Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38705174›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024

Towards global insect biomonitoring with frugal methods.

Mikkel Brydegaard, Ronniel D Pedales, Vivian Feng, Assoumou Saint-Doria Yamoa, Benoit Kouakou, Hampus Månefjord, Lorenz Wührl, Christian Pylatiuk, Dalton de Souza Amorim, Rudolf Meier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Sharing insect data through GBIF: novel monitoring methods, opportunities and standards.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. Towards a toolkit for global insect biodiversity monitoring.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    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

10 authors.

Mikkel BrydegaardDept. Physics, Lund University, Sölvegatan 14c, 22362 Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0586-664X
Ronniel D PedalesInstitute of Biology, University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines 1101.ORCID 0000-0002-5335-6313
Vivian FengCenter for Integrative Biodiversity Discovery, Museum für Naturkunde, Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science, Invalidenstraße 43, 10115, Berlin, Germany.
Assoumou Saint-Doria YamoaInstrumentation, Imaging and Spectroscopy Laboratory, Felix Houphouet-Boigny Institute, BP1093 Yamoussoukro, Ivory Coast.
Benoit KouakouInstrumentation, Imaging and Spectroscopy Laboratory, Felix Houphouet-Boigny Institute, BP1093 Yamoussoukro, Ivory Coast.ORCID 0000-0001-6829-9609
Hampus MånefjordDept. Physics, Lund University, Sölvegatan 14c, 22362 Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1767-6010
Lorenz WührlInstitute for Automation and Applied Informatics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 76344 Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany.
Christian PylatiukInstitute for Automation and Applied Informatics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 76344 Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany.
Dalton de Souza AmorimDepartamento de Biologia, FFCLRP, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14040-901, Brazil.
Rudolf MeierCenter for Integrative Biodiversity Discovery, Museum für Naturkunde, Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science, Invalidenstraße 43, 10115, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4452-2885

Funding

DAAD Research Grant (doctoral programmes in Germany)European Research Council (ERC )International Science Programme (Uppsala, Sweden)Royal Physiographic Society in Lund and D.S.A. from the FAPESPSwedish International Developing Aid (SIDA)Swedish Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

None of the global targets for protecting nature are currently met, although humanity is critically dependent on biodiversity. A significant issue is the lack of data for most biodiverse regions of the planet where the use of frugal methods for biomonitoring would be particularly important because the available funding for monitoring is insufficient, especially in low-income countries. We here discuss how three approaches to insect biomonitoring (computer vision, lidar, DNA sequences) could be made more frugal and urge that all biomonitoring techniques should be evaluated for global suitability before becoming the default in high-income countries. This requires that techniques popular in high-income countries should undergo a phase of 'innovation through simplification' before they are implemented more broadly. We predict that techniques that acquire raw data at low cost and are suitable for analysis with AI (e.g. images, lidar-signals) will be particularly suitable for global biomonitoring, while techniques that rely heavily on patented technologies may be less promising (e.g. DNA sequences). We conclude the opinion piece by pointing out that the widespread use of AI for data analysis will require a global strategy for providing the necessary computational resources and training. This article is part of the theme issue 'Towards a toolkit for global insect biodiversity monitoring'.

Indexed as

Biological MonitoringInsectaAnimalsArtificial IntelligenceBiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesEnvironmental MonitoringRemote Sensing Technologyfrugal scienceinsect biomonitoringphotonics

Identifiers

PMID38705174
PMCPMC11070255

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.