ArticleRoyal Society open science2025
Complementary approaches to measure predation pressure on butterfly populations in Australia.
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.
- Predictors of Wing Attacks by Birds Across Australian Butterflies.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Complementary approaches to measure predation pressure on butterfly populations in Australia.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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predation pressure is a major force driving the evolution of anti-predatory traits, yet quantifying its intensity in the wild remains difficult. In this study, we combined three complementary methods to evaluate predation risk in Australian butterfly communities: assessing wing damage on wild butterflies, monitoring attacks on artificial butterfly replicas, and surveying bird communities. Across eight sites in Sydney, Australia, we recorded wing damage on 1070 free-living butterflies from five families, assessed attacks on 1600 butterfly replicas, and surveyed local bird diversity. Of the wild butterflies, 807 showed wing damage, with 169 individuals (16% of all butterflies) exhibiting patterns consistent with bird attacks. Among replicas, 114 (7%) showed evidence of predation, of which 31 (2% of all replicas) were likely to be attacked by birds. Predation on wild butterflies was most strongly associated with bird community composition, bird density, and butterfly size (wingspan), while replica attacks were influenced primarily by bird community composition and density. Our results suggest that butterfly wing damage and replica attacks data provide complementary, but not interchangeable, insights into predation risk. When integrated, they offer a more robust picture of true predation pressure. Our results underscore the critical role of bird community structure in shaping predation risk-an important consideration for any method used to assess predation in natural prey communities.
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.