Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38959233›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Watch out! High vigilance at small waterholes when alone in open trees.

Gerhard Hofmann, Claudia Mettke-Hofmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Gouldian Finches (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Gerhard HofmannMoreton, Wirral, United Kingdom.
Claudia Mettke-HofmannSchool of Biological & Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3874-5035

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An animal's environment contains many risks causing animals to scan their environment for potential predators and threats from conspecifics. How much time they invest in such vigilance depends on environmental and social factors. Most vigilance studies have been conducted in a foraging context with little known about vigilance in other contexts. Here we investigated vigilance of Gouldian finches at waterholes considering environmental and social factors. Gouldian finches are colour polymorphic with two main head colours in both sexes co-occurring in the same population, black-headed and red-headed. Data collection was done on birds sitting in trees surrounding waterholes by measuring the frequency of head movements, which reflects how frequently they change their field of view, i.e., scan different areas in their environment. A higher frequency generally reflects higher vigilance. Gouldian finches had a higher frequency of head movements when at small waterholes and when sitting in open, leafless trees. Moreover, head movements were higher when birds were alone in the tree as compared to groups of birds. Finally, birds in same head colour morph groups had a higher frequency of head movements than birds in mixed head colour groups. Results indicate heightened vigilance with increased perception of predation risk (small waterholes, open exposed perch, when alone) but that social vigilance also played a role (group composition) with particularly the aggressive red-headed birds being more vigilant when together with other red-headed birds. Future research should investigate the effect of smaller waterholes as global warming will cause smaller waterholes to become more common for longer periods of time, which can increase stress in the birds.

Indexed as

FinchesTreesAnimalsBehavior, AnimalFemaleHead MovementsMalePredatory Behavior

Identifiers

PMID38959233
PMCPMC11221651

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.