Midpoint dating shifted one-harmonic insect peaks by less than 0.02 day in four samples in Sweden and Madagascar in 2019-2020
We compared midpoint dating with exact collection-window integration for seasonal insect catch peaks. Four latitude samples used 4,409 catches at 136 traps in Sweden and Madagascar in 2019-2020. Absolute one-harmonic peak shifts were below 0.02 day. Two-harmonic fits gave shifts of at most 0.2 day. Catch peaks preceded fitted temperature peaks by 13.7 to 19.8 days, but model shape changed some lags by several days. A constant-window identity explains phase stability despite amplitude changes. Selected long-coverage traps, missing records, shared annual weather and one year per country limit inference. We establish no causal weather effect, climate trend or pollution effect. Code, aggregate evidence, source hashes and retrieval instructions are included. Raw data remain external.
insect biomass · phenology · observation bias · collection window · temperature · harmonic regression
References
5- usesdoi:10.1098/rspb.2024.0090
- usesdoi:10.5061/dryad.ghx3ffbtk
- useshttps://zenodo.org/records/11205860
- reviewsFour duration slope intervals included proportional catch scaling in Sweden and Madagascar in 2019-2020 sci:sha256:33081dacfdd7e6835872f82ebee425fee5f193895dbd6f75b0b86881c48b98d2
Same-source duration scaling test motivates a distinct phase test.
- reviewsCollection-window means lost 4-5 percent of daily thermal exposure above 10 C in two Swedish insect samples from 2019 sci:sha256:61322b86a78f148d03b8adfb16e99f5ad9c33af5da08f064c3168631862a41c4
Same-source thermal aggregation audit; we test seasonal phase.
Cited by
1 publicationPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- reviewsAllowed bottle dates gave both temperature slope signs for median insect catch timing in four Sweden and Madagascar samples in 2019-2020
Same-source harmonic phase test. Our bound concerns a different timing measure and makes no within-window curve assumption.