Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38089894›Full record

ReviewEcology and evolution2023

Outstanding issues in the study of antipredator defenses.

Yuqian Huang, Tim Caro

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ecology and evolution, 2023. 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. Review
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

2 authors.

Yuqian HuangSchool of Biological Sciences University of Bristol Bristol UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1569-846X
Tim CaroSchool of Biological Sciences University of Bristol Bristol UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6804-8519

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protective defense mechanisms are well documented across the animal kingdom, but there are still examples of antipredator defenses that do not fit easily into the current conceptualization. They either fall within the intersection of multiple mechanisms or fail to fall neatly into pre-existing categories. Here, using Endler's predatory sequence as a framework, we identify problematic examples of antipredator defenses, separating them into protective mechanisms that are difficult to classify and those which act sequentially depending on context. We then discuss three ways of improving underlying terminological and definitional problems: (1) issues with English and polysemy, (2) overlapping aspects of similar mechanisms, and (3) unclear definitions. By scrutinizing the literature, we disentangle several opaque areas in the study of protective defense mechanisms and highlight questions that require further research. An unclear conceptual framework for protective defense mechanisms can lead to misconceptions in understanding the costs and benefits of defenses displayed by animals, while interchangeable terminologies and ambiguous definitions can hinder communication in antipredator studies.

Indexed as

antipredatordefense behaviorprotective coloration

Identifiers

PMID38089894
PMCPMC10714066

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.