Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33791513›Full record

ArticleIntegrative organismal biology (Oxford, England)2019

Shifting Paradigms in the Mechanics of Nectar Extraction and Hummingbird Bill Morphology.

A Rico-Guevara, M A Rubega, K J Hurme, R Dudley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Diet of bird-like troodontid dinosaurs: synthesis of a contentious clade.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Food transport in Reptilia: a comparative viewpoint.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Mechanoethology: The Physical Mechanisms of Behavior.Integrative and comparative biology · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors.

A Rico-GuevaraDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, 3040 Valley Life Sciences Building, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4067-5312
M A RubegaDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.
K J HurmeDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, 3040 Valley Life Sciences Building, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
R DudleyDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, 3040 Valley Life Sciences Building, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As functional morphologists, we aim to connect structures, mechanisms, and emergent higher-scale phenomena (e.g., behavior), with the ulterior motive of addressing evolutionary patterns. The fit between flowers and hummingbird bills has long been used as an example of impressive co-evolution, and hence hummingbirds' foraging behavior and ecological associations have been the subject of intense study. To date, models of hummingbird foraging have been based on the almost two-centuries-old assumption that capillary rise loads nectar into hummingbird tongue grooves. Furthermore, the role of the bill in the drinking process has been overlooked, instead considering it as the mere vehicle with which to traverse the corolla and access the nectar chamber. As a scientific community, we have been making incorrect assumptions about the basic aspects of how hummingbirds extract nectar from flowers. In this article, we summarize recent advances on drinking biomechanics, morphological and ecological patterns, and selective forces involved in the shaping of the hummingbird feeding apparatus, and also address its modifications in a previously unexpected context, namely conspecific and heterospecific fighting. We explore questions such as: how do the mechanics of feeding define the limits and adaptive consequences of foraging behaviors? Which are the selective forces that drive bill and tongue shape, and associated sexually dimorphic traits? And finally, what are the proximate and ultimate causes of their foraging strategies, including exploitative and interference competition? Increasing our knowledge of morphology, mechanics, and diversity of hummingbird feeding structures will have implications for understanding the ecology and evolution of these remarkable animals.

Identifiers

PMID33791513
PMCPMC7671138

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.