Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39510081›Full record

ArticleEcology2024

Phenological mismatch is less important than total nectar availability for checkerspot butterflies.

Elizabeth E Crone, June V Arriens, Leone M Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Elizabeth E CroneDepartment of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts, USA.
June V ArriensDepartment of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts, USA.
Leone M BrownDepartment of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

DOD RC-2700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Changes in phenology are a conspicuous fingerprint of climate change, leading to fears that phenological mismatches among interacting species will be a leading cause of population declines and extinction. We used quantile regression to analyze museum collection data and estimate changes in the phenological overlap of Baltimore checkerspot butterflies and 12 common nectar plant species over several decades in two geographic regions. We combined these museum data with field estimates of each species' flower density and nectar sugar production to estimate changes in resource availability caused by shifts in phenological overlap. Phenological overlap (measured as the proportion of plant flowering during the flight period of an average butterfly) decreased through time, primarily because the flowering period of nectar plants was longer, but the flight period of butterflies was shorter in recent years. Our study was also motivated by the hypothesis that phenological mismatches may be more severe in the southern region due to a midsummer dearth in floral resources, but this hypothesis was not supported by our data. Although phenological overlap was somewhat smaller in the southern region, changes in overlap through time were similar in both regions. When phenological overlap was weighted by nectar sugar production of different species, the overlap increased in the southern region but decreased in the northern region (the opposite of our prediction). Overall, nectar resources were much more abundant at study sites in our northern region than in our southern region, possibly due to differences in land management. Our study demonstrates the complexities of phenological mismatch of interacting species and highlights that phenological changes may have small impacts on population viability.

Indexed as

ButterfliesPlant NectarAnimalsClimate ChangeEcosystemFlowersTime FactorsPlant Nectarclimate changeEuphydryas phaetonfloral resourceshabitat managementherbariumhistorical collectionslatitudinal gradientphenological overlapphenologypollinator conservation

Identifiers

PMID39510081
PMCPMC11610707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.