ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2015
Using the Specialization Framework to Determine Degree of Dietary Specialization in a Herbivorous Woodrat.
Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Turning Over an Old Leaf- do Mammalian Herbivores Retain the Ability to Biotransform Toxic Ancestral Diets?Journal of chemical ecology · 2025Article
- Toxin tolerance across landscapes: Ecological exposure not a prerequisite.Functional ecology · 2022Article
- Differences in dietary composition and preference maintained despite gene flow across a woodrat hybrid zone.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Terpenes May Serve as Feeding Deterrents and Foraging Cues for Mammalian Herbivores.Journal of chemical ecology · 2019Article
- The Woodrat Gut Microbiota as an Experimental System for Understanding Microbial Metabolism of Dietary Toxins.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To be considered a dietary specialist, mammalian herbivores must consume large quantities of a plant species considered "difficult" with respect to nutrient or toxin content, and possess specialized adaptations to deal with plant defensive compounds or low nutritional content. Populations of Neotoma lepida in the Great Basin consume Juniperus osteosperma, a plant heavily defended by terpenes, but a detailed dietary analysis of this population is lacking. Therefore, we investigated the extent of dietary specialization in this species in comparison with the better-studied specialist species, N. stephensi. Microhistological analysis of feces from N. lepida revealed that greater than 90% of their diet in nature was comprised of juniper. In laboratory tolerance trials, N. lepida tolerated a diet of 80% J. osteosperma, similar to that observed for N. stephensi. There was no difference in the abilities of N. lepida and N. stephensi to metabolize hexobarbital, a proxy compound for terpene metabolism. In preference tests of native and non-native juniper species, N. lepida did not exhibit a preference for its native or co-occurring juniper, J. osteosperma, over the non-native species, J. monosperma, whereas N. stephensi preferred its native or co-occurring juniper J. monosperma over non-native J. osteosperma. Behavioral and habitat differences between these woodrat species lead to the categorization of N. stephensi as an obligate juniper specialist with a small range that overlaps that of its preferred food, J. monosperma, and N. lepida as a facultative juniper specialist with a large range, and only a portion of its distribution containing populations that feed extensively on J. osteosperma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26631406What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.