Nicolas Bailly

Dr. Nicolas Bailly

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
6 July 2017 in BMC Ecology and Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRicardo Betancur-R
Ricardo Betancur-R
EWEdward O. Wiley
Edward O. Wiley
GAGloria Arratia
Gloria Arratia
APArturo Acero P.
Arturo Acero P.
NBNicolas Bailly
Nicolas Bailly
GOGuillermo Orti
Guillermo Orti
Fish classifications, as those of most other taxonomic groups, are being transformed drastically as new molecular phylogenies provide support for natural groups that were unanticipated by previous studies. A brief review of the main criteria used by ichthyologists to define their classifications during the last 50 years, however, reveals slow progress towards using an explicit phylogenetic framework. Instead, the trend has been to rely, in varying degrees, on deep-rooted anatomical concepts and authority, often mixing taxa with explicit phylogenetic support with arbitrary groupings. Two leading sources in ichthyology frequently used for fish classifications (JS Nelson’s volumes of Fishes of the World and W. Eschmeyer’s Catalog of Fishes) fail to adopt a global phylogenetic framework despite much recent progress made towards the resolution of the fish Tree of Life. The first explicit phylogenetic classification of bony fishes was published in 2013, based on a comprehensive molecular phylogeny ( www.deepfin.org ). We here update the first version of that classification by incorporating the most recent phylogenetic results. The updated classification presented here is based on phylogenies inferred using molecular and genomic data for nearly 2000 fishes. A total of 72 orders (and 79 suborders) are recognized in this version, compared with 66 orders in version 1. The phylogeny resolves placement of 410 families, or ~80% of the total of 514 families of bony fishes currently recognized. The ordinal status of 30 percomorph families included in this study, however, remains uncertain (incertae sedis in the series Carangaria, Ovalentaria, or Eupercaria). Comments to support taxonomic decisions and comparisons with conflicting taxonomic groups proposed by others are presented. We also highlight cases were morphological support exist for the groups being classified. This version of the phylogenetic classification of bony fishes is substantially improved, providing resolution for more taxa than previous versions, based on more densely sampled phylogenetic trees. The classification presented in this study represents, unlike any other, the most up-to-date hypothesis of the Tree of Life of fishes.

17 September 2014 in Biodiversity Data Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
YJYde de Jong
Yde de Jong
MVMelina Verbeek
Melina Verbeek
VMVerner Michelsen
Verner Michelsen
PBPer de Place Bjørn
Per de Place Bjørn
WLWouter Los
Wouter Los
LPLyubomir Penev
Lyubomir Penev
Fauna Europaea is Europe's main zoological taxonomic index, making the scientific names and distributions of all living, currently known, multicellular, European land and freshwater animals species integrally available in one authoritative database. Fauna Europaea covers about 260,000 taxon names, including 145,000 accepted (sub)species, assembled by a large network of (>400) leading specialists, using advanced electronic tools for data collations with data quality assured through sophisticated validation routines. Fauna Europaea started in 2000 as an EC funded FP5 project and provides a unique taxonomic reference for many user-groups such as scientists, governments, industries, nature conservation communities and educational programs. Fauna Europaea was formally accepted as an INSPIRE standard for Europe, as part of the European Taxonomic Backbone established in PESI. Fauna Europaea provides a public web portal at faunaeur.org with links to other key biodiversity services, is installed as a taxonomic backbone in wide range of biodiversity services and actively contributes to biodiversity informatics innovations in various initiatives and EC programs.

9 January 2017 in Biodiversity Data Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DPDaphnis De Pooter
Daphnis De Pooter
WAWard Appeltans
Ward Appeltans
NBNicolas Bailly
Nicolas Bailly
SBSky Bristol
Sky Bristol
KDKlaas Deneudt
Klaas Deneudt
FHFrancisco Hernandez
Francisco Hernandez
The Ocean Biogeographic Information System (OBIS) is the world’s most comprehensive online, open-access database of marine species distributions. OBIS grows with millions of new species observations every year. Contributions come from a network of hundreds of institutions, projects and individuals with common goals: to build a scientific knowledge base that is open to the public for scientific discovery and exploration and to detect trends and changes that inform society as essential elements in conservation management and sustainable development. Until now, OBIS has focused solely on the collection of biogeographic data (the presence of marine species in space and time) and operated with optimized data flows, quality control procedures and data standards specifically targeted to these data. Based on requirements from the growing OBIS community to manage datasets that combine biological, physical and chemical measurements, the OBIS-ENV-DATA pilot project was launched to develop a proposed standard and guidelines to make sure these combined datasets can stay together and are not, as is often the case, split and sent to different repositories. The proposal in this paper allows for the management of sampling methodology, animal tracking and telemetry data, biological measurements (e.g., body length, percent live cover, ...) as well as environmental measurements such as nutrient concentrations, sediment characteristics or other abiotic parameters measured during sampling to characterize the environment from which biogeographic data was collected. The recommended practice builds on the Darwin Core Archive (DwC-A) standard and on practices adopted by the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). It consists of a DwC Event Core in combination with a DwC Occurrence Extension and a proposed enhancement to the DwC MeasurementOrFact Extension. This new structure enables the linkage of measurements or facts - quantitative and qualitative properties - to both sampling events and species occurrences, and includes additional fields for property standardization. We also embrace the use of the new parentEventID DwC term, which enables the creation of a sampling event hierarchy. We believe that the adoption of this recommended practice as a new data standard for managing and sharing biological and associated environmental datasets by IODE and the wider international scientific community would be key to improving the effectiveness of the knowledge base, and will enhance integration and management of critical data needed to understand ecological and biological processes in the ocean, and on land.

1 March 2016 in Ecological Modelling
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Gianpaolo CoroGianpaolo Coro
Gianpaolo Coro
CMChiara Magliozzi
Chiara Magliozzi
EBEdward Vanden Berghe
Edward Vanden Berghe
NBNicolas Bailly
Nicolas Bailly
AEAnton Ellenbroek
Anton Ellenbroek
PPPasquale Pagano
Pasquale Pagano

11 March 2020 in Journal of Applied Ichthyology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
AHAmanda Hay
Amanda Hay
WXWeiwei Xian
Weiwei Xian
NBNicolas Bailly
Nicolas Bailly
CLCui Liang
Cui Liang
Daniel M. PaulyDaniel M. Pauly
Daniel M. Pauly
The rationale and a strategy for the estimation of length‐weight relationships (LWR) using preserved specimens of less common fish species in museums is presented, along with preliminary results pertaining to 56 specimens and 31 species of fish from the Australian Museum, Sydney, Australia, the Marine Biological Specimen Museum of Chinese Academy of Sciences in Qingdao, China, and the Beaty Biodiversity Museum of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. These results are discussed in the context of the effects of seasonality (in fresh specimens) and preservation (in museum specimens) on the estimation of LWR parameters.

1 November 2016 in Biodiversity Data Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NBNicolas Bailly
Nicolas Bailly
Vasilis GerovasileiouVasilis Gerovasileiou
Vasilis Gerovasileiou
CAChristos Arvanitidis
Christos Arvanitidis
ALAnastasios Legakis
Anastasios Legakis