ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2021
On the move: sloths and their epibionts as model mobile ecosystems.
Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Crescentic Hair Shaft Defects and Piedra-Like Lesions With Follicular Invasion in Northern Elephant Seals (Mirounga angustirostris).Veterinary dermatology · 2026Article
- Multi-Species Canopy Latrines in Costa Rican Cloud Forests: A Mammal Interactions Hub in a Single Tree Species.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Seroprevalence of Arboviruses and Genetic Characterization of Orbiviruses in Sloths from Western Panama.Viruses · 2025Article
- Variations in dietary patterns of living sloths revealed by finite element analysis of jaws.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
- Article
- Analysis of twelve genomes of the bacteriumPeerJ · 2024Article
- Differences in fungal communities in the fur of two- and three-toed sloths revealed by ITS metabarcoding.Microbiology (Reading, England) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sloths are unusual mobile ecosystems, containing a high diversity of epibionts living and growing in their fur as they climb slowly through the canopies of tropical forests. These epibionts include poorly studied algae, arthropods, fungi, and bacteria, making sloths likely reservoirs of unexplored biodiversity. This review aims to identify gaps and eliminate misconceptions in our knowledge of sloths and their epibionts, and to identify key questions to stimulate future research into the functions and roles of sloths within a broader ecological and evolutionary context. This review also seeks to position the sloth fur ecosystem as a model for addressing fundamental questions in metacommunity and movement ecology. The conceptual and evidence-based foundation of this review aims to serve as a guide for future hypothesis-driven research into sloths, their microbiota, sloth health and conservation, and the coevolution of symbioses in general.
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.