ArticleScientific reports2026
Faecal sac energy in common swifts (Apus apus) as a function of mass and nest identity.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nest sanitation is thought to be an important component of reproductive success because it can reduce pathogen loads and ectoparasites in the nest. Coprophagy - the ingestion of faeces - includes consumption of nestling faecal sacs by adults (allocoprophagy) and is therefore often discussed in the context of sanitation. In several bird taxa, this behaviour has also been linked to the "parental nutrition hypothesis", whereby adults may recover part of the energetic and nutritional costs of provisioning. In the Common Swift (Apus apus), faecal sac ingestion has been documented, yet the energetic content of faecal sacs has rarely been quantified directly, limiting evaluation of potential energetic recycling. Here we quantify the energy content of nestling faecal sacs using bomb calorimetry and test how gross energy relates to sac mass while describing among-nest variation. We collected 224 faecal sacs from nine nests in central Israel after fledging and measured gross energy and (desiccated) mass of each sample. Mean gross energy was 1.94 kJ per sac, with substantial variation among nests. In a mixed-effects model, gross energy increased with sac mass, and sacs from the same nest were more similar in energy content to each other than to sacs from other nests. Because samples were collected post-fledging and we did not measure ingestion frequency or assimilation efficiency, our results quantify the gross energetic substrate potentially available for recycling, but do not by themselves demonstrate a net energetic benefit of coprophagy. We outline the need for studies linking faecal-sac energy to nestling age, provisioning dynamics, and adult energy budgets to evaluate ecological payoffs and potential selection on this behaviour.
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.