References
- 1Archer, L., Dawson, E., Dewitt, J., Seakins, A., and Wong, B. (2015) “Science capital”: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922–948. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21227
- 2Bessey, C., Neil Jarman, S., Simpson, T., Miller, H., Stewart, T., Kenneth Keesing, J., and Berry, O. (2021) Passive eDNA collection enhances aquatic biodiversity analysis. Communications Biology, 4(1). DOI: 10.1038/s42003-021-01760-8
- 3Biggs, J., Ewald, N., Valentini, A., Gaboriaud, C., Dejean, T., Griffiths, R.A., Foster, J., et al. (2015) Using eDNA to develop a national citizen science-based monitoring programme for the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus). Biological Conservation, 183, 19–28. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.029
- 4Bourdieu, P. (1984) A social critique of the judgement of taste. Traducido del francés por R. Nice. Londres, Routledge.
- 5Bowler, D.E., Bjorkman, A.D., Dornelas, M., Myers-Smith, I.H., Navarro, L.M., Niamir, Supp, S.R et al. (2020) Mapping human pressures on biodiversity across the planet uncovers anthropogenic threat complexes. People and Nature, 2(2), 380–394. DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10071
- 6Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. DOI: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
- 7Broadhurst, H.A., Gregory, L.M., Bleakley, E.K., Perkins, J.C., Lavin, J.V., Bolton, P., Browett, S.S., et al. (2021) Mapping differences in mammalian distributions and diversity using environmental DNA from rivers. Science of The Total Environment, 801, 149724. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149724
- 8Broadhurst, H.A., Sales, N.G., Raynor, R., Howe, C., Ochu, E., Lambin, X., Sutherland, C.S., et al. (2025) From water to land: A review on the applications of environmental DNA and invertebrate-derived DNA for monitoring terrestrial and semi-aquatic mammals. Mammal Review,
e70006 . DOI: 10.1111/mam.70006 - 9Clarke, S.J., Long, E., Biggs, J., Bruce, K., Weatherby, A., Harper, L.R., and Hails, R. S. (2023) Co-design of a citizen science study: Unlocking the potential of eDNA for volunteer freshwater monitoring. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 4(3),
e12273 . DOI: 10.1002/2688-8319.12273 - 10Cooper, C.B. (2012) Links and Distinctions Among Citizenship, Science, and Citizen Science. A Reponse to” The Future of Citizen Science.”. Democracy and Education, 20(2), 13.
- 11Cooper, C.B., Hawn, C.L., Larson, L.R., Parrish, J.K., Bowser, G., Cavalier, D., Dunn, R.R. et al. (2021) Inclusion in citizen science: The conundrum of rebranding. Science, 372(6549), 1386–1388. DOI: 10.1126/science.abi6487
- 12Croose, E., Hanniffy, R., Harrington, A., Põdra, M., Gómez, A., Bolton, P.L., Lavin, J.V. et al. (2023) Mink on the brink: comparing survey methods for detecting a critically endangered carnivore, the European mink Mustela lutreola. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 69(2), 34. DOI: 10.1007/s10344-023-01657-3
- 13Danielsen, F., Burgess, N.D., Coronado, I., Enghoff, M., Holt, S., Jensen, P.M., Poulsen, M.K. et al. (2018)
The value of indigenous and local knowledge as citizen science . Pages 110–123 in Hecker S, Haklay M, Boswer A, Makuch Z, Vogel J, Bonn A, eds. Citizen Science. UCL Press. DOI: 10.14324/111.9781787352339 - 14Dickinson, J.L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R.L., Martin, J., Phillips, T. et al. (2012) The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6), 291–297. DOI: 10.1890/110236
- 15Edwards, R., Kirn, S., Hillman, T., Kloetzer, L., Mathieson, K., McDonnell, D., and Phillips, T. (2018)
Learning and developing science capital through citizen science . UCL Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctv550cf2.33 - 16Freitag, A., Meyer, R., and Whiteman, L. (2016) Strategies Employed by Citizen Science Programs to Increase the Credibility of Their Data. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 1(1), 2. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.6
- 17Geoghegan, H., Dyke, A., Pateman, R., West, S., and Everett, G. (2016) Understanding motivations for citizen science. Final report on behalf of UKEOF, University of Reading, Stockholm Environment Institute (University of York) and University of the West of England.
