CASTAGNEYROL, B. | Search bioRxiv

bioRxiv2026

Knowledge gap and conditional receptivity: why tree and forest professionals underutilize citizen science for quarantine pest detection in France

Exotic pests and pathogens pose a major threat to forest ecosystems. Early detection of newly introduced organisms is critical for implementing effective eradication measures before they become established. Citizen science platforms have emerged as promising sources of biodiversity data for detecting invasive pests and pathogens, yet their integration into formal biosecurity surveillance remains limited. Using France as a case study, we surveyed 101 professionals involved in forest and urban tree management and pest surveillance to assess their knowledge of regulated tree pests and pathogens and their attitudes towards online citizen science platforms for biosecurity applications. We focused on ten focal species representing different regulatory statuses under EU legislation. We assessed the knowledge professionals have of these species and their regulatory status, and explored sources of variation in their opinions regarding the use of citizen science platforms as a tool for post-border biosecurity. Experts involved in mandatory surveillance of regulated organisms (SORE experts) demonstrated consistent knowledge of quarantine pests, whereas other professionals knowledge varied by species, with greater familiarity for non-quarantine, widely distributed pests. Half of respondents used citizen science platforms, predominantly to consult species distribution rather than to contribute observations. Professionals receptivity to citizen science increased significantly when species were perceived as easy to identify, but they expressed more confidence in citizen science for monitoring established pests than for the early detection of quarantine species. The survey reveals that while citizen science platforms are known and valued as information sources, they remain underutilized as mechanisms for sharing field observations, even among surveillance professionals.

ecology↗

bioRxiv2024

Accuracy in bird predation assessment: Camera traps testing the efficacy of plasticine caterpillars as prey models

Sampling methods that are both scientifically rigorous and ethical are cornerstones of any experimental biological research. Since its introduction 30 years ago, the method of using plasticine prey to quantify predation pressure has become increasingly popular in biology. However, recent studies have questioned the accuracy of the method, suggesting that misinterpretation of predator bite marks and the artificiality of the models may bias the results. Yet, bias per se might not be a methodological issue as soon as its statistical distribution in the samples is even, quantifiable, and thus correctable in quantitative analyses. In this study, we focus on avian predation of lepidopteran larvae models, which is one of the most extensively studied predator-prey interactions across diverse ecosystems worldwide. We compared bird predation on plasticine caterpillar models to that on dead caterpillars of similar size and color, using camera traps to assess actual predation events and to evaluate observer accuracy in identifying predation marks a posteriori. The question of whether plasticine models reliably measure insectivorous bird predation remained unanswered, for two reasons: (1) even the evaluation of experienced observers in the posterior assessment of predation marks on plasticine models was subjective to some extent, and (2) camera traps failed to reflect predation rates as assessed by observers, partly because they could only record evidence of bird presence rather than actual predation events. Camera traps detected more evidence of bird presence than predation clues on plasticine models, suggesting that fake prey may underestimate the foraging activity of avian insectivores. The evaluation of avian predation on real caterpillar corpses was probably also compromised by losses to other predators, likely ants. Given the uncertainties and limitations revealed by this study, and in the current absence of more effective monitoring methods, it remains simpler, more cost-effective, ethical, and reliable to keep using plasticine models to assess avian predation. However, it is important to continue developing improved monitoring technologies to better evaluate and refine these methods in order to advance research in this field.

ecology↗