Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40102541›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Cavity nesting birds show behavioural plasticity to simulated territorial intrusions in response to natural resource pulses.

Andrea R Norris, Kathy Martin

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Andrea R NorrisDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences, University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. andrea.norris@alumni.ubc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5080-1285
Kathy MartinDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences, University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We investigated the impact of two natural pulses (food and nesting resources) on intra- and inter-specific territorial behaviour of species that co-occur year-round in multi-species groups. We simulated conspecific and heterospecific territorial intrusions in two cavity-nesting species using 974 model presentations with territorial song playbacks during and after a dual resource pulse of insect (bark beetle) prey and nest cavities across 5 years in British Columbia, Canada. As beetle abundance increased, both species increased aggression toward conspecific intruders. At peak beetle abundance the (typically) subordinate generalist insectivore, mountain chickadee (Poecile gambeli), attacked model intruders more frequently than did the dominant bark insectivore, red-breasted nuthatch (Sitta canadensis), and responded more aggressively to nuthatch intruders than to conspecifics. The reversal in the inter-specific dominance hierarchy suggests that behavioural mechanisms governing community structure may change during resource pulses. Overall, we suggest that social interactions between chickadees and nuthatches are dynamic with high complexity and flexibility to major ecological changes. Future work that examines the fitness consequences of temporal variation in community dynamics and resiliency could help to reveal evolutionary mechanisms by which these species co-exist.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalBirdsNesting BehaviorTerritorialityAggressionAnimalsBritish ColumbiaColeopteraPredatory BehaviorBehavioural interactionsDominance hierarchiesEcological disruptionEcological resilienceInter-specific competitionSocial resilience

Identifiers

PMID40102541
PMCPMC11920054

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.