Red tape or open slaughter? Examining and sampling biological animal specimens held in public and private collections
Dirk H.R. Spennemann, Matthew C.G. O’Connell
Collection and Curation, Vol. ahead-of-print, No. ahead-of-print, pp.-

Biological specimens in collections can play a crucial role in supporting research in systematics, taxonomy and biogeography. Species specific collections in natural history museums are commonly small, with restricted availability for invasive sampling. Biological collections material (e.g. fishing trophies) held in private hand is commonly discounted as informal, although it represents a distributed and uncatalogued collection of potentially considerable extent. Using a case study of Murray Cod, an apex predator in the Murray-Darling River system of Australia, this paper aims to examine the access and usage of such specimens for research as well as their availability for non-invasive and invasive sampling.

Crowd sourced via a distributed social media approach, primarily Facebook (O’Connell et al., 2025), stewards (a generic term to encompass venue managers, custodians and owners) of taxidermy Murray Cod were interviewed to examine access to and usage of their taxidermy specimens for morphometric and biogeographical research in general as well as their willingness to loan specimens for non-invasive investigation (x-ray, CT-scanning) and/or to permit invasive sample taking of otoliths (for ageing studies).

The paper reviews access to biological collections in both formal (e.g. museums) and informal (e.g. private collections) settings, emphasising that informal collections often exceed formal ones in quantity. A case study shows private collectors are open to sharing their specimens for research, including morphometric, biogeographic and non-invasive studies. Many collectors are even willing to allow tissue sampling, provided the specimen’s appearance is preserved. This presents an important opportunity for research in systematics, taxonomy and biogeography, making informal collections a valuable but underutilised resource.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first of its kind that examines access to biological collections material held in both formal and informal collections and the limitations imposed on its use is non-invasive and invasive (sample-taking) scientific enquiry. It demonstrates that informal collections in private hand can supply a data set that far exceeds formal (museum) collections both numerically and with regard to access and research utility.