ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Leveraging Community Science to Measure Bee Body Size From Museum Specimens.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Leveraging Community Science to Measure Bee Body Size From Museum Specimens.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Community or volunteer participation in research has the potential to significantly help mobilize the wealth of biodiversity and functional ecological data housed in natural history collections. Many such projects recruit community scientists to transcribe specimen label data from images; a next step is to task community scientists with conducting straightforward morphological measurements (e.g., body size) from specimen images. We investigated whether community science could be an effective approach to generating significant body size datasets from specimen images generated by museum digitization initiatives. Using the community science platform Notes from Nature, we engaged community scientists in a specimen measurement task to estimate body size (i.e., intertegular distance) from images of bee specimens. Community scientists showed high engagement and completion of this task, with each user measuring 43.6 specimens on average and self-reporting successful measurement of 98.0% of the images. Community scientist measurements were significantly larger than measurements conducted by trained researchers, though the average measurement error was only 2.3%. These results suggest that community science participation could be an effective approach for bee body size measurement, for descriptive studies or for research questions where this degree of expected error is deemed acceptable. For larger-bodied organisms (e.g., vertebrates), where modest measurement errors represent a smaller proportion of body size, community science approaches may be particularly effective. Methods we present here may serve as a blueprint for future projects aimed at engaging the public in biodiversity and collections-based research efforts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.