Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41549740›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2026

Preservation of stable isotope niche dynamics in squamate museum specimens.

Maggie R Grundler, Erica Bree Rosenblum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Maggie R GrundlerDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7104-0494
Erica Bree RosenblumDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural history museums are invaluable resources for large-scale ecological and evolutionary studies, but certain ecological traits can be challenging to recover, particularly from fluid-preserved specimens. Stable isotope analysis is an elegant method for reconstructing the dietary niche over integrated timescales, and recovering this information from museum specimens can provide a critical axis of ecological information for studies of population dynamics through time and space. However, isotope ratios of tissues are known to be altered by extended contact with formalin and ethanol. Here, we assess whether intra- and interspecific variation in isotopic signature, which represent critical data used to assess metrics of niche diversity, can be reliably recovered following fluid preservation. We use a broad taxonomic distribution of squamates to compare niche metrics prior to and 8 weeks following a standard museum preservation process We could not recover intraindividual metrics of niche diversity but found that between-individual variation was not significantly altered, allowing for the reconstruction of community niche characteristics We present an example isotopic analysis from museum specimens representing generalist and specialist Thamnophis garter snake populations that aligns with empirical estimates of niche width We also present several additional analyses on tissue-specific effects, delipification and buffer storage, with useful insights for field collection and downstream analysis decisions.

Indexed as

ColubridaeEcosystemSpecimen HandlingAnimalsCarbon IsotopesMuseumsNitrogen IsotopesOxygen IsotopesCarbon IsotopesNitrogen IsotopesOxygen Isotopesmuseum collectionsniche evolutionsquamatesstable isotopes

Identifiers

PMID41549740
PMCPMC12957730

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.