Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39747251›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Choice of props for courtship dancing in estrildid finches.

Masayo Soma, Misaki Nakatani, Nao Ota

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Masayo Soma *Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University, Hokkaido, Japan. masayo.soma@sci.hokudai.ac.jp.
Misaki Nakatani *Biosystems Science Course, The Graduate School of Life Science, Hokkaido University, Hokkaido, Japan.
Nao OtaDepartment of Behavioural Neurobiology, Max Planck Institute for Biological Intelligence, Seewiesen, Germany.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 16H06177Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Overseas Research FellowshipsNational Geographic Society EC-KOR-44731R-18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among the diverse sexual signals used by birds, the possible signaling functions of non-bodily objects during mating/courting displays remain unexplained. It is unclear whether such object-holding gestures are purely ritualistic or serve as an advertisement of an extended phenotype to potential mates. Estrildid finches (family Estrildidae) are characterized by mutual courtship, during which either a male or female will hold nesting material (usually grass stems or straw) in the beak while singing and dancing toward the opposite sex. We predicted that this display of potential nesting material advertises the ability of an individual to collect and transport such materials. Captive adult red-cheeked cordon-bleus (Uraeginthus bengalus) and star finches (Neochmia ruficauda) were presented with different string lengths in choice tests, and results were compared with those obtained from field observations of courtship displays among U. bengalus and blue-capped cordon-bleus (Uraeginthus cyanocephalus). Both captive and wild estrildid finches preferred longer strings for displays, which is compatible with the idea that non-bodily ornaments (strings) convey information on the maximum performance potential. The evolution of nesting material holding displays is likely associated with the nesting ecology of estrildid finches, which is characterized by a high predation risk and joint nest building by mating pairs.

Indexed as

CourtshipFinchesSexual Behavior, AnimalAnimalsChoice BehaviorDancingFemaleMaleNesting BehaviorCourtshipEstrildid finchExtended phenotypeObject-useSexual signalTool-use

Identifiers

PMID39747251
PMCPMC11696241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.