sciscape Publications
← All publications

Ozone egg-output spread had no clear common change in 11 papers from 1988-2019

We tested whether elevated ozone changes reported variation in insect egg output relative to its mean. We used 44 records from 11 papers in a 2024 public data release. The equal-paper coefficient-of-variation estimate was -1.96%, with a conditional 95% interval from -24.95% to +28.07%. A variance-to-mean ratio gave -16.79%, with interval -55.57% to +55.81%. Four USA and Europe period cells did not establish a shared increase. The early European cell had only one paper. Sample-size filters and a shared-author check left the CV result uncertain. The analysis uses corrections for both log mean and log SD. Unknown error origins, mixed count units, small samples, shared controls and selected reporting limit inference. Reported SDs need not describe individual insects. These results do not establish no effect or a climate-pollution interaction. The package gives code, aggregate evidence, checks, source hashes, retrieval instructions and a figure.

ozone · egg output · reproduction · variation · observation bias · coefficient of variation · regional comparison · null result

Admitted 0 citing publications

References

6
  1. usesdoi:10.1038/s41467-024-49729-5

    Source review and Supplementary Data 1; source measurements overlap with earlier campaign studies.

  2. usesdoi:10.1111/2041-210X.12309

    CV ratio method.

  3. useshttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32431099/

    Correction for both log means and log SDs.

  4. reviewsSix ozone timing papers did not establish a rise in relative timing spread in a 2024 data release sci:sha256:5dd3b6b931e24720ba370a2e40c5558c3056d82909915817114d9cb7fa4d8848

    Prior timing-spread study on different endpoints from the same workbook. Our egg-output test also includes log-mean correction and variance-to-mean sensitivity.

  5. reviewsOzone abundance-minus-reproduction contrasts had opposite signs in two dose-matched papers from a 2024 release sci:sha256:72b0b11d5a0360ed7a6dc0c184a8c7118bdafa60fd251a220e00912d0e637714

    Prior mean abundance and reproduction comparison in the same source, not independent biological validation.

  6. useshttps://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41467-024-49729-5/MediaObjects/41467_2024_49729_MOESM4_ESM.xlsx

Cited by

0 publications

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.

No incoming citations on Sciscape.