Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41302895›Full record

ArticleInsects2025

An Evaluation of the Popularity of Australian Native Bee Taxa and State of Knowledge of Native Bee Taxonomy Among the Bee-Interested Public.

Kit Prendergast

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insects, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

1 author.

Kit PrendergastSchool of Molecular & Life Sciences, Curtin University, Kent Street, Bentley, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1164-6099

Funding

Hesperia NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bee declines are making headlines, yet awareness of native bees is limited, which may stem in part from poor taxonomic knowledge and under-representation in media and education. This study aimed to determine the Australian public's taxonomic knowledge of native bees and identify the relative popularity of species. We explored this by asking "What is your favourite Australian bee species?" to members joining the Facebook group "The Buzz on Wild Bees". Over nine months, 580 people responded, but only 400 provided an answer of their favourite Australian native bee species, with 419 answers in total (as some provided more than 1 answer). Of these answers, just 12.9% provided a name for a species, rather than a group, and only 7.6% provided a scientific name. The group that emerged as the favourite were the

Indexed as

AmegillaAustralian native beesbeesblue banded beesconservationscience communicationscientific literacysocial mediataxonomyTetragonulawild bees

Identifiers

PMID41302895
PMCPMC12653838

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.