ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2022
Exploration speed in captivity predicts foraging tactics and diet in free-living red knots.
Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2022. 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, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Parental and personal experience drive personality formation and individual niche diversification in group-living mites.iScience · 2025Article
- Slow-exploring captive red knots were quicker to find food in a social setting than fast explorers.Biology letters · 2024Article
- Environmental factors influencing red knot (Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Article
- Food patch use of Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) varies with personality traits.Frontiers in zoology · 2023Article
- Exploration speed in captivity predicts foraging tactics and diet in free-living red knots.The Journal of animal ecology · 2022Article
- Maternal diet exerts sex-specific effects on offspring' personalities in predatory mites.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral EcologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Variation in foraging tactics and diet is usually attributed to differences in morphology, experience and prey availability. Recently, consistent individual differences in behaviour (personality) have been shown to be associated with foraging strategies. Bolder or more exploratory individuals are predicted to have a faster pace-of-life and offset the costs of moving more or in risky areas, with higher energetic gains by encountering profitable foraging opportunities and prey. However, the relationship between personality, foraging and diet is poorly understood. We investigated how exploratory behaviour in red knots Calidris canutus is associated with foraging tactics and diet by combining laboratory experiments, field observations and stable isotope analysis. First, we developed a mobile experimental arena to measure exploration speed in controlled settings. We validated the method by repeated testing of individuals over time and contexts. This setup allowed us to measure exploratory personality at the field site, eliminating the need to bring birds into captivity for long periods of time. After releasing birds within days of their capture, we asked whether exploration speed was associated with differences in foraging tactics and diet in the wild. We found that tactile foraging red knots mainly caught hard-shelled prey that are buried in the sediment, whereas visual foraging knots only captured soft preys located close to or on the surface. We also found that faster explorers showed a higher percentage of visual foraging than slower explorers. By contrast, morphology (bill length and gizzard size) had no significant effect on foraging tactics. Diet analysis based on δ
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.