Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40267967›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Where the wild bees are: Birds improve indicators of bee richness.

Josée S Rousseau, Alison Johnston, Amanda D Rodewald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. 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

3 authors.

Josée S RousseauCornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5797-3565
Alison JohnstonCornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, United States of America.
Amanda D RodewaldCornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6719-6306

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Widespread declines in wild bee populations necessitate urgent action, but insufficient data exist to guide conservation efforts. Addressing this data deficit, we investigated the relative performance of environmental and/or taxon-based indicators to predict wild bee richness in the eastern and central U.S. Our methodology leveraged publicly available data on bees (SCAN and GBIF data repositories), birds (eBird participatory science project) and land cover data (USDA Cropland Data Layer). We used a Bayesian variable selection algorithm to select variables that best predicted species richness of bees using two datasets: a semi-structured dataset covering a wide geographical and temporal range and a structured dataset covering a focused extent with a standardized protocol. We demonstrate that birds add value to land cover data as indicators of wild bee species richness across broad geographies, particularly when using semi-structured data. These improvements likely stem from the demonstrated sensitivity of birds to conditions thought to impact bees but that are missed by remotely sensed environmental data. Importantly, this enables estimation of bee richness in places that don't have direct observations of bees. In the case of wild bees specifically, we suggest that bird and land cover data, when combined, serve as useful indicators to guide monitoring and conservation priorities until the quality and quantity of bee data improve.

Indexed as

Animals, WildBeesBiodiversityBirdsEcological Parameter MonitoringAnimal DistributionAnimalsBayes TheoremConservation of Natural Resources

Identifiers

PMID40267967
PMCPMC12017907

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.