Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40821891›Full record

ArticleBioscience2025

Drones in ecology: ten years back and forth.

Karen Anderson, Felipe Gonzalez, Kevin J Gaston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioscience, 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.

Karen AndersonEnvironment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn, Cornwall, England, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3289-2598
Felipe GonzalezRobotics and Autonomous Systems, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4342-3682
Kevin J GastonEnvironment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn, Cornwall, England, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7235-7928

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A decade after our initial publication predicting that lightweight drones would revolutionize spatial ecology, drone technology has become firmly established in ecological studies. In the present article, we explore the key developments in ecological drone science since 2013, considering plant and animal ecology, imaging and nonimaging workflows, advances in data processing and operational ethics. Focusing on inexpensive, lightweight drones equipped with various sensors, we offer a critical evaluation of drone futures for ecologists, arguing that this could deliver opportunities for volumetric ecology to take flight. We discuss the potential future uses of drones in aerobiology and in understory and underground ecological studies and debate the future of multirobot cooperation from an ecological standpoint. We call on ecologists to engage critically with drone technology in this next phase of development.

Indexed as

aerialdronessamplingspatial ecologysurvey

Identifiers

PMID40821891
PMCPMC12352311

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.