ArticleBiodiversity data journal2025
Bridging Citizen Science and Expert Surveys in urban biodiversity monitoring: Insights from insect diversity in Macao.
Article in Biodiversity data journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The City Nature Challenge as an urban BioBlitz: evaluating Citizen Science contributions to biodiversity monitoring in Berlin.BMC ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Integrating images, sounds, citizen science and AI to assess the biodiversity of the Atlantic Forest of Brazil.PloS one · 2026Article
- Snakes among citizens: distribution and ecology of the Aesculapian snake, Zamenis longissimus (Laurenti, 1768) in Bratislava revealed by citizen science.BMC 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urban ecosystems present unique challenges for biodiversity monitoring, demanding efficient methods to document species diversity in rapidly changing environments. This study quantifies insect diversity in Macao SAR - a hyper-urbanised region - by integrating data on 1,339 species documented in expert-led surveys and 1,012 species recorded in citizen-science observations between 2019 and 2023. Striking divergence emerged between the expert and citizen-science datasets: only 462 species (33.5% of total diversity) were detected by both groups, with experts documenting 877 unique taxa often requiring specialised collection or morphological analysis, while citizen scientists contributed 550 distinctive species through spatially explicit, image-based records. Together, these approaches achieved 96.59% estimated species coverage within five years, demonstrating that combining community-driven data with expert methods accelerates comprehensive biodiversity documentation. Citizen-science platforms played a pivotal role by providing high-resolution geotagged imagery which enabled experts to validate records and resolve taxonomic ambiguities. Meanwhile, expert surveys detected cryptic taxa overlooked by citizen scientists. The rapid species coverage achieved through this synergy highlights the transformative potential of integrated frameworks. By mobilizing the scalability of citizen science to fill spatial and taxonomic gaps, while leveraging expert precision to ensure rigour, urban biodiversity monitoring can adapt to the rapid pace of ecological change. These findings advocate for collaborative strategies that harness public participation and scientific validation to optimise conservation efforts in data-deficient and highly-stressed ecosystems.
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.