ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020
Avian egg and nestling detection in the wild: should we rely on visual models or behavioural experiments?
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nestling Plumage Colour Variation in a Sexually Dichromatic Hole-Nesting Passerine Bird-Potential Functions and Mechanisms.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Impact of nest sanitation behavior on hosts' egg rejection: an empirical study and meta-analyses.Current zoology · 2021Article
- Signal detection, acceptance thresholds and the evolution of animal recognition systems.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The fields of avian egg and nestling colour detection have rapidly advanced owing to the application of visual models, which have allowed assessing of evolutionary questions considering receiver perception. Here, I first review the literature aiming to identify patterns of avian visual model usage. Second, I elaborate on limitations in the application of the receptor-noise limited perceptual (RNL hereafter) model. A systematic literature review revealed that the RNL model was the most used approach (81% of studies) in the field, and that most studies (76%) were concerned with classic evolutionary questions in avian brood parasitism. Some known limitations of the RNL model deal with model assumptions and parameterization, or, a poor consideration of post-detection neural processes. Others, however, are specific of the fields of egg and nestling discrimination and deal with the highly variable nature of ambient light at the nests, the complex colour design of eggs and nestlings, the multi-dimensional nature of perception, and the possible implication of learning. I, therefore, conclude that visual models should be used with caution to establish inference about egg and nestling discrimination, and rather be used to provide reasonable hypotheses which need to be validated with behavioural experiments. This article is part of the theme issue 'Signal detection theory in recognition systems: from evolving models to experimental tests'.
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.