Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33830225›Full record

ArticleAnnals of botany2021

Comparing fruiting phenology across two historical datasets: Thoreau's observations and herbarium specimens.

Tara K Miller, Amanda S Gallinat, Linnea C Smith, Richard B Primack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of botany, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Ten best practices for effective phenological research.International journal of biometeorology · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tara K MillerBoston University, Biology Department, Boston, MA 02215, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2827-4578
Amanda S GallinatDepartment of Biology and Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA.
Linnea C SmithGerman Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research, Leipzig 04103, Germany.
Richard B PrimackBoston University, Biology Department, Boston, MA 02215, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsFruiting remains under-represented in long-term phenology records, relative to leaf and flower phenology. Herbarium specimens and historical field notes can fill this gap, but selecting and synthesizing these records for modern-day comparison requires an understanding of whether different historical data sources contain similar information, and whether similar, but not equivalent, fruiting metrics are comparable with one another.

methodsFor 67 fleshy-fruited plant species, we compared observations of fruiting phenology made by Henry David Thoreau in Concord, Massachusetts (1850s), with phenology data gathered from herbarium specimens collected across New England (mid-1800s to 2000s). To identify whether fruiting times and the order of fruiting among species are similar between datasets, we compared dates of first, peak and last observed fruiting (recorded by Thoreau), and earliest, mean and latest specimen (collected from herbarium records), as well as fruiting durations. KEY

resultsOn average, earliest herbarium specimen dates were earlier than first fruiting dates observed by Thoreau; mean specimen dates were similar to Thoreau's peak fruiting dates; latest specimen dates were later than Thoreau's last fruiting dates; and durations of fruiting captured by herbarium specimens were longer than durations of fruiting observed by Thoreau. All metrics of fruiting phenology except duration were significantly, positively correlated within (r: 0.69-0.88) and between (r: 0.59-0.85) datasets.

conclusionsStrong correlations in fruiting phenology between Thoreau's observations and data from herbaria suggest that field and herbarium methods capture similar broad-scale phenological information, including relative fruiting times among plant species in New England. Differences in the timing of first, last and duration of fruiting suggest that historical datasets collected with different methods, scales and metrics may not be comparable when exact timing is important. Researchers should strongly consider matching methodology when selecting historical records of fruiting phenology for present-day comparisons.

Indexed as

FruitPlant LeavesFlowersMassachusettsPlantsfruitherbaceousherbariamuseum specimenNew EnglandphenologyplantripeningThoreauWeibullwoody

Identifiers

PMID33830225
PMCPMC8324031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.