Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30761691›Full record

ArticleGlobal change biology2019

Spatial and habitat variation in aphid, butterfly, moth and bird phenologies over the last half century.

James R Bell, Marc S Botham, Peter A Henrys, David I Leech, James W Pearce-Higgins, Chris R Shortall, Tom M Brereton, Jon Pickup, Stephen J Thackeray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global change biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. 30 years of climate related phenological research: themes and trends.International journal of biometeorology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Urbanization extends flight phenology and leads to local adaptation of seasonal plasticity in Lepidoptera.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

9 authors.

James R BellRothamsted Insect Survey, Biointeractions and Crop Protection, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1640-6120
Marc S BothamCentre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Peter A HenrysCentre for Ecology & Hydrology, Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster, Lancashire, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4758-1482
David I LeechBritish Trust for Ornithology, Thetford, Norfolk, UK.
James W Pearce-HigginsBritish Trust for Ornithology, Thetford, Norfolk, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1341-5080
Chris R ShortallRothamsted Insect Survey, Biointeractions and Crop Protection, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7175-5393
Tom M BreretonButterfly Conservation, Wareham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2868-7951
Jon PickupSASA, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8554-6939
Stephen J ThackerayCentre for Ecology & Hydrology, Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster, Lancashire, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3274-2706

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/C/000J0200
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Global warming has advanced the timing of biological events, potentially leading to disruption across trophic levels. The potential importance of phenological change as a driver of population trends has been suggested. To fully understand the possible impacts, there is a need to quantify the scale of these changes spatially and according to habitat type. We studied the relationship between phenological trends, space and habitat type between 1965 and 2012 using an extensive UK dataset comprising 269 aphid, bird, butterfly and moth species. We modelled phenologies using generalized additive mixed models that included covariates for geographical (latitude, longitude, altitude), temporal (year, season) and habitat terms (woodland, scrub, grassland). Model selection showed that a baseline model with geographical and temporal components explained the variation in phenologies better than either a model in which space and time interacted or a habitat model without spatial terms. This baseline model showed strongly that phenologies shifted progressively earlier over time, that increasing altitude produced later phenologies and that a strong spatial component determined phenological timings, particularly latitude. The seasonal timing of a phenological event, in terms of whether it fell in the first or second half of the year, did not result in substantially different trends for butterflies. For moths, early season phenologies advanced more rapidly than those recorded later. Whilst temporal trends across all habitats resulted in earlier phenologies over time, agricultural habitats produced significantly later phenologies than most other habitats studied, probably because of nonclimatic drivers. A model with a significant habitat-time interaction was the best-fitting model for birds, moths and butterflies, emphasizing that the rates of phenological advance also differ among habitats for these groups. Our results suggest the presence of strong spatial gradients in mean seasonal timing and nonlinear trends towards earlier seasonal timing that varies in form and rate among habitat types.

Indexed as

AphidsBirdsButterfliesMothsAnimalsClimate ChangeEcosystemLife Cycle StagesSpatio-Temporal Analysisclimate changefirst egg dayfirst flightgeneralized additive mixed modelsglobal warmingtemporal trends

Identifiers

PMID30761691
PMCPMC6563090

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.