ArticleEcology2019
Comparison of large-scale citizen science data and long-term study data for phenology modeling.
Article in Ecology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Deep Learning in Plant Phenological Research: A Systematic Literature Review.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Pooled it
- Bridging data silos to holistically model plant macrophenology.The New phytologist · 2026Review
- Hybrid machine learning approaches outperform mechanistic models of bloom timing in Eastern Redbud, Cercis canadensis.International journal of biometeorology · 2026Article
- Expanding phenological insights: automated phenostage annotation with community science plant images.International journal of biometeorology · 2025Article
- Cross-continental comparison of plant reproductive phenology shows high intraspecific variation in temperature sensitivity.AoB PLANTS · 2024Article
- Losing ground: projections of climate-driven bloom shifts and their implications for the future of California's almond orchards.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Ten best practices for effective phenological research.International journal of biometeorology · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Bridging the gap: how to adopt opportunistic plant observations for phenology monitoring.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- Consistent trait-temperature interactions drive butterfly phenology in both incidental and survey data.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A comparison of herbarium and citizen science phenology datasets for detecting response of flowering time to climate change in Denmark.International journal of biometeorology · 2022Article
- MeadoWatch: a long-term community-science database of wildflower phenology in Mount Rainier National Park.Scientific data · 2022Article
- An empirical method to account for climatic adaptation in plant phenology models.International journal of biometeorology · 2021Article
- Provoking a Cultural Shift in Data Quality.Bioscience · 2021Article
- Using community photography to investigate phenology: A case study of coat molt in the mountain goat (Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- Machine Learning Using Digitized Herbarium Specimens to Advance Phenological Research.Bioscience · 2020Article
- Low-cost observations and experiments return a high value in plant phenology research.Applications in plant sciences · 2020Review
- Automated data-intensive forecasting of plant phenology throughout the United States.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large-scale observational data from citizen science efforts are becoming increasingly common in ecology, and researchers often choose between these and data from intensive local-scale studies for their analyses. This choice has potential trade-offs related to spatial scale, observer variance, and interannual variability. Here we explored this issue with phenology by comparing models built using data from the large-scale, citizen science USA National Phenology Network (USA-NPN) effort with models built using data from more intensive studies at Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites. We built statistical and process based phenology models for species common to each data set. From these models, we compared parameter estimates, estimates of phenological events, and out-of-sample errors between models derived from both USA-NPN and LTER data. We found that model parameter estimates for the same species were most similar between the two data sets when using simple models, but parameter estimates varied widely as model complexity increased. Despite this, estimates for the date of phenological events and out-of-sample errors were similar, regardless of the model chosen. Predictions for USA-NPN data had the lowest error when using models built from the USA-NPN data, while LTER predictions were best made using LTER-derived models, confirming that models perform best when applied at the same scale they were built. This difference in the cross-scale model comparison is likely due to variation in phenological requirements within species. Models using the USA-NPN data set can integrate parameters over a large spatial scale while those using an LTER data set can only estimate parameters for a single location. Accordingly, the choice of data set depends on the research question. Inferences about species-specific phenological requirements are best made with LTER data, and if USA-NPN or similar data are all that is available, then analyses should be limited to simple models. Large-scale predictive modeling is best done with the larger-scale USA-NPN data, which has high spatial representation and a large regional species pool. LTER data sets, on the other hand, have high site fidelity and thus characterize inter-annual variability extremely well. Future research aimed at forecasting phenology events for particular species over larger scales should develop models that integrate the strengths of both data sets.
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.