Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39965651›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2025

Risk-sensitive foraging in a tropical lizard.

Avik Banerjee, Maria Thaker

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Avik BanerjeeCentre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0002-1803-1636
Maria ThakerCentre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0001-6019-2639

Funding

DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/I/19/2/504639Wellcome Trust DBT India Alliance
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Foraging opportunities can be unpredictable. When foragers face a choice between resources that vary in predictability, foraging decisions not only depend on the profitability of food but also on their physiological state. This risk-sensitive foraging approach, in which animals take greater foraging risks when starving, remains relatively untested in reptiles compared with other taxa. We tested the risk-sensitive foraging theory in the tropical lizard,

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorLizardsAnimalsRewardenergy budgetoptimal foraging theoryreptilerisk averserisk pronestarvation

Identifiers

PMID39965651
PMCPMC11835483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.