Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32210673›Full record

ArticleBiodiversity data journal2020

Standardised spider (Arachnida, Araneae) inventory of Lammi, Finland.

Arttu Soukainen, Timo Pajunen, Tuuli Korhonen, Joni Saarinen, Filipe Chichorro, Sonja Jalonen, Niina Kiljunen, Nelli Koskivirta, Jaakko Kuurne, Saija Leinonen and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biodiversity data journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

14 authors.

Arttu SoukainenFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Timo PajunenFinnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Tuuli KorhonenLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8939-930X
Joni SaarinenFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Filipe ChichorroLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Sonja JalonenFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Niina KiljunenDepartment of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Finland.
Nelli KoskivirtaFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Jaakko KuurneFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Saija LeinonenFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Tero SalonenFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Veikko YrjöläFaculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.
Caroline FukushimaLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7909-0173
Pedro CardosoLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8119-9960

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn June 2019, an ecology field course of the University of Helsinki was held at Lammi Biological Station, Southern Finland. Within this course, the students familiarised themselves with field work and identification of spiders and explored the diversity of species in the area. Three sampling plots were chosen, one in grassland and two in boreal forest, to demonstrate the sampling techniques and, by applying a standardised protocol (COBRA), contribute to a global spider biodiversity project. NEW INFORMATION: The collected samples contained a total of 3445 spiders, of which 1956 (57%) were adult. Only adult spiders were accounted for in the inventory due to the impossibility of identification of juveniles. A total of 115 species belonging to 17 families were identified, of which the majority (58 species, 50%) were Linyphiidae. Lycosidae and Theridiidae both had 11 species (10%) and all the other families had seven or fewer species. Linyphiidae were also dominant in terms of adult individuals captured, with 756 (39%), followed by 705 (36%) Lycosidae. Other families with more than 100 individuals were Thomisidae (196, 10%) and Tetragnathidae (102, 5%). The most abundant species were the lycosids

Indexed as

Arthropodaboreal forestCOBRAsampling

Identifiers

PMID32210673
PMCPMC7083949

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.