Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39421426›Full record

ReviewPeerJ2024

Wind energy and insects: reviewing the state of knowledge and identifying potential interactions.

Michelle Weschler, Lusha Tronstad

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Michelle WeschlerWyoming Natural Diversity Database and Deparment of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, United States.
Lusha TronstadWyoming Natural Diversity Database and Deparment of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1845-0267

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2023 the wind industry hit a milestone of one terawatt of installed capacity globally. That amount is expected to double within the next decade as billions of dollars are invested in new wind projects annually. Wildlife mortality is a primary concern regarding the proliferation of wind power, and many studies have investigated bird and bat interactions. Little is known about the interactions between wind turbines and insects, despite these animals composing far more biomass than vertebrates. Turbine placement, coloration, shape, heat output, and lighting may attract insects to turbines. Insects attract insectivorous animals, which may be killed by the turbines. Compiling current knowledge about these interactions and identifying gaps in knowledge is critical as wind power grows rapidly. We reviewed the state of the literature investigating insects and wind energy facilities, and evaluated hypotheses regarding insect attraction to turbines. We found evidence of insect attraction due to turbine location, paint color, shape, and temperature output. We provide empirical data on insect abundance and richness near turbines and introduce a risk assessment tool for comparing wind development with suitable climate for insects of concern. This understudied topic merits further investigation as insects decline globally. Compiling information will provide a resource for mitigation and management strategies, and will inform conservation agencies on what insects may be most vulnerable to the expansion of wind technologies.

Indexed as

InsectaWindAnimalsPower PlantsRenewable EnergyEnergy productionInsect behaviorInsect physiologyInvertebratesMitigationRenewable energyWildlife effects

Identifiers

PMID39421426
PMCPMC11485068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.