Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38200801›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

Precision Beekeeping Systems: State of the Art, Pros and Cons, and Their Application as Tools for Advancing the Beekeeping Sector.

Pier Paolo Danieli, Nicola Francesco Addeo, Filippo Lazzari, Federico Manganello, Fulvia Bovera

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. A Wireless Sensor Platform for Beehive Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pier Paolo DanieliDepartment of Agriculture and Forest Sciences (DAFNE), University of Tuscia, Via S. C. de Lellis snc, 01100 Viterbo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6895-1027
Nicola Francesco AddeoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Napoli Federico II, Via F. Delpino, 1, 80137 Napoli, Italy.
Filippo LazzariDepartment of Agriculture and Forest Sciences (DAFNE), University of Tuscia, Via S. C. de Lellis snc, 01100 Viterbo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0602-0809
Federico ManganelloDepartment of Agriculture and Forest Sciences (DAFNE), University of Tuscia, Via S. C. de Lellis snc, 01100 Viterbo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9684-3189
Fulvia BoveraDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Napoli Federico II, Via F. Delpino, 1, 80137 Napoli, Italy.
Università degli Studi della Tuscia · ITUniversity of Naples Federico II · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present review aims to summarize the more recent scientific literature and updated state of the art on the research effort spent in adapting hardware-software tools to understand the true needs of honeybee colonies as a prerequisite for any sustainable management practice. A SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis was also performed with the aim of identifying the key factors that could support or impair the diffusion of precision beekeeping (PB) systems. Honeybee husbandry, or beekeeping, is starting to approach precision livestock farming (PLF), as has already happened in other animal husbandry sectors. A transition from the current paradigm of rational beekeeping to that of precision beekeeping (PB) is thus expected. However, due to the peculiarities of this species and the related farming practices, the PB technological systems (PB systems) are still undergoing a development process that, to some extent, limits their large-scale practical application. Several physical-chemical (weight, temperature, humidity, sound, gases) and behavioral traits (flight activity, swarming) of the hive are reviewed in light of the evolution of sensors, communication systems, and data management approaches. These advanced sensors are equipped with a microprocessor that records data and sends it to a remote server for processing. In this way, through a Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) system, the beekeeper, using specific applications on a personal computer, tablet, or smartphone, can have all the above-mentioned parameters under remote control. In general, weight, temperature, and humidity are the main hive traits monitored by commercial sensors. Surprisingly, flight activity sensors are rarely available as an option in modular PB systems marketed via the web. The SWOT analysis highlights that PB systems have promising strength points and represent great opportunities for the development of beekeeping; however, they have some weaknesses, represented especially by the high purchasing costs and the low preparedness of the addressed operators, and imply some possible threats for beekeeping in terms of unrealistic perception of the apiary status if they applied to some hives only and a possible adverse impact on the honeybees' colony itself. Even if more research is expected to take place in the next few years, indubitably, the success of commercial PB systems will be measured in terms of return on investment, conditioned especially by the benefits (higher yields, better colonies' health) that the beekeeper will appraise as a consequence of their use.

Indexed as

beekeepershoneybeeinternet of thingsliterature reviewsensors and systems

Identifiers

PMID38200801
PMCPMC10778344
OpenAlexW4390174469

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.