ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Evaluating the Supplementary Role of Photogrammetry in Insect Taxonomy: Applications and Limitations of 3D Scanning Technology.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Realistic 3D morphology reshapes insect heat budgets.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Supplementary Role of Photogrammetry in Insect Taxonomy: Applications and Limitations of 3D Scanning Technology.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
The integration of high-resolution 3D photogrammetry in insect taxonomy offers potential enhancements to traditional classification methods, particularly in educational and resource-limited settings. This study assesses the Artec Micro scanner's capability to capture detailed external phenotypic features of insects across a size spectrum from 1.63 to 33.49 mm. Ten samples from unique species were mounted and scanned. The model outputs were evaluated against an identification key, which compiled diagnostic features for the specimens from the wider literature, to describe the specimens to the lowest taxonomic level possible. The results showed that six of the ten specimens could be identified to species level using the scans. Threshold values for body length and width were 10.7 and 4.4 mm, respectively. Below these body dimensions, important diagnostic features of specimens could not be resolved reliably. This result outlines the limitations of this technology and highlights the supportive role that this approach can provide when integrated with traditional taxonomic methods. This approach opens up novel applications for species identification and data sharing among taxonomists, international field research, conservation efforts and entomological outreach. However, the limitations of this approach to taxonomic identification must be considered depending upon the size of the specimen and its diagnostic features. Future developments could enhance this technology's application in routine taxonomic work, particularly through integration with artificial intelligence platforms.
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.