Increasing the impact of vertebrate scientific collections through 3D imaging: The openVertebrate (oVert) Thematic Collections Network

David C Blackburn; Doug M Boyer; Jaimi A Gray; Julie Winchester; John M Bates; Stephanie L Baumgart; Emily Braker; Daryl Coldren; Kevin W Conway; Alison Davis Rabosky; Noé de la Sancha; Casey B Dillman; Jonathan L Dunnum; Catherine M Early; Benjamin W Frable; Matt W Gage; James Hanken; Jessica A Maisano; Ben D Marks; Katherine P Maslenikov; John E McCormack; Ramon S Nagesan; Gregory G Pandelis; Heather L Prestridge; Daniel L Rabosky; Zachary S Randall; Mark B Robbins; Lauren A Scheinberg; Carol L Spencer; Adam P Summers; Leif Tapanila; Cody W Thompson; Luke Tornabene; Greg J Watkins-Colwell; Luke J Welton; oVert Project Team; Edward L Stanley

doi:10.1093/biosci/biad120

Increasing the impact of vertebrate scientific collections through 3D imaging: The openVertebrate (oVert) Thematic Collections Network

Bioscience. 2024 Mar 6;74(3):169-186. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biad120. eCollection 2024 Mar.

Authors

David C Blackburn^{1

2}, Doug M Boyer³, Jaimi A Gray^{1

2}, Julie Winchester³, John M Bates⁴, Stephanie L Baumgart⁵, Emily Braker⁶, Daryl Coldren⁴, Kevin W Conway⁷, Alison Davis Rabosky⁸, Noé de la Sancha⁹, Casey B Dillman¹⁰, Jonathan L Dunnum¹¹, Catherine M Early¹², Benjamin W Frable¹³, Matt W Gage¹⁴, James Hanken¹⁴, Jessica A Maisano¹⁵, Ben D Marks⁴, Katherine P Maslenikov¹⁶, John E McCormack¹⁷, Ramon S Nagesan⁸, Gregory G Pandelis⁸, Heather L Prestridge⁷, Daniel L Rabosky⁸, Zachary S Randall^{1

2}, Mark B Robbins¹⁸, Lauren A Scheinberg¹⁹, Carol L Spencer²⁰, Adam P Summers¹⁶, Leif Tapanila²¹, Cody W Thompson, Luke Tornabene¹⁶, Greg J Watkins-Colwell²², Luke J Welton¹⁸; oVert Project Team; Edward L Stanley^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Florida Museum of Natural History (FLMNH), University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States.
² Blackburn served as the lead principal investigator for the oVert Thematic Collections Network.
³ Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States.
⁴ Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois, United States.
⁵ University of Chicago and University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States.
⁶ University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, United States.
⁷ Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States.
⁸ University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States.
⁹ Chicago State University DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois, United States.
¹⁰ Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States.
¹¹ Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States.
¹² FLMNH Science Museum of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States.
¹³ Scripps Institute of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, United States.
¹⁴ Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States.
¹⁵ University of Texas Austin, Austin, Texas, United States.
¹⁶ University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States.
¹⁷ Occidental College, Los Angeles, California, United States.
¹⁸ University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, United States.
¹⁹ California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California, United States.
²⁰ University of California, Berkeley, in Berkeley, California, United States.
²¹ Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, United States.
²² Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States.

Abstract

The impact of preserved museum specimens is transforming and increasing by three-dimensional (3D) imaging that creates high-fidelity online digital specimens. Through examples from the openVertebrate (oVert) Thematic Collections Network, we describe how we created a digitization community dedicated to the shared vision of making 3D data of specimens available and the impact of these data on a broad audience of scientists, students, teachers, artists, and more. High-fidelity digital 3D models allow people from multiple communities to simultaneously access and use scientific specimens. Based on our multiyear, multi-institution project, we identify significant technological and social hurdles that remain for fully realizing the potential impact of digital 3D specimens.

Keywords: comparative anatomy; computed tomography (CT); data sharing; light scanning; natural history collections; photogrammetry.

Publication types

Review