Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31236253›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2019

Phenological mismatch in Arctic-breeding shorebirds: Impact of snowmelt and unpredictable weather conditions on food availability and chick growth.

Sarah T Saalfeld, Daniel C McEwen, Dylan C Kesler, Malcolm G Butler, Jenny A Cunningham, Andrew C Doll, Willow B English, Danielle E Gerik, Kirsten Grond, Patrick Herzog and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Evaluating environmental drivers and synchrony of Arctic shorebird demographic rates to inform conservation management.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Sarah T SaalfeldMigratory Bird Management Division U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Anchorage Alaska.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6837-9729
Daniel C McEwenLimnopro Aquatic Science, Inc. South Haven Minnesota.
Dylan C KeslerThe Institute for Bird Populations Point Reyes Station California.
Malcolm G ButlerDepartment of Biological Sciences North Dakota State University Fargo North Dakota.
Jenny A CunninghamDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences University of Missouri Columbia Missouri.
Andrew C DollDenver Museum of Nature & Science Denver Colorado.
Willow B EnglishNational Wildlife Research Centre Carleton University Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Danielle E GerikCollege of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks Alaska.
Kirsten GrondDepartment of Molecular & Cell Biology University of Connecticut Storrs Connecticut.
Patrick HerzogInstitut für Biologie, Zoologie - Molekulare Ökologie Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Halle Germany.
Brooke L HillDepartment of Biology and Wildlife University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks Alaska.
Benjamin J LagasséDepartment of Integrative Biology University of Colorado Denver Denver Colorado.
Richard B LanctotMigratory Bird Management Division U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Anchorage Alaska.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ecological consequences of climate change have been recognized in numerous species, with perhaps phenology being the most well-documented change. Phenological changes may have negative consequences when organisms within different trophic levels respond to environmental changes at different rates, potentially leading to phenological mismatches between predators and their prey. This may be especially apparent in the Arctic, which has been affected more by climate change than other regions, resulting in earlier, warmer, and longer summers. During a 7-year study near Utqiaġvik (formerly Barrow), Alaska, we estimated phenological mismatch in relation to food availability and chick growth in a community of Arctic-breeding shorebirds experiencing advancement of environmental conditions (i.e., snowmelt). Our results indicate that Arctic-breeding shorebirds have experienced increased phenological mismatch with earlier snowmelt conditions. However, the degree of phenological mismatch was not a good predictor of food availability, as weather conditions after snowmelt made invertebrate availability highly unpredictable. As a result, the food available to shorebird chicks that were 2-10 days old was highly variable among years (ranging from 6.2 to 28.8 mg trap

Indexed as

Arcticchick growth ratesinsect emergenceinvertebrate availabilityphenological mismatchshorebirdstrophic mismatch

Identifiers

PMID31236253
PMCPMC6580279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.