Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41459099›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2025

Use of Citizen Science to Determine Prey Partitioning Between Two Coastal Raptors.

Leo Biggs, Greg S Baxter, Stephen J S Debus, Neal Finch, Anysha Riggs, Hayden Houweling, Melissa Appleby, Peter J Murray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

8 authors.

Leo BiggsSchool of Agriculture and Environmental Science University of Southern Queensland Queensland Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7674-2903
Greg S BaxterSchool of Agriculture and Environmental Science University of Southern Queensland Queensland Australia.
Stephen J S DebusZoology, School of Environmental and Rural Science University of new England Armidale New South Wales Australia.
Neal FinchSchool of Agriculture and Environmental Science University of Southern Queensland Queensland Australia.
Anysha RiggsSchool of Agriculture and Environmental Science University of Southern Queensland Queensland Australia.
Hayden HouwelingSchool of Agriculture and Environmental Science University of Southern Queensland Queensland Australia.
Melissa ApplebySchool of Agriculture and Environmental Science University of Southern Queensland Queensland Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3734-0889
Peter J MurraySchool of Agriculture and Environmental Science University of Southern Queensland Queensland Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1143-1706

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to effectively conserve a species, it is often important to understand the ecological niche it occupies, and the resources required to sustain it. For predators, prey is typically the most important resource, and predators either outcompete for or partition resources to secure long-term food security. Raptors have been shown to utilise both strategies. However, demonstrating competition and prey partitioning between raptors is difficult. Traditional diet collection methods can be prohibitively time-consuming over large spatial areas and biased towards breeding individuals and nest sites. Use of citizen science, in particular images and videos recorded from social media, potentially overcomes these issues. This theory was tested by investigating the dietary breadth, diversity, overlap and competition between two Australian raptors, the Eastern Osprey (

Indexed as

citizen scienceinterspecies competitionniche overlapprey partitioningraptor dietsocial media

Identifiers

PMID41459099
PMCPMC12742461

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.