Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27890965›Full record

ArticleEcological modelling2016

BEESCOUT: A model of bee scouting behaviour and a software tool for characterizing nectar/pollen landscapes for BEEHAVE.

M A Becher, V Grimm, J Knapp, J Horn, G Twiston-Davies, J L Osborne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecological modelling, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. National-scale mapping of potential floral resources for honeybees and native pollinators in New Zealand.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. The BEEHAVEEnvironmental toxicology and chemistry · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Honey bee colony performance affected by crop diversity and farmland structure: a modeling framework.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Ecology and evolution · 2019
    Article
  17. The Journal of applied ecology · 2018
    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

6 authors.

M A BecherEnvironment & Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, UK.
V GrimmUFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Permoserstr. 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany; German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Deutscher Platz 5e, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
J KnappEnvironment & Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, UK.
J HornUFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Permoserstr. 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany.
G Twiston-DaviesEnvironment & Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, UK.
J L OsborneEnvironment & Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social bees are central place foragers collecting floral resources from the surrounding landscape, but little is known about the probability of a scouting bee finding a particular flower patch. We therefore developed a software tool, BEESCOUT, to theoretically examine how bees might explore a landscape and distribute their scouting activities over time and space. An image file can be imported, which is interpreted by the model as a "forage map" with certain colours representing certain crops or habitat types as specified by the user. BEESCOUT calculates the size and location of these potential food sources in that landscape relative to a bee colony. An individual-based model then determines the detection probabilities of the food patches by bees, based on parameter values gathered from the flight patterns of radar-tracked honeybees and bumblebees. Various "search modes" describe hypothetical search strategies for the long-range exploration of scouting bees. The resulting detection probabilities of forage patches can be used as input for the recently developed honeybee model BEEHAVE, to explore realistic scenarios of colony growth and death in response to different stressors. In example simulations, we find that detection probabilities for food sources close to the colony fit empirical data reasonably well. However, for food sources further away no empirical data are available to validate model output. The simulated detection probabilities depend largely on the bees' search mode, and whether they exchange information about food source locations. Nevertheless, we show that landscape structure and connectivity of food sources can have a strong impact on the results. We believe that BEESCOUT is a valuable tool to better understand how landscape configurations and searching behaviour of bees affect detection probabilities of food sources. It can also guide the collection of relevant data and the design of experiments to close knowledge gaps, and provides a useful extension to the BEEHAVE honeybee model, enabling future users to explore how landscape structure and food availability affect the foraging decisions and patch visitation rates of the bees and, in consequence, to predict colony development and survival.

Indexed as

BumblebeeFlight patternHarmonic radarHoneybeeIndividual-based modelSearching

Identifiers

PMID27890965
PMCPMC5070411

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.