ArticlePloS one2025
Utilizing FUCOM and AHP methods to identify the optimal beekeeping lands: A case study from Mardin, Türkiye.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Beekeeping plays a vital role in agricultural sustainability and biodiversity conservation, yet identifying ecologically suitable areas for apiculture remains challenging. The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare two Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods-the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Full Consistency Method (FUCOM)-within a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) framework to identify optimal beekeeping areas in Mardin Province, Türkiye. Nine environmental, climatic, topographical, logistic, and socio-economic factors were selected through literature review, legal regulations, expert consultation, and field observations. Suitability maps were generated and validated using field-verified hive locations and Receiver Operating Characteristic-Area Under the Curve (ROC-AUC) analysis. The results show that land use/cover, proximity to water sources, and precipitation were the most influential factors. Overall, 83% of hive locations coincided with areas classified as moderately suitable or higher. AHP achieved slightly higher predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.774) than FUCOM (AUC = 0.754), while FUCOM required substantially fewer pairwise comparisons, underscoring its efficiency. These findings confirm the robustness of the framework and provide a practical tool for sustainable apicultural land-use planning, offering transferable insights for policymakers, decision-makers, and beekeepers in Türkiye and other regions with similar ecological conditions.
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.