ArticleEcology and evolution2026
Thinking Outside the Black Box: Seven Guidelines for GenAI Use in the Ecological Sciences.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools are increasingly incorporated into ecological workflows at every stage of the scientific process, from hypothesis generation and data collection to synthesis, analysis, manuscript preparation, and peer review. This rapid integration presents new opportunities for discovery but also poses fundamental challenges to the epistemological foundations of the field. We discuss how the uncritical adoption of GenAI risks eroding core principles of ecological inquiry, including idea generation, reproducibility, transparency, and engagement with natural systems. By prioritizing scale, speed, and statistical pattern detection over rigorous theory development and testing, GenAI may shift research away from theory-driven questions and toward large-scale data-mining approaches. GenAI tools offer clear benefits when used thoughtfully; these include expanded access to information and the ability to synthesize across otherwise disparate disciplines and datasets. But overemphasis on these approaches could have adverse impacts on the field, including reducing reproducibility and ecological inference and reinforcing existing inequities in knowledge production. Here, we identify key challenges associated with GenAI integration in the field of ecology and provide seven actionable guidelines to support its responsible and effective use. We call for a concerted effort to engage in reflective and intentional use of GenAI in ecological research, resisting pressures to prioritize efficiency over the rigor, creativity, inclusivity, and societal relevance of our field.
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.