Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35857892›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2022

Moths complement bumblebee pollination of red clover: a case for day-and-night insect surveillance.

Jamie Alison, Jake M Alexander, Nathan Diaz Zeugin, Yoko L Dupont, Evelin Iseli, Hjalte M R Mann, Toke T Høye

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
22.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Towards a standardized framework for AI-assisted, image-based monitoring of nocturnal insects.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Jamie AlisonDepartment of Ecoscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6787-6192
Jake M AlexanderInstitute for Integrative Biology, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2226-7913
Nathan Diaz ZeuginInstitute for Integrative Biology, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7992-4174
Yoko L DupontDepartment of Ecoscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Evelin IseliInstitute for Integrative Biology, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Hjalte M R MannDepartment of Ecoscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Toke T HøyeDepartment of Ecoscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University · DKETH Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent decades have seen a surge in awareness about insect pollinator declines. Social bees receive the most attention, but most flower-visiting species are lesser known, non-bee insects. Nocturnal flower visitors, e.g. moths, are especially difficult to observe and largely ignored in pollination studies. Clearly, achieving balanced monitoring of all pollinator taxa represents a major scientific challenge. Here, we use time-lapse cameras for season-wide, day-and-night pollinator surveillance of

Indexed as

MothsTrifoliumAnimalsBeesFlowersInsectaPollinationbiodiversitycomputer visionconservationentomologyLepidopteraphenology

Identifiers

PMID35857892
PMCPMC9277237
OpenAlexW4285097318

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.