ArticleBehavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
Passive and active parental food allocation in a songbird.
Article in Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of multi-component, dynamic begging displays as honest signals of nestling hunger.Royal Society open science · 2026Article
- Parental control: ecology drives plasticity in parental response to offspring signals.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology · 2025Article
- Passive and active parental food allocation in a songbird.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral EcologyArticle
- Escalated begging does not compromise nestling health.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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parent-offspring conflict over food allocation can be modeled using two theoretical frameworks: passive (scramble competition) and active choice (signaling) resolution models. However, differentiating between these models empirically can be challenging. One possibility involves investigating details of decision-making by feeding parents. Different nestling traits, related to competitive prowess or signaling cryptic condition, may interact additively or non-additively as predictors of parental feeding responses. To explore this, we experimentally created even-sized, small broods of pied flycatchers and manipulated nestling cryptic quality, independently of size, by vitamin E supplementation. We explored how interactions between nestling cryptic condition, size, signals, and spatial location predicted food allocation and prey-testing by parents. Parents created the potential for spatial scramble competition between nestlings by feeding from and to a narrow range of nest locations. Heavier supplemented nestlings grew faster and were more likely to access profitable nest locations. However, the most profitable locations were not more contested, and nestling turnover did not vary in relation to spatial predictability or food supply. Postural begging was only predicted by nestling hunger and body mass, but parents did not favor heavier nestlings. This suggests that size-mediated and spatial competition in experimental broods was mild. Pied flycatcher fathers allocated food in response to nestling position and begging order, while mothers seemingly followed an active choice mechanism involving assessment of more complex traits, including postural intensity interacting with order, position, and treatment, and perhaps other stimuli when performing prey-testings. Differences in time constraints may underlie sex differences in food allocation rules.
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.