ArticleEcology letters2019
The limits to population density in birds and mammals.
Article in Ecology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward a metabolic theory of catchments: Scaling of water and carbon fluxes with size.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Estimating density of forest bats and their long-term trends in a climate refuge.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Determinants of natal dispersal distances in North American birds.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Multi-trophic occupancy modeling connects temporal dynamics of woodpeckers and beetle sign following fire.PloS one · 2023Article
- Resource requirements for ecosystem conservation: A combined industrial and natural ecology approach to quantifying natural capital use in nature.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Traits and ecological space availability predict avian densities at the country scale of the Czech Republic.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Article
- Breaking down population density into different components to better understand its spatial variation.BMC ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Relative demographic susceptibility does not explain the extinction chronology of Sahul's megafauna.eLife · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We address two fundamental ecological questions: what are the limits to animal population density and what determines those limits? We develop simple alternative models to predict population limits in relation to body mass. A model assuming that within-species area use increases with the square of daily travel distance broadly predicts the scaling of empirical extremes of minimum density across birds and mammals. Consistent with model predictions, the estimated density range for a given mass, 'population scope', is greater for birds than for mammals. However, unlike mammals and carnivorous birds, expected broad relationships between body mass and density extremes are not supported by data on herbivorous and omnivorous birds. Our results suggest that simple constraints on mobility and energy use/supply are major determinants of the scaling of density limits, but further understanding of interactions between dietary constraints and density limits are needed to predict future wildlife population responses to anthropogenic threats.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.