ArticleRoyal Society open science2025
Unravelling the decision making of foraging vultures: insights from a field experiment.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contrasting properties of predation and scavenging networks governed by megaherbivores in an African savannah.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Article
- Unravelling the decision making of foraging vultures: insights from a field experiment.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT) integrates both the consumer and the resource, yet their simultaneous assessment is uncommon. Vultures represent an ideal model for OFT studies because carrion requires no capture effort and minimal handling, allowing them to focus primarily on food searching. Here, we combined GPS tracking of 61 Iberian griffon vultures (consumers) with photo-trapping monitoring of 49 carcasses (resources) to assess the determinants of vulture foraging and the consequences for carrion consumption in two areas with different carrion abundances. First, we determined the importance of different factors (distance to the resource, hunger and competition) in the decisions of individuals of whether to descend or not on a carcass. Second, we compared carrion consumption patterns (time of carcass discovery and consumption, and maximum number of vultures gathered around the carcass) between areas. We found that distance, rather than hunger, is the primary factor determining whether a vulture descends to a carcass. In parallel, carrion was consumed similarly in areas with different resource availabilities. These findings indicate that vultures tend to eat whenever a nearby opportunity arises, consistent with a type-I functional response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.