ArticleScientific reports2018
Evaluation of Microclimatic Detection by a Wireless Sensor Network in Forest Ecosystems.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Degradable Bioinspired Flier with Aerogel-Based Colorimetric Sensors for Environmental Monitoring.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Materials Advances for Distributed Environmental Sensor Networks at Scale.Nature reviews. Materials · 2026Article
- Living Tree Moisture Content Detection Method Based on Intelligent UHF RFID Sensors and OS-PELM.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Timely and accurate detection of microclimates is extremely valuable for monitoring and stimulating exchanges of mass and energy in forest ecosystems under climate change. Recently, the rapid growth of wireless sensor networks (WSNs) has provided a new approach for detecting microclimates in a complex environment at multiple temporal and spatial scales. However, applications of wireless sensors in forest microclimate monitoring have rarely been studied, and the corresponding observation accuracy, error sources and correction methods are not well understood. In this study, through field experiments in two typical subtropical forest ecosystems in Zhejiang Province, China, the accuracy of the temperature and humidity observed by the wireless sensors was evaluated against standard meteorological data. Furthermore, the observation error sources were analyzed and corresponding correction models were established. The results showed that the wireless sensor-based temperature and humidity values performed well within the total observation accuracy. However, the observation errors varied with season, daily periodicity and weather conditions. For temperature, the wireless sensor observations were overestimated during the daytime while they were underestimated during the nighttime. For humidity, the data observed by the wireless sensors generally appeared as overestimates. Adopting humidity as the corrected factor, correction models were established and effectively improved the accuracy of the microclimatic data observed by the wireless sensors. Notably, our error analysis demonstrated that the observation errors may be associated with the shell material of the wireless sensor, suggesting that shading measures for the wireless sensors should be considered for outdoor work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.