David James Harris

Dr. David James Harris

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

30Years (1997-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
25 July 2012 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
WLWilliam Laurance
William Laurance
DUD. Carolina Useche
D. Carolina Useche
JRJulio Rendeiro
Julio Rendeiro
MKMargareta Kalka
Margareta Kalka
Corey BradshawCorey Bradshaw
Corey Bradshaw
FZFranky Zamzani
Franky Zamzani

9 July 2013 in Global Ecology and Biogeography
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JSJ. W. Ferry Slik
J. W. Ferry Slik
GPGary Paoli
Gary Paoli
KMKrista L McGuire
Krista L McGuire
IAIeda Amaral
Ieda Amaral
JBJorcely Barroso
Jorcely Barroso
NZNicole Zweifel
Nicole Zweifel

6 December 2010 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DBDaniel P. Bebber
Daniel P. Bebber
MCMark A. Carine
Mark A. Carine
JWJohn R. I. Wood
John R. I. Wood
AWAlexandra H. Wortley
Alexandra H. Wortley
DHDavid James Harris
David James Harris
RSRobert W. Scotland
Robert W. Scotland
Despite the importance of species discovery, the processes including collecting, recognizing, and describing new species are poorly understood. Data are presented for flowering plants, measuring quantitatively the lag between the date a specimen of a new species was collected for the first time and when it was subsequently described and published. The data from our sample of new species published between 1970 and 2010 show that only 16% were described within five years of being collected for the first time. The description of the remaining 84% involved much older specimens, with nearly one-quarter of new species descriptions involving specimens >50 y old. Extrapolation of these results suggest that, of the estimated 70,000 species still to be described, more than half already have been collected and are stored in herbaria. Effort, funding, and research focus should, therefore, be directed as much to examining extant herbarium material as collecting new material in the field.

13 November 2023 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LMLidong Mo
Lidong Mo
CZConstantin M. Zohner
Constantin M. Zohner
PRPeter B. Reich
Peter B. Reich
JLJingjing Liang
Jingjing Liang
Sergio de MiguelSergio de Miguel
Sergio de Miguel
TCThomas W. Crowther
Thomas W. Crowther
Forests are a substantial terrestrial carbon sink, but anthropogenic changes in land use and climate have considerably reduced the scale of this system1. Remote-sensing estimates to quantify carbon losses from global forests2–5 are characterized by considerable uncertainty and we lack a comprehensive ground-sourced evaluation to benchmark these estimates. Here we combine several ground-sourced6 and satellite-derived approaches2,7,8 to evaluate the scale of the global forest carbon potential outside agricultural and urban lands. Despite regional variation, the predictions demonstrated remarkable consistency at a global scale, with only a 12% difference between the ground-sourced and satellite-derived estimates. At present, global forest carbon storage is markedly under the natural potential, with a total deficit of 226 Gt (model range = 151–363 Gt) in areas with low human footprint. Most (61%, 139 Gt C) of this potential is in areas with existing forests, in which ecosystem protection can allow forests to recover to maturity. The remaining 39% (87 Gt C) of potential lies in regions in which forests have been removed or fragmented. Although forests cannot be a substitute for emissions reductions, our results support the idea2,3,9 that the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of diverse forests offer valuable contributions to meeting global climate and biodiversity targets.

1 November 2015 in Current Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ZGZoë A. Goodwin
Zoë A. Goodwin
DHDavid James Harris
David James Harris
DFDenis Filer
Denis Filer
JWJohn R.I. Wood
John R.I. Wood
RSRobert W. Scotland
Robert W. Scotland
Specimens of plants and animals preserved in museums are the primary source of verifiable data on the geographical and temporal distribution of organisms. Museum datasets are increasingly being uploaded to aggregated regional and global databases (e.g. the Global Biodiversity Information Facility; GBIF) for use in a wide range of analyses. Thus, digitisation of natural history collections is providing unprecedented information to facilitate the study of the natural world on a global scale. The digitisation of this information utilises information provided on specimen labels, and assumes they are correctly identified. Here we evaluate the accuracy of names associated with 4,500 specimens of African gingers from 40 herbaria in 21 countries. Our data show that at least 58% of the specimens had the wrong name prior to a recent taxonomic study. A similar pattern of wrongly named specimens is also shown for Dipterocarps and Ipomoea (morning glory). We also examine the number of available plant specimens worldwide. Our data demonstrate that, while the world's collections have more than doubled since 1970, more than 50% of tropical specimens, on average, are likely to be incorrectly named. This finding has serious implications for the uncritical use of specimen data from natural history collections.

16 June 2015 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJ. W. Ferry Slik
J. W. Ferry Slik
VAVíctor Arroyo-Rodríguez
Víctor Arroyo-Rodríguez
SAShin-Ichiro Aiba
Shin-Ichiro Aiba
PAPatricia Alvarez-Loayza
Patricia Alvarez-Loayza
LALuciana F. Alves
Luciana F. Alves
EVEduardo M. Venticinque
Eduardo M. Venticinque
Significance: People are fascinated by the amazing diversity of tropical forests and will be surprised to learn that robust estimates of the number of tropical tree species are lacking. We show that there are at least 40,000, but possibly more than 53,000, tree species in the tropics, in contrast to only 124 across temperate Europe. Almost all tropical tree species are restricted to their respective continents, and the Indo-Pacific region appears to be as species-rich as tropical America, with each of these two regions being almost five times as rich in tree species as African tropical forests. Our study shows that most tree species are extremely rare, meaning that they may be under serious risk of extinction at current deforestation rates.