Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39901893›Full record

ReviewEcology and evolution2025

Safe Periods and Safe Activities: Two Phenological Responses to Mortality.

Théo Constant, F Stephen Dobson, Sylvain Giroud, Caroline Habold

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Théo ConstantUMR 7178, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert CURIEN Université de Strasbourg Strasbourg France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7166-8273
F Stephen DobsonUMR 7178, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert CURIEN Université de Strasbourg Strasbourg France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5562-6316
Sylvain GiroudDepartment of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, Research Institute of Wildlife Ecology University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna Vienna Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6621-7462
Caroline HaboldUMR 7178, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert CURIEN Université de Strasbourg Strasbourg France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6881-6546

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phenology is often thought to evolve mainly in response to food availability, yet recent studies have focused on predation. Predation may explain apparent mismatches between phenology and resources. One type of phenological response to predation involves shifting phenology from a period of high to low predation (i.e., a safe-period strategy). This strategy presupposes variation in predation over time due to environmental factors such as the number or diversity of predators. Predation varies not only over time but also among different activities like reproduction and dormancy. Alternative activities involve alternative behavioral or physiological states, and different locations where they take place influencing predation risk. Phenological responses to predation may involve shifting from a high risk activity to a safer one, resulting in increased survival (i.e., a «safe-activity» strategy). This strategy may theoretically evolve under environmental conditions associated with constant predation over time, but assumes variation in predation among activities. Safe-period and safe-activity strategies are not mutually exclusive, but assume different conditions for their evolution. On the basis of a literature review, our goal was to: (1) propose a classification of phenological responses to predation according to their evolutionary context, including mean population responses and interindividual differences (degree of synchrony); (2) to show how these two strategies may explain the lack of support for the idea that phenology responds primarily to food availability; and (3) to propose several approaches for testing the influence of predation on phenology. Our review highlights the relevance of studying phenology on multiple scales, thereby integrating several interspecific interactions (communities scales) and multiple activities (annual scale), and studying synchronicity and the pace-of-life (inter-individual scale).

Indexed as

hibernationlife history theorymigrationphenologypredationreproductionsurvival

Identifiers

PMID39901893
PMCPMC11788320

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.