Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41797626›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2026

Integrating landscape ecology into generic surveillance plans for bark- and wood-boring beetles.

Davide Nardi, Davide Rassati, Andrea Battisti, Manuela Branco, Claudine Courtin, Massimo Faccoli, Nina Feddern, Joseph A Francese, Emily Franzen, André Garcia and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Integrating landscape ecology into generic surveillance plans for bark- and wood-boring beetles.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026
    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

22 authors.

Davide NardiDepartment of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Legnaro, Padua, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6438-6286
Davide RassatiDepartment of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Legnaro, Padua, Italy.
Andrea BattistiDepartment of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Legnaro, Padua, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2497-3064
Manuela BrancoCentro de Estudos Florestais, Laboratório Associado TERRA, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Claudine CourtinInstitut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (INRAE), UR 0633, Zoologie Forestière, Orléans, France.
Massimo FaccoliDepartment of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Legnaro, Padua, Italy.
Nina FeddernForest Entomology, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland.
Joseph A FranceseUSDA-APHIS-PPQ-S&T Forest Pest Methods Laboratory, Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts, USA.
Emily FranzenUSDA APHIS PPQ S&T Bethel Field Station, Bethel, Ohio, USA.
André GarciaCentro de Estudos Florestais, Laboratório Associado TERRA, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Filippo GiannoneIndependent Researcher, Padova, Italy.
Martin M GossnerForest Entomology, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1516-6364
Mats JonsellDepartment of Ecology, SLU, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0360-2651
Chantelle KostanowiczNatural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Atlantic Forestry Centre, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada.
Matteo MarchioroDepartment of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Legnaro, Padua, Italy.
Petr MartinekDepartment of Forest Protection and Wildlife Management, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Ann M RayDepartment of Biology, Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Alain RoquesInstitut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (INRAE), UR 0633, Zoologie Forestière, Orléans, France.
Jon SweeneyNatural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Atlantic Forestry Centre, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada.
Kate Van RooyenNatural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Atlantic Forestry Centre, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada.
Vincent WebsterNatural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Atlantic Forestry Centre, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada.
Lorenzo MariniDepartment of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Legnaro, Padua, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7429-7685

Funding

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service AP18PPQS&T00C164Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service AP18PPQS&T00C169Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service AP19PPQS&T00C082Canadian Forest Service, Forest Pest Risk Management ProgramFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia UID/00239Horizon 2020 Framework Programme 771271HORIZON EUROPE Climate, Energy and Mobility 101134200
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

International trade poses a growing threat to global biosecurity, with bark- and wood-boring beetles representing a major concern for forest health. Non-native species are frequently introduced at points of entry, where populations can establish in the surrounding landscape. To improve early detection, generic surveillance programs use traps in these high-risk areas, collecting a broad spectrum of species. These traps also capture native beetles, providing insights into the potential species pool that could become exotic elsewhere. However, implementing effective landscape-wide surveillance within reasonable resource limits remains challenging. In this study, we used trapping data of Cerambycidae and Scolytinae from 11 high-risk areas across Europe and North America to develop practical recommendations for generic surveillance at multiple spatial scales. Specifically, we attempted to address two key questions: (1) how to maximize the single-trap efficacy depending on the trap surroundings; and (2) how many traps should be used in a landscape-wide sampling depending on landscape composition. Under budget constraints, we recommend prioritizing trap placement within forest patches and avoiding locations surrounded by roads or buildings. Urban-dominated landscapes required greater sampling effort (i.e., more traps) than forest-dominated landscapes. Deploying fewer than four traps per square kilometer might lead to an incomplete representation of the local bark- and wood-boring beetle community, losing about 30%-50% of species. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of incorporating landscape ecology into generic surveillance planning to optimize trap effectiveness within resource limitations.

Indexed as

ColeopteraEnvironmental MonitoringAnimalsEuropeForestsIntroduced SpeciesNorth AmericaPlant BarkWoodalien speciesbiosecurityColeopterageneric surveillancelandscape ecologysample coveragesampling effortwoodborers

Identifiers

PMID41797626
PMCPMC12968951

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.