Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33013174›Full record

ArticleBiodiversity data journal2020

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

Niina Kiljunen, Timo Pajunen, Caroline Fukushima, Arttu Soukainen, Jaakko Kuurne, Tuuli Korhonen, Joni Saarinen, Ilari Falck, Erkka Laine, Stefano Mammola and 3 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

13 authors.

Niina KiljunenDepartment of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Finland.
Timo PajunenFinnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), 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
Arttu SoukainenLaboratory 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.
Jaakko KuurneLaboratory 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.
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 SaarinenLaboratory 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.
Ilari FalckLaboratory 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.
Erkka LaineDepartment of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Finland.
Stefano MammolaLaboratory 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/0000-0002-4471-9055
Fernando UrbanoLaboratory 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.
Nuria Macías-HernándezLaboratory 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.
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

backgroundA spider taxonomy and ecology field course was organised in Kilpisjärvi Biological Station, northern Finland, in July 2019. During the course, four 50 × 50 m plots in mountain birch forest habitat were sampled following a standardised protocol. In addition to teaching and learning about spider identification, behaviour, ecology and sampling, the main aim of the course was to collect comparable data from the Kilpisjärvi area as part of a global project, with the purpose of uncovering global spider diversity patterns. NEW INFORMATION: A total of 2613 spiders were collected, of which 892 (34%) were adults. Due to uncertainty of juvenile identification, only adults are included in the data presented in this paper. The observed adult spiders belong to 51 species, 40 genera and 11 families, of which the Linyphiidae were the most rich and abundant with 28 (55%) species and 461 (52%) individuals. Lycosidae had six species and 286 individuals, Gnaphosidae five species and 19 individuals, Thomisidae four species and 24 individuals, Theridiidae two species and 23 individuals. All other six families had one species and less than 40 individuals. The most abundant species were the linyphiid

Indexed as

ArthropodabiogeographyLaplandsubarctic

Identifiers

PMID33013174
PMCPMC7515933

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.