Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41757291›Full record

ArticleThe Ibis2021

Allopreening in the Black-browed Albatross (

Natasha Gillies, Tim Guilford, Paulo Catry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Ibis, 2021. 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

3 authors.

Natasha GilliesDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9950-609X
Tim GuilfordDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Paulo CatryMARE - Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, ISPA - Instituto Universitário, Rua Jardim do Tabaco 34, Lisbon, 1149-041, Portugal.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M011224/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The functions of display between breeding pairs of animals have been given little attention outside of sexual selection. Yet evidence suggests that display between partners is in fact most commonly observed following mate choice, and is often just as elaborate. In many bird species, allopreening, when one member of a pair preens the other, is a major component of display both pre- and post-pair formation. Despite this, there has been little investigation into its functions. Explanations that have been put forward tend to focus on its role in feather hygiene, which has limited phylogenetic support, or its function in the maintenance of the pair bond, though how this might occur or indeed what this actually represents has not been adequately explained. Phylogenetic evidence reveals that allopreening is most commonly observed in those species exhibiting high levels of partner retention and biparental care, and it appears to be functional in maintaining cooperation in parental behaviour in at least one species. In our observational study, we explored the patterns and putative functions of allopreening during the nest-relief displays of breeding pairs of Black-browed Albatrosses

Indexed as

displayforagingnegotiationparental care

Identifiers

PMID41757291
PMCPMC7618800

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.