ArticleOecologia2026
Associations of waterbirds with harvesting and ploughing events in rice fields: increasing foraging opportunities or just gathering for the feast?
Article in Oecologia, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Surges in food availability create localized intense foraging opportunities, often attracting multi-species consumer groups. Agricultural practices can trigger these surges, prompting bird associations. However, the strength and duration of associations and its drivers, remain unclear. This study examines waterbird association with harvesting and ploughing events in rice fields. The duration and magnitude of these associations were determined and three hypotheses addressed to explain them: (1) increased food availability, (2) enhanced foraging success and (3) reduced time allocated to vigilance. Waterbird counts and GPS tracking revealed strong associations with management events. Bird numbers spiked during events but declined within one to two days. Food availability increased significantly during events - crayfish and rice during harvesting, worms and soil penetrability during ploughing - supporting Hypothesis (1) However, this did not improve foraging performance (intake rate, foraging success), rejecting Hypothesis (2) Higher competition, interference or kleptoparasitism in these large mixed-species flocks may offset the benefits of increased food availability. Alternatively, prey intake may be constrained by a saturating functional response, with birds operating near maximum intake despite higher food availability. Hypothesis 3 was also unsupported, as birds did not reduce vigilance. Overall, birds gain no additional foraging advantage from attending actively managed fields relative to those managed over three days earlier. We hypothesize they are attracted by the expectation of improved foraging opportunities, with associations driven by gregariousness and local enhancement. Results highlight complex responses to food surges, suggesting waterbirds maintain stable foraging performance during and after agricultural management, indicating resilience to management timing shifts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42782363What 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.