Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41268885›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2026

Evaluation of BugBox, a software platform for AI-assisted bioinventories of arthropods.

Kelton D Welch, Mikayla E Wilson, Jonathan G Lundgren

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Kelton D WelchEcdysis Foundation, Estelline, South Dakota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5128-8874
Mikayla E WilsonEcdysis Foundation, Estelline, South Dakota, USA.
Jonathan G LundgrenEcdysis Foundation, Estelline, South Dakota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9860-3613

Funding

Cisco Systems
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has the potential to revolutionize entomology and biodiversity research, allowing entomologists to address biodiversity questions on a larger scale than ever before. A new software program, called BugBox, has been developed to facilitate large-scale arthropod bioinventories. BugBox uses an AI algorithm to rapidly classify arthropods from specimen photographs and calculates per-sample diversity indices from its classifications. We evaluated the performance of the AI algorithm over three consecutive training cycles by comparing the AI's classifications to identifications conducted by a human expert. We also used both AI and human data to separately test the hypothesis that regenerative agricultural practices increase arthropod biodiversity in a bioinventory from North American rangelands. BugBox demonstrated substantial improvement in all test metrics over the three cycles as it was allowed to incorporate the human expert's corrections into each new model version (e.g. f1 score improved from 0.523 to 0.722 over the four consecutive model versions). AI classifications were strongly correlated with human identifications, and the AI drew the same conclusion as the human data when comparing diversity indices (Hill numbers): both found evidence that regenerative practices increased arthropod diversity. These results demonstrate that, while the AI was less accurate than the human, it was still able to provide useful surrogate data at scale very rapidly. It can also improve over time under the guidance of human expertise. This technology has profound implications for the scalability of entomological science.

Indexed as

ArthropodsArtificial IntelligenceBiodiversityEntomologySoftwareAlgorithmsAnimalsartificial intelligencebiodiversity indexcomputer visionentomologymachine learningregenerative agriculturespecies richnesstaxonomy

Identifiers

PMID41268885
PMCPMC12775548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.