Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 357

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Butterfly numbers and weather: predicting historical trends in abundance and the future effects of climate change

Roy, D. B., Rothery, P., Moss, D., Pollard, E., Thomas, J. A.·2001·Journal of Animal Ecology

Abstract

Summary The effect of weather on the size of British butterfly populations was studied using national weather records and the Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (BMS), a national database that has measured butterfly abundance since 1976. Strong associations between weather and population fluctuations and trends were found in 28 of 31 species studied . The main positive associations were with warm summer (especially June) temperature during the current and previous year, low rainfall in the current year and high rainfall in the previous year . Most bivoltine species benefited from warm June weather in the current year, three spring species and two that overwinter as adults benefited from warm weather in the previous summer, and most species with moist or semi‐shaded habitats increased following high rainfall and cooler weather in the previous year. Simple models incorporating weather variables and density effects were constructed for each species using the first 15 years’ population data (1976–90) . These fitted the observed data for that period well (median R 2 = 70%). Models were less good at predicting changes in abundance over the next 7 years (1991–97), although significant predictive success was obtained. Parameter values of models were then adjusted to incorporate the full 22‐year data‐run . For the eight species whose models had best predicted population changes or fitted the data well ( R 2 > 85%), models were run from 1767 to 1997, using historical weather records, to ‘predict’ trends in abundance over the past two centuries . For three species it was possible to compare predicted past trends with contemporary accounts of abundance since 1800 . In each case, the match between predictions and these qualitative assessments was good. Models were also used to predict future changes in abundance, using three published scenarios for climate change . Most, but not all, species are predicted to increase in the UK under warmer climates, a few species stayed stable, and only one species – the agricultural pest Pieris brassicae (Cabbage White) – is predicted to decline.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2001.00480.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 357

Metadata

Authors
Roy, D. B., Rothery, P., Moss, D., Pollard, E., & Thomas, J. A.
Venue
Journal of Animal Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-03
Volume
70
Issue
2
Pages
201-217
ISSN
  • 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2656
OpenAlex
W2081988732
Cited by
357
References
0
FWCI
9.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Butterfly numbers and weather: predicting historical trends in abundance and the future effects of climate change. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2001.00480.x
The paper
Roy, D. B., Rothery, P., Moss, D., Pollard, E., & Thomas, J. A. (2001). Butterfly numbers and weather: predicting historical trends in abundance and the future effects of climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2001.00480.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.