Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39775088›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2025

Strange features are no better than no features: predator recognition by untrained birds.

Ondřej Fišer, Irena Strnadová, Petr Veselý, Michaela Syrová, Michal Němec, Barbora Kamišová, Josef Šalom, Roman Fuchs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 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

8 authors.

Ondřej FišerDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, České Budějovice, 370 05, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1437-5690
Irena StrnadováDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Albertov 6, Prague 2, 128 00, Czech Republic.
Petr VeselýDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, České Budějovice, 370 05, Czech Republic. veselp03@prf.jcu.cz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9935-2150
Michaela SyrováDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, České Budějovice, 370 05, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2755-3716
Michal NěmecDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, České Budějovice, 370 05, Czech Republic.
Barbora KamišováDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, České Budějovice, 370 05, Czech Republic.
Josef ŠalomDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, České Budějovice, 370 05, Czech Republic.
Roman FuchsDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, České Budějovice, 370 05, Czech Republic.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6511-3207

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predator recognition is essential for prey survival, allowing for appropriate antipredator strategies. Some bird species, such as the red-backed shrike (Lanius collurio), distinguish not only between predators and non-threatening species but also between different predator species. Earlier studies have identified general predator "key features", especially beak shape and talons, as critical for predator recognition. The question, though, still remains of whether exchanging predator key features with those of nonpredatory species or, alternatively, completely removing them, have different or equal impact on recognition. Here we tested to ascertain whether the presence of the "incorrect key features" of a harmless pigeon (Columba livia) placed on a common kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) body impairs predator recognition more efficiently than the absence of any key features. We presented an unmodified kestrel dummy and two modified kestrel dummies (one with pigeon key features, the other lacking key features) to wild red-backed shrikes defending their nest. The shrikes attacked the unmodified dummy kestrel more intensively than both kestrel modifications when defending the nest. However, shrikes did not show different responses to the kestrel with pigeon key features and the featureless kestrel. Our findings show that the absence and exchange of key features have the same effect in this case. These results are discussed in the context of recognition of a specific predator species and predators as a category in general.

Indexed as

ColumbidaeFalconiformesPredatory BehaviorRecognition, PsychologyAnimalsAntipredator behaviourCategorizationLanius collurioMobbingPredator–prey interactionsRecognition

Identifiers

PMID39775088
PMCPMC11706896

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.