Dataset Information

Focal Plant Observations as a Standardised Method for Pollinator Monitoring: Opportunities and Limitations for Mass Participation Citizen Science.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Recently there has been increasing focus on monitoring pollinating insects, due to concerns about their declines, and interest in the role of volunteers in monitoring pollinators, particularly bumblebees, via citizen science.

Methodology / principal findings

The Big Bumblebee Discovery was a one-year citizen science project run by a partnership of EDF Energy, the British Science Association and the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology which sought to assess the influence of the landscape at multiple scales on the diversity and abundance of bumblebees. Timed counts of bumblebees (Bombus spp.; identified to six colour groups) visiting focal plants of lavender (Lavendula spp.) were carried out by about 13 000 primary school children (7-11 years old) from over 4000 schools across the UK. 3948 reports were received totalling 26 868 bumblebees. We found that while the wider landscape type had no significant effect on reported bumblebee abundance, the local proximity to flowers had a significant effect (fewer bumblebees where other flowers were reported to be >5m away from the focal plant). However, the rate of mis-identifcation, revealed by photographs uploaded by participants and a photo-based quiz, was high.

Conclusions / significance

Our citizen science results support recent research on the importance of local flocal resources on pollinator abundance. Timed counts of insects visiting a lure plant is potentially an effective approach for standardised pollinator monitoring, engaging a large number of participants with a simple protocol. However, the relatively high rate of mis-identifications (compared to reports from previous pollinator citizen science projects) highlights the importance of investing in resources to train volunteers. Also, to be a scientifically valid method for enquiry, citizen science data needs to be sufficiently high quality, so receiving supporting evidence (such as photographs) would allow this to be tested and for records to be verified.

SUBMITTER: Roy HE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4795797 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Citizen science is an approach that has become increasingly popular in recent years. Despite this growing popularity, there still is widespread scepticism in the academic world about the validity and quality of data from citizen science projects. And although there might be great potential, citizen science is a rarely used approach in the field of bioacoustics. To better understand the possibilities, but also the limitations, we here evaluated data generated in a citizen science project on nightingale song as a case study. We analysed the quantity and quality of song recordings made in a non-standardized way with a smartphone app by citizen scientists and the standardized recordings made with professional equipment by academic researchers. We made comparisons between the recordings of the two approaches and among the user types of the app to gain insights into the temporal recording patterns, the quantity and quality of the data. To compare the deviation of the acoustic parameters in the recordings with smartphones and professional devices from the original song recordings, we conducted a playback test. Our results showed that depending on the user group, citizen scientists produced many to a lot of recordings of valid quality for further bioacoustic research. Differences between the recordings provided by the citizen and the expert group were mainly caused by the technical quality of the devices used-and to a lesser extent by the citizen scientists themselves. Especially when differences in spectral parameters are to be investigated, our results demonstrate that the use of the same high-quality recording devices and calibrated external microphones would most likely improve data quality. We conclude that many bioacoustic research questions may be carried out with the recordings of citizen scientists. We want to encourage academic researchers to get more involved in participatory projects to harness the potential of citizen science-and to share scientific curiosity and discoveries more directly with society.

Project description:Citizen science approaches are of great interest for their potential to efficiently and sustainably monitor wildlife populations on both public and private lands. Here we present two studies that worked with volunteers to set camera traps for ecological surveys. The photographs recorded by these citizen scientists were archived and verified using the eMammal software platform, providing a professional grade, vouchered database of biodiversity records. Motivated by managers' concern with perceived high bear activity, our first example enlisted the help of homeowners in a short-term study to compare black bear activity inside a National Historic Site with surrounding private land. We found similar levels of bear activity inside and outside the NHS, and regional comparisons suggest the bear population is typical. Participants benefited from knowing their local bear population was normal and managers refocused bear management given this new information. Our second example is a continuous survey of wildlife using the grounds of a nature education center that actively manages habitat to maintain a grassland prairie. Center staff incorporated the camera traps into educational programs, involving visitors with camera setup and picture review. Over two years and 5,968 camera-nights this survey has collected 41,393 detections of 14 wildlife species. Detection rates and occupancy were higher in open habitats compared to forest, suggesting that the maintenance of prairie habitat is beneficial to some species. Over 500 volunteers of all ages participated in this project over two years. Some of the greatest benefits have been to high school students, exemplified by a student with autism who increased his communication and comfort level with others through field work with the cameras. These examples show how, with the right tools, training and survey design protocols, citizen science can be used to answer a variety of applied management questions while connecting participants with their secretive mammal neighbors.

Project description:Citizen Science is a powerful tool for biodiversity research, as it facilitates data recording at large scales that would otherwise be impossible to cover by standard academic research. Despite its benefits, the accuracy of citizen science data remains a subject of concern among scientists, with varying results reported so far. Neither citizen science data nor academic records are immune to biases, which can significantly impact the quality and reliability of observations. Here, using insects in the Iberian Peninsula as a case study, we compare data collected by participatory platforms to those obtained through academic research projects, and assess their taxonomic, spatial, temporal, and environmental biases. Results show a prominent taxonomic bias in both academic and citizen science data, with certain insect orders receiving more attention than others. These taxonomic biases are conserved between different participatory platforms, as well as between groups of users with different levels of contribution performance. The biases captured by leading contributors in participatory platforms mirrored those of sporadic users and academic data. Citizen science data had higher spatial coverage and less spatial clustering than academic data, showing also clearer trends in temporal seasonality. Environmental coverage over time was more stable in citizen science than in academic records. User behaviour, preference, taxonomical expertise, data collection methodologies and external factors may contribute to these biases. This study shows the multifaceted nature of biases present in academic records and citizen science platforms. The insights gained from this analysis emphasize the need for careful consideration of these biases when making use of biodiversity data from different sources. Combining academic and citizen science data enhances our understanding of biodiversity, as their integration offers a more comprehensive perspective than relying solely on either dataset alone, especially since biases in these two types of data are not always the same.