Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40715152›Full record

ArticleScientific data2025

BeeFunc, a comprehensive trait database for French bees.

Lucas Aubouin, David Genoud, Bérénice Givord-Coupeau, Sandrine Tercerie, Olivier Gargominy, Benoît Geslin, Bertrand Schatz

Abstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Lucas Aubouin *CEFE, CNRS (UMR 5175), Université de Montpellier, EPHE, IRD, 34293, Montpellier, France. lucas.aubouin@cefe.cnrs.fr.ORCID 0009-0000-8789-2221
David Genoud *Independant, Ambazac, France.
Bérénice Givord-CoupeauArthropologia, Lyon, France.
Sandrine TerceriePatriNat (OFB-MNHN-CNRS-IRD), Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4341-062X
Olivier GargominyPatriNat (OFB-MNHN-CNRS-IRD), Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-7807-944X
Benoît GeslinUniversité de Rennes (UNIR), UMR 6553 ECOBIO, CNRS, Rennes, France. benoit.geslin@univ-rennes.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-2464-7998
Bertrand SchatzCEFE, CNRS (UMR 5175), Université de Montpellier, EPHE, IRD, 34293, Montpellier, France. bertrand.schatz@cefe.cnrs.fr.ORCID 0000-0003-0135-8154

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given pollinator's reported decline, it is of utmost importance to better understand the vulnerability of wild bees to human pressures. One way to achieve this goal is to explore how their traits are associated with exposure to anthropogenic perturbations. To date, there is no database synthesizing traits of bees at the species level in France, limiting the functional interpretation of inventories. We present BeeFunc 1.0, the first database on traits for the entire fauna of French wild bees. Based on extensive literature research and expert knowledge, the database is structured according to the French taxonomic register (TAXREF) and its associated knowledge base. The base gathers 26,176 trait information from 483 sources, describing 932 species for 20 features related to morphology, ecology, biogeography, and conservation. BeeFunc is intended to be collaborative and regularly updated. Bees can finally be better considered from a functional perspective. We expect this database to be widely used by researchers, conservationists, naturalists, and stakeholders, stimulating future research on wild bees.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualAnimalsBeesFrance

Identifiers

PMID40715152
PMCPMC12297367

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.