ArticleBMC biology2025
Complex competition interactions between Egyptian fruit bats and black rats in the real world.
Article in BMC biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Complex competition interactions between Egyptian fruit bats and black rats in the real world.BMC biology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInterspecific interactions, including competition and predation, are key drivers of ecological systems. Understanding these interactions remains challenging in the wild as it requires quantifying their effects, particularly the non-consumptive effects (NCEs) driven by predation risk. We conducted a 7-month study in a semi-natural open bat colony, monitoring interactions between Egyptian fruit bats (Rousettus aegyptiacus) and black rats (Rattus rattus) competing for food, where rats also pose a potential predation risk to the bats.
resultsVideo analysis revealed that bat responses to rats were fundamentally different from responses to conspecifics. The primary response was avoidance, with bat landings near food decreasing significantly when rats were present. For the 789 landings that did occur, bats showed increased vigilance and reduced foraging success, demonstrating clear NCEs. Crucially, bat foraging strategies were highly context-dependent, shifting with seasonal resource availability and rat abundance. During winter when rats were uncommon, the bats primarily employed predation risk-averse strategies (avoidance and vigilance). In spring, when rats were frequent, although there was clear temporal partitioning between the bat and the rat populations, some of the bats shifted to heterospecific interference competition, and occasionally attacked the rats to gain access to food-a behavior inconsistent with simple risk-aversion models.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that the bat-rat interactions are dynamically modulated by resource availability, which alters rat presence and thereby the context-dependent interplay between interference competition and NCEs. This study provides rare quantitative evidence of how behaviorally flexible animals strategically manage interference competition and predation risk based on seasonal ecological conditions.
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.