Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38806471›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

Small body size is associated with increased evolutionary lability of wing skeleton proportions in birds.

Andrew Orkney, Brandon P Hedrick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Unidirectional airflow, air sacs or the horizontal septum: what does it take to make a bird lung?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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.

Andrew OrkneyCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Cornell University, 930 Campus Rd, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA. aco58@cornell.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4972-2541
Brandon P HedrickCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Cornell University, 930 Campus Rd, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA. bph54@cornell.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4446-3405

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Birds are represented by 11,000 species and a great variety of body masses. Modular organisation of trait evolution across birds has facilitated simultaneous adaptation of different body regions to divergent ecological requirements. However, the role modularity has played in avian body size evolution, especially small-bodied, rapidly evolving and diverse avian subclades, such as hummingbirds and songbirds, is unknown. Modularity is influenced by the intersection of biomechanical restrictions, adaptation, and developmental controls, making it difficult to uncover the contributions of single factors such as body mass to skeletal organisation. We develop a novel framework to decompose this complexity, assessing factors underlying the modularity of skeletal proportions in fore-limb propelled birds distributed across a range of body masses. We demonstrate that differences in body size across birds triggers a modular reorganisation of flight apparatus proportions consistent with biomechanical expectations. We suggest weakened integration within the wing facilitates radiation in small birds. Our framework is generalisable to other groups and has the capacity to untangle the multi-layered complexity intrinsic to modular evolution.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionBirdsBody SizeFlight, AnimalWings, AnimalAnimalsBiomechanical Phenomena

Identifiers

PMID38806471
PMCPMC11133451

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.