ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2026
Relationship between spatial and social phenotypes in an avian scavenger.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Relationship between spatial and social phenotypes in an avian scavenger.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Animals may interact incidentally, by sharing space, or intentionally, by seeking out interactions. Understanding which elements of social interactions can be explained by spatial behaviour and which cannot may uncover drivers of individual fitness and population functioning. In an avian scavenger, we tested how space use covaried with social position while flying, feeding, and roosting. We also identified the deviation of observed social centrality from chance and examined how this non-incidental social centrality covaried with space use. In flight, space use was positively associated only with observed social centrality, suggesting that interactions while flying emerge primarily from co-movement. In contrast, space use covaried with non-incidental social centrality while roosting, suggesting a stronger importance of social preferences when interacting at roost sites. Our work demonstrates that the role of animal movements in shaping social interactions differs across social situations. Such an understanding of the spatial-social interface is essential for predicting population responses to environmental changes and conserving threatened species.
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.