ArticleRoyal Society open science2020
Natural barriers: waterfall transit by small flying animals.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Waterfalls are conspicuous geomorphological features with heterogeneous structure, complex dynamics and multiphase flows. Swifts, dippers and starlings are well-known to nest behind waterfalls, and have been reported to fly through them. For smaller fliers, by contrast, waterfalls seem to represent impenetrable barriers, but associated physical constraints and the kinematic responses of volant animals during transit are unknown. Here, we describe the flight behaviour of hummingbirds (the sister group to the swifts) and of various insect taxa as they fly through an artificial sheet waterfall. We additionally launched plastic balls at different speeds at the waterfall so as to assess the inertial dependence of sheet penetration. Hummingbirds were able to penetrate the waterfall with reductions in both their translational speed, and stroke amplitude. The body tilted more vertically and exhibited greater rotations in roll, pitch and yaw, along with increases in tail spread and pitch. The much smaller plastic balls and some flies moving at speeds greater than 2.3 m s
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.