ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Can Central Place Foraging Theory Predict Material Collection Behaviours of the Eurasian Beaver (
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Central place foragers (CPF) are animals that return collected resources to their central place. During foraging trips, individuals may exhibit different strategies and either prioritize energy maximizing (EM) during foraging bouts or minimize the time (Time minimising, TM) they spend away from their central place. The exhibited strategy may depend on the composition and distribution of the desired resources and costs of local threats. Beavers exhibit CPF, collecting timber for food and for use in constructions. We assessed trees felled by beavers and control, unfelled trees at two rivers in England and Norway that differed in resource availability and distribution and history of beaver occupation. We evaluated evidence to support or refute EM and TM strategies. We found that beavers were selective in the size and species of trees that they felled. However, the beavers differed between sites in whether their felling was spatially clustered or more randomly distributed. These results suggest site-dependent variation in the predictive value of the EM and TM strategies of CPF for beaver material collection behaviors. These differences between the two sites may reflect different optimal foraging strategies driven by different lengths of occupation by beavers in the vicinity.
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.