ArticleBehavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
Persistence associated with extractive foraging explains variation in innovation in Darwin's finches.
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 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.
- First Evidence of Diverse Inhibitory Control Abilities in Pre- and Post-Metamorphic Salamanders.Integrative zoology · 2026Article
- Demonstrating the reproductive consequences of cognition: learning from experience.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Mechanical problem solving by plush-crested jays: are tools special after all?Animal cognition · 2024Article
- A multi-peak performance landscape for scale biting in an adaptive radiation of pupfishes.The Journal of experimental biology · 2024Article
- Persistence associated with extractive foraging explains variation in innovation in Darwin's finches.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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The capacity to create new behaviors is influenced by environmental factors such as foraging ecology, which can lead to phylogenetic variation in innovativeness. Alternatively, these differences may arise due to the selection of the underlying mechanisms, collaterally affecting innovativeness. To understand the evolutionary pathways that might enhance innovativeness, we examined the role of diet breadth and degree of extractive foraging, as well as a range of intervening cognitive and behavioral mechanisms (neophilia, neophobia, flexibility, motivation, and persistence). Darwin's finches are very suitable to this purpose: the clade is composed of closely related species that vary in their feeding habits and capacity to develop food innovations. Using a multi-access box, we conducted an interspecies comparison on innovative problem-solving between two diet specialists, extractive foragers (woodpecker and cactus finch), and two diet generalists, non-extractive foragers (small and medium ground finch). We predicted that if extractive foraging was associated with high innovativeness, variation would be best explained by species differences in persistence and motivation, whereas if diet generalism was the main driver, then variation would be due to differences in flexibility and responses to novelty. We found a faster capacity to innovate and a higher persistence for extractive foragers, suggesting that persistence might be adaptive to extractive foraging and only secondarily to innovation. Our findings also show that diet generalism and some variables linking it to innovation were unrelated to innovativeness and call for the development of joint experimental approaches that capture the diversity of factors giving rise to novel behaviors.
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.