ArticleScientific reports2020
Evaluating the performance of the Bayesian mixing tool MixSIAR with fatty acid data for quantitative estimation of diet.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. 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.
- Selective nutrient incorporation may underestimate heterotrophy of a mixotrophic reef-building coral.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Assessing the influence of blubber stratification on the estimation of diet in phocid seals using the MixSIAR model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Provenance analyses of silted sediments in Shenzhen Bay: Insights based on rare earth elements and stable isotopes.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Complementary use of stable isotopes and fatty acids for quantitative diet estimation of sympatric predators, the Antarctic pack-ice seals.Oecologia · 2021Article
- Assessing the Reliability of Quantitative Fatty Acid Signature Analysis and Compound-Specific Isotope Analysis-Based Mixing Models for Trophic Studies.Biomolecules · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We test the performance of the Bayesian mixing model, MixSIAR, to quantitatively predict diets of consumers based on their fatty acids (FAs). The known diets of six species, undergoing controlled-feeding experiments, were compared with dietary predictions modelled from their FAs. Test subjects included fish, birds and mammals, and represent consumers with disparate FA compositions. We show that MixSIAR with FA data accurately identifies a consumer's diet, the contribution of major prey items, when they change their diet (diet switching) and can detect an absent prey. Results were impacted if the consumer had a low-fat diet due to physiological constraints. Incorporating prior information on the potential prey species into the model improves model performance. Dietary predictions were reasonable even when using trophic modification values (calibration coefficients, CCs) derived from different prey. Models performed well when using CCs derived from consumers fed a varied diet or when using CC values averaged across diets. We demonstrate that MixSIAR with FAs is a powerful approach to correctly estimate diet, in particular if used to complement other methods.
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.