Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41673071›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Estimating species commonness and prevalence through unsupervised methods.

Pasquale Bove, Andrea Bertini, Gianpaolo Coro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.

Pasquale Bove *Istituto di Geoscienze e Georisorse, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, 56124, Pisa, Italy.
Andrea Bertini *Independent Researcher, 56126, Pisa, Italy.
Gianpaolo Coro *Istituto di Scienza e Tecnologie dell'Informazione "A. Faedo", Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, 56124, Pisa, Italy. gianpaolo.coro@cnr.it.

Funding

Next Generation EU Mission 4, Component 2 - CUP B53C22002150006 - Project IR0000032 - ITINERIS - Italian Integrated Environmental Research Infrastructures System IR0000032
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prevalence of a species in a given area is crucial for estimating the environmental conditions associated with its subsistence within ecological niche models (ENMs). Prevalence is defined as the proportion of presences relative to the total number of sampled sites, reflecting prior expectation on species commonness or rarity. However, reliable estimation often faces challenges due to limited or biased occurrence data, particularly for rare or poorly monitored species. This work presents a data-driven, multi-species methodology to estimate species prevalence for use in ENMs. It leverages species occurrence records from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility and is entirely unsupervised. It utilises two clustering methods, one deep-learning model, and an ensemble model, plus statistical analysis to classify species commonness and transform classifications into prevalence probabilities. A case study is presented for 161 species living in the Massaciuccoli Lake basin (Tuscany, Italy), a wetland of high biodiversity value and ecological sensitivity. The models classified the species' prevalence based on observations from other Italian wetland sites, and were evaluated against expert-based assessments. All models achieved high accuracy, with the deep-learning model achieving the highest (~ 81-90%). The proposed methodology is scalable and reproducible and can inform ENMs with objective, robust prevalence estimates.

Indexed as

BiodiversityCluster AnalysisClustering AlgorithmsDeep LearningEcosystemItalyWetlandsArtificial intelligenceDeep learningSpecies commonnessSpecies prevalenceWetlands

Identifiers

PMID41673071
PMCPMC12966340

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.