↓ Skip to main content

Microclimate Data Improve Predictions of Insect Abundance Models Based on Calibrated Spatiotemporal Temperatures

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Microclimate Data Improve Predictions of Insect Abundance Models Based on Calibrated Spatiotemporal Temperatures
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00139
Pubmed ID
Authors

François Rebaudo, Emile Faye, Olivier Dangles

Abstract

A large body of literature has recently recognized the role of microclimates in controlling the physiology and ecology of species, yet the relevance of fine-scale climatic data for modeling species performance and distribution remains a matter of debate. Using a 6-year monitoring of three potato moth species, major crop pests in the tropical Andes, we asked whether the spatiotemporal resolution of temperature data affect the predictions of models of moth performance and distribution. For this, we used three different climatic data sets: (i) the WorldClim dataset (global dataset), (ii) air temperature recorded using data loggers (weather station dataset), and (iii) air crop canopy temperature (microclimate dataset). We developed a statistical procedure to calibrate all datasets to monthly and yearly variation in temperatures, while keeping both spatial and temporal variances (air monthly temperature at 1 km² for the WorldClim dataset, air hourly temperature for the weather station, and air minute temperature over 250 m radius disks for the microclimate dataset). Then, we computed pest performances based on these three datasets. Results for temperature ranging from 9 to 11°C revealed discrepancies in the simulation outputs in both survival and development rates depending on the spatiotemporal resolution of the temperature dataset. Temperature and simulated pest performances were then combined into multiple linear regression models to compare predicted vs. field data. We used an additional set of study sites to test the ability of the results of our model to be extrapolated over larger scales. Results showed that the model implemented with microclimatic data best predicted observed pest abundances for our study sites, but was less accurate than the global dataset model when performed at larger scales. Our simulations therefore stress the importance to consider different temperature datasets depending on the issue to be solved in order to accurately predict species abundances. In conclusion, keeping in mind that the mismatch between the size of organisms and the scale at which climate data are collected and modeled remains a key issue, temperature dataset selection should be balanced by the desired output spatiotemporal scale for better predicting pest dynamics and developing efficient pest management strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 100 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 22%
Researcher 17 17%
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 28 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 43%
Environmental Science 14 14%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 36 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2016.
All research outputs
#5,553,126
of 22,860,626 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#2,517
of 13,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,451
of 299,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#30
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,860,626 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.