- 18Gold, M. and Ochu, E.E. (2018) Creative collaboration in citizen science and the evolution of ThinkCamps. Citizen science: Innovation in open science, society and policy, 146–167. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctv550cf2.17
- 19Haklay, M., Dörler, D., Heigl, F., Manzoni, M., Hecker, S., and Vohland, K. (2021)
What Is Citizen Science? The Challenges of Definition . In The Science of Citizen Science, 13–33. Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_2 - 20Haklay, M., König, A., Moustard, F., and Aspee, N. (2023) Citizen science and Post-Normal Science’s extended peer community: Identifying overlaps by mapping typologies. Futures, 150, 103178. DOI: 10.1016/j.futures.2023.103178
- 21Hinojosa, L., Riedy, R., Polman, J., Swanson, R., Nuessle, T., and Garneau, N. (2021) Expanding public participation in science practices beyond data collection. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1). DOI: 10.5334/cstp.292
- 22Hsieh, T.C., Ma, K.H., and Chao, A. (2016) iNEXT: an R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7(12), 1451–1456. DOI: 10.1111/2041-210x.12613
- 23Hsieh, T.C., Ma, K.H., and Chao, A. (2020) iNEXT: iNterpolation and EXTrapolation for species diversity. R package version 2.0.20. Retrieved from
https://sites.google.com/view/chao-lab-website/software/inext - 24Jones, M.G., Chesnutt, K., Ennes, M., Macher, D., and Paechter, M. (2022) Measuring science capital, science attitudes, and science experiences in elementary and middle school students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 74, 101180. DOI: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101180
- 25Kaakinen, J.K., Havu-Nuutinen, S., Häikiö, T., Julku, H., Koskela, T., Mikkilä-Erdmann, M. et al. (2023) Science Capital: Results from a Finnish Population Survey. Public Understanding of Science, 0(0). DOI: 10.1177/09636625241310756
- 26Leerhøi, F., Rytter, M., Lillemark, M.R., Randeris, B., Rix, C., Olesen, J., Olsen, M.T. et al. (2024) Exploring the potential of extreme citizen science with Danish high school students using environmental DNA for marine monitoring. Frontiers in Marine Science, 11, 1347298. DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2024.1347298
- 27Likert, R. (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology. 22(140), p. 55
- 28Pocock, M.J., Chapman, D.S., Sheppard, L.J., and Roy, H.E. (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. - 29R Core Team. (2022) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from
https://www.R-project.org/ - 30Robinson, L.D., Cawthray, J.L., West, S.E., Bonn, A., and Ansine, J. (2018)
Ten principles of citizen science . In Citizen science: Innovation in open science, society and policy (pp. 27–40). UCL Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctv550cf2.9 - 31Rüfenacht, S., Woods, T., Agnello, G., Gold, M., Hummer, P., Land-Zandstra, A., and Sieber, A. (2021) Communication and dissemination in citizen science. The Science of Citizen Science, 475, 520. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_24
- 32Sales, N.G., McKenzie, M.B., Drake, J., Harper, L.R., Browett, S.S., Coscia, I., Wangensteen, O.S. et al. (2020) Fishing for mammals: Landscape-level monitoring of terrestrial and semi-aquatic communities using eDNA from riverine systems. Journal of Applied Ecology, 57(4), 707–716. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.13592
- 33Sellers, G.S., Di Muri, C., Gómez, A., and Hänfling, B. (2018) Mu-DNA: a modular universal DNA extraction method adaptable for a wide range of sample types. Metabarcoding and Metagenomics, 2,
e24556 . DOI: 10.3897/mbmg.2.24556 - 34Suzuki-Ohno, Y., Tanabe, A.S., Kasai, A., Masuda, R., Seino, S., Dazai, A., Suzuki, S. et al. (2023) Evaluation of community science monitoring with environmental DNA for marine fish species: “Fish survey project using environmental DNA”. Environmental DNA, 5(3), 613–623. DOI: 10.1002/edn3.425
- 35Tøttrup, A.P., Svenningsen, L., Rytter, M., Lillemark, M.R., Møller, P.D.R., and Knudsen, S.W. (2021) Citizens in the lab: performance and validation of eDNA results. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1), 35. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.382
- 36Ushio, M., Fukuda, H., Inoue, T., Makoto, K., Kishida, O., Sato, K., Murata, K. et al. (2017) Environmental DNA enables detection of terrestrial mammals from forest pond water. Molecular Ecology Resources, 17(6), e63–e75. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.12690
- 37Valentini, A., Taberlet, P., Miaud, C., Civade, R., Herder, J., Thomsen, P.F., Bellemain, E. et al. (2016) Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Molecular Ecology, 25(4), 929–942. DOI: 10.1111/mec.13428
- 38West, S.E., Pateman, R.M., and Dyke, A. (2021) Variations in the motivations of environmental citizen scientists. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice. 6(14). DOI: 10.5334/cstp.370
- 39Wickham, H., Averick, M., Bryan, J., Chang, W., McGowan, L., François, R., Grolemund, G. et al. (2019) Welcome to the Tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(43), 1686. DOI: 10.21105/joss.01686
- 40Wickham, H., Chang, W., and Wickham, M.H. (2016) Package ‘ggplot2’. Create Elegant Data Visualisations Using the Grammar of Graphics. Version, 2(1), 1–189.