteiningerM. Remote sensing for biodiversity science and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol, 2003, 18(6): 306-314.

[96] TurriniT, DörlerD, RichterA, HeiglF, BonnA. The threefold potential of environmental citizen science-Generating knowledge, creating learning opportunities and enabling civic participation. Biol Cons, 2018, 225: 176-186.

[97] UllahF, SaqibS, XiongY-C. Integrating artificial intelligence in biodiversity conservation: bridging classical and modern approaches. Biodivers Conserv, 2024, 34(1): 45-65.

[98] van der Horst D, Gimona A (2005) Where new farm woodlands support biodiversity action plans: a spatial multi-criteria analysis. Biol Conserv 123(4):421-432

[99] Van VlietK, MooreC. Citizen science initiatives: engaging the public and demystifying science. J Microbiol Biol Educ, 2016, 17(1): 13-16.

[100] VermaAK, PrakashS. Status of animal phyla in different kingdom systems of biological classification. Int J Biol Innov, 2020, 2(2): 149-154.

[101] WangW, FengC, LiuF, LiJ. Biodiversity conservation in China: a review of recent studies and practices. Environ Sci Ecotechnol, 2020, 2. 100025

[102] WhelanCJ, WennyDG, MarquisRJ. Ecosystem services provided by birds. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 2008, 1134(1): 25-60.

[103] WiersmaYF, ClencheT, ErblandM, WachingerG, LukyanenkoR, ParsonsJ. Advantages and drawbacks of open-ended, use-agnostic citizen science data collection: a case study. Citiz Sci Theory Pract, 2024, 915.

[104] WolffA, PaulJ, MartinJ, BretagnolleV. The benefits of extensive agriculture to birds: the case of the little bustard. J Appl Ecol, 2001, 38(5): 963-975.

[105] WoodSA, RobinsonPW, CostaDP, BeltranRS. Accuracy and precision of citizen scientist animal counts from drone imagery. PLoS ONE, 2021, 162. e0244040

[106] WoolleyJP, McGowanML, TeareHJA, CoathupV, FishmanJR, SetterstenRA, SterckxS, KayeJ, JuengstET. Citizen science or scientific citizenship? Disentangling the uses of public engagement rhetoric in national research initiatives. BMC Med Ethics, 2016, 171. s12910

[107] WuL, SunC, FanF. Estimating the Characteristic Spatiotemporal variation in habitat quality using the InVEST model—a case study from Guangdong-Hong Kong–Macao greater bay area. Remote Sensing, 2021, 1351008.

[108] WymanRL. Soil acidity and moisture and the distribution of amphibians in five forests of southcentral New York. Copeia, 1988, 19882394.

[109] Zhongming Z, Linong L, Xiaona Y, Wangqiang Z, Wei L (2020) Insect diversity boosted by combination of crop diversity and semi-natural habitats. Britishecologicalsociety.com. Accessed on 16/04/2023, 17.30

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

The Author(s)