Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21738408›Full record

ArticleZooKeys2011

Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe - from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation.

D Johan Kotze, Pietro Brandmayr, Achille Casale, Emmanuelle Dauffy-Richard, Wouter Dekoninck, Matti J Koivula, Gábor L Lövei, Dietrich Mossakowski, Jinze Noordijk, Wilfried Paarmann and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ZooKeys, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed
21.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 408 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. PeerJ · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 12 institutions in 8 countries.

D Johan KotzeUniversity of Helsinki, Department of Environmental Sciences P.O. Box 65 (Biocenter 3, Viikinkaari 1), FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland.
Pietro Brandmayr
Achille Casale
Emmanuelle Dauffy-Richard
Wouter Dekoninck
Matti J Koivula
Gábor L Lövei
Dietrich Mossakowski
Jinze Noordijk
Wilfried Paarmann
Roberto Pizzolotto
Pavel Saska
Axel Schwerk
José Serrano
Jan Szyszko
Angela Taboada
Hans Turin
Stephen Venn
Rikjan Vermeulen
Tullia Zetto
Aarhus University · DKBiocenter Finland · FICenter for Assessment · USCzech University of Life Sciences Prague · CZEcologie et Ecophysiologie Forestières · FRFinnish Environment Institute · FIInstitute of Entomology · CZUniversidad de Murcia · ESUniversity of Calabria · ITUniversity of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Sassari · ITWarsaw University of Life Sciences · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

'Carabidologists do it all' (Niemelä 1996a) is a phrase with which most European carabidologists are familiar. Indeed, during the last half a century, professional and amateur entomologists have contributed enormously to our understanding of the basic biology of carabid beetles. The success of the field is in no small part due to regular European Carabidologists' Meetings, which started in 1969 in Wijster, the Netherlands, with the 14th meeting again held in the Netherlands in 2009, celebrating the 40th anniversary of the first meeting and 50 years of long-term research in the Dwingelderveld. This paper offers a subjective summary of some of the major developments in carabidology since the 1960s. Taxonomy of the family Carabidae is now reasonably established, and the application of modern taxonomic tools has brought up several surprises like elsewhere in the animal kingdom. Progress has been made on the ultimate and proximate factors of seasonality and timing of reproduction, which only exceptionally show non-seasonality. Triggers can be linked to evolutionary events and plausibly explained by the "taxon cycle" theory. Fairly little is still known about certain feeding preferences, including granivory and ants, as well as unique life history strategies, such as ectoparasitism and predation on higher taxa. The study of carabids has been instrumental in developing metapopulation theory (even if it was termed differently). Dispersal is one of the areas intensively studied, and results show an intricate interaction between walking and flying as the major mechanisms. The ecological study of carabids is still hampered by some unresolved questions about sampling and data evaluation. It is recognised that knowledge is uneven, especially concerning larvae and species in tropical areas. By their abundance and wide distribution, carabid beetles can be useful in population studies, bioindication, conservation biology and landscape ecology. Indeed, 40 years of carabidological research have provided so much data and insights, that among insects - and arguably most other terrestrial organisms - carabid beetles are one of the most worthwhile model groups for biological studies.

Indexed as

ant feedingbioindicatorsbiologyCarabidaeconservationdispersalectoparasitismground beetlehabitat managementlandscape ecologylife historylong-term researchpitfall trappingpopulation dynamicspredation on amphibiansrhythmsseed feedingstatisticssystematics

Identifiers

PMID21738408
PMCPMC3131012
OpenAlexW2000529827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.