Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39242847›Full record

Reviewnpj biodiversity2024

The buzz about honey-based biosurveys.

Paton Vuong, Anna Poppy Griffiths, Elizabeth Barbour, Parwinder Kaur

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in npj biodiversity, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

4 authors.

Paton VuongUWA School of Agriculture & Environment, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Anna Poppy GriffithsUWA School of Agriculture & Environment, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Elizabeth BarbourUWA School of Agriculture & Environment, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Parwinder KaurUWA School of Agriculture & Environment, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. parwinder.kaur@uwa.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately 1.8 million metric tonnes of honey are produced globally every year. The key source behind this output, the honey bee (Apis mellifera), works tirelessly to create the delicious condiment that is consumed worldwide. The honey that finds its way into jars on store shelves contains a myriad of information about its biogeographical origins, such as the bees that produced it, the botanical constituents, and traces of other organisms or pathogens that have come in contact with the product or its producer. With the ongoing threat of honey bee decline and overall global biodiversity loss, access to ecological information has become an key factor in preventing the loss of species. This review delves into the various molecular techniques developed to characterize the collective DNA harnessed within honey samples, and how it can be used to elucidate the ecological interactions between honey bees and the environment. We also explore how these DNA-based methods can be used for large-scale biogeographical studies through the environmental DNA collected by foraging honey bees. Further development of these techniques can assist in the conservation of biodiversity by detecting ecosystem perturbations, with the potential to be expanded towards other critical flying pollinators.

Identifiers

PMID39242847
PMCPMC11332087

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.