Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33976857›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2021

Fine-scale foraging behavior reveals differences in the functional roles of herbivorous reef fishes.

Robert F Semmler, Simon J Brandl, Sally A Keith, David R Bellwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Robert F SemmlerLancaster Environment Centre Lancaster University Lancaster UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1257-5859
Simon J BrandlDepartment of Marine Science Marine Science Institute University of Texas Austin Port Aransas TX USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6649-2496
Sally A KeithLancaster Environment Centre Lancaster University Lancaster UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9634-2763
David R BellwoodARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies James Cook University Townsville QLD Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8911-1804

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efforts to understand and protect ecosystem functioning have put considerable emphasis on classifying species according to the functions they perform. However, coarse classifications based on diet or feeding mode often oversimplify species' contributions to ecological processes. Behavioral variation among superficially similar species is easily missed but could indicate important differences in competitive interactions and the spatial scale at which species deliver their functions. To test the extent to which behavior can vary within existing functional classifications, we investigate the diversity of foraging movements in three herbivorous coral reef fishes across two functional groups. We find significant variation in foraging movements and spatial scales of operation between species, both within and across existing functional groups. Specifically, we show that movements and space use range from low frequency foraging bouts separated by short distances and tight turns across a small area, to high frequency, far-ranging forays separated by wide sweeping turns. Overall, we add to the burgeoning evidence that nuanced behavioral differences can underpin considerable complementarity within existing functional classifications, and that species assemblages may be considerably less redundant than previously thought.

Indexed as

complementaritycoral reefsforaging behaviorfunctional traitsmovement

Identifiers

PMID33976857
PMCPMC8093660

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.