Journal: The Journal of Applied Ecology

Article Title: BEEHAVE : a systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure

doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12222

Figure Lengend Snippet: Overview of the BEEHAVE model structure: Based on the egg‐laying rate and interacting with the varroa and foraging modules, the structure of a single honeybee colony is modelled. A separate landscape module allows the determination of detection probabilities (%) of flower patches by scouting bees and definition of their nectar and pollen flows over the season. This information is then taken into account when foragers collect food in an agent‐based foraging module. Note that the various mortalities implemented in the model are not shown in this figure.

Article Snippet: Three different settings were used to simulate foraging conditions ( n = 10 replicates for each): (1) ‘BEEHAVE default setting’ using real weather data (Rothamsted, 2009), (2) ‘BEEHAVE artificial weather’ simulating more favourable conditions: daily foraging period follows a bell‐shaped curve over the year (maximum 12 h per day), (3) ‘BEEHAVE ideal’: honey and pollen stores set to remain full so that no foraging takes place, to demonstrate the maximum potential growth rate that can be achieved by the model.

Techniques:

Journal: The Journal of Applied Ecology

Article Title: BEEHAVE : a systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure

doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12222

Figure Lengend Snippet: (a) Colony dynamics of BEEHAVE under three sets of conditions: the default setting (continuous line), a setting with favourable, artificial weather data (dashed line) and a setting with ideal food supply that requires no foraging (dotted line) (mean ± SD; n = 10) in comparison with data from literature (data redrawn from Schmickl & Crailsheim ). Under ideal food supply, the model colonies peak at the end of August (125 000 workers) and contain about 80 000 bees at the end of the year ( y ‐axis truncated for clarity). Error bars are shown for every second day. (b) Numbers of worker brood cells, and honey and pollen stores under the BEEHAVE default setting, and numbers of brood cells under ‘ideal’ conditions (mean ± SD; n = 10). Note that pollen stores are shown as increased by a factor of 10 for clarity in the figure. Empirical brood data redrawn from Imdorf, Ruoff and Fluri (squares: fig. (‘control’), n = 8; circles: fig. 14 (‘carnica’), n = 54). Error bars are shown for every fifth day.

Article Snippet: Three different settings were used to simulate foraging conditions ( n = 10 replicates for each): (1) ‘BEEHAVE default setting’ using real weather data (Rothamsted, 2009), (2) ‘BEEHAVE artificial weather’ simulating more favourable conditions: daily foraging period follows a bell‐shaped curve over the year (maximum 12 h per day), (3) ‘BEEHAVE ideal’: honey and pollen stores set to remain full so that no foraging takes place, to demonstrate the maximum potential growth rate that can be achieved by the model.

Techniques: Comparison, Control

Journal: The Journal of Applied Ecology

Article Title: BEEHAVE : a systems model of honeybee colony dynamics and foraging to explore multifactorial causes of colony failure

doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12222

Figure Lengend Snippet: Simulation of a feeder experiment by Seeley, Camazine and Sneyd on 19th June: Two feeders are set up 400 m north and south of the colony with sugar concentrations of 0·75 and 2·5 mol L −1 , respectively. After 4 h, the two feeders are switched. The number of visits at each feeder relative to the maximum number of visits over time is shown for BEEHAVE simulations compared with the redrawn empirical data. Simulations are based on 10 replicates with the number of visits being averaged for each 30 min time slot.

Article Snippet: Three different settings were used to simulate foraging conditions ( n = 10 replicates for each): (1) ‘BEEHAVE default setting’ using real weather data (Rothamsted, 2009), (2) ‘BEEHAVE artificial weather’ simulating more favourable conditions: daily foraging period follows a bell‐shaped curve over the year (maximum 12 h per day), (3) ‘BEEHAVE ideal’: honey and pollen stores set to remain full so that no foraging takes place, to demonstrate the maximum potential growth rate that can be achieved by the model.

Techniques:

Journal: Scientific Data

Article Title: Over a decade of atmospheric mercury monitoring at Amsterdam Island in the French Southern and Antarctic Lands

doi: 10.1038/s41597-023-02740-9

Figure Lengend Snippet: Tekran® 2537 A/B integration parameters optimisation for Hg peak detection in low-level ambient air concentration conditions. N-up is the number of consecutive up marks required to register an upslope condition; V-up is the size of each increase when Hg is detected, in analog to digital (A/D) counts (LSBs) required to be qualified as an up mark; N-dn is the number of consecutive down marks required to register a downslope condition; V-dn is the size of a decrease, also in A/D counts required to qualify as a down mark; NBase if the number of consecutive no changes required to register a baseline condition after a downslope has been detected and finally, VBase corresponds to the permissible change allowed from one reading to the next to qualify as a “no change” condition. Once NBase consecutive no changes have been registered, the first such reading is considered to be the end of the peak and a baseline condition is consequently flagged. LSB (Least Significant Bit) is the smallest level that an A/D can convert.

Article Snippet: Tekran® default integration settings , N-up : 7 , N-dn : 3 , NBase : 5.

Techniques: Concentration Assay