ArticleOecologia2022
Sexual differences in phenotypical predictors of floating status: body condition influences male but not female reproductive status in a wild passerine.
Article in Oecologia, 2022. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex-Specific Yolk Allocation Revisited: A Test in Starlings and a Review of Evidence in Birds.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- An immune challenge affects growth dynamics, oxidative stress and survival in wild spotless starling nestlings.The Journal of experimental biology · 2025Article
- Corticosterone and glucose are correlated and show similar response patterns to temperature and stress in a free-living bird.The Journal of experimental biology · 2024Article
- Male starling floaters preferentially visit nests of males with reduced resource holding potential.Biology letters · 2024Article
- Not all who wander are lost: prospecting and settlement of male floaters in the spotless starling.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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Floaters constitute the sexually mature but non-breeding part of populations. Despite being ubiquitous in most species, knowledge about floaters is scarce. Ignoring this significant number of individuals may strongly bias our understanding of population dynamics and sexual selection processes. We used the spotless starling (Sturnus unicolor) to examine whether phenotypical and non-phenotypical variables from early and adult life predict reproductive status, focusing on the earliest age at which most individuals start to breed, when the percentage of floaters is the highest. We compiled data from a long-term study involving eight female and seven male cohorts of individuals PIT-tagged at birth. We compared a suite of nestling (condition, hatching date and brood size) and adult variables (condition, size and ornamentation) between floaters and breeders. We found that adult and nestling body condition strongly and positively influenced the likelihood of breeding in males. Path analysis revealed that male reproductive status could only be predicted by considering nestling body condition-the influence of this variable superseded adult body condition. Female reproductive status was only negatively associated with hatching date. Ornamentation was not associated with reproductive status in any of the sexes, although path analyses revealed that body condition was positively associated with throat feather length. We conclude that predictors of reproductive status are sex-specific in the spotless starling, suggesting an important role of body condition in access to breeding resources in males. Our results also highlight the long-term influence of early life on life trajectories and their potential implications on floating status.
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.