↓ Skip to main content

Nutmeg mannikins (Lonchura punctulata) reduce their feeding rates in response to simulated competition

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, January 2004
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Nutmeg mannikins (Lonchura punctulata) reduce their feeding rates in response to simulated competition
Published in
Oecologia, January 2004
DOI 10.1007/s00442-003-1482-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shawn Gauvin, Luc-Alain Giraldeau

Abstract

Group feeding animals experience a number of competitive foraging costs that may result in a lowered feeding rate. It is important to distinguish between reductions in feeding rates that are caused by reduced food availability and physical interactions among foragers from those caused by the mere presence of foraging companions that may be self-imposed in order to obtain some benefit of group membership. Starlings ( Sturnus vulgaris) reduce their feeding rates when in the company of simulated competitors located in an adjacent cage that cannot affect the food availability or interact with the forager. In the present study, we investigate whether the presence of simulated competitors in another species of passerine, nutmeg mannikins ( Lonchura punctulata), can result in self-imposed reductions in feeding rates. When feeding in the company of simulated competitors, mannikins spent more non-foraging time near them, fed more slowly, reduced travel times between patches, reduced their scanning time and pecked more slowly. These results provide evidence that simulated competitors induce a reduction in pecking rate: behavioural interference. These self-imposed responses to competitors may have resulted from attempts to remain close to the non-feeding companions. Such self-imposed reductions in feeding rates may be a widespread yet generally unrecognised foraging cost to group feeding individuals.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 67%
Environmental Science 3 9%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2013.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,774
of 4,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,509
of 146,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#8
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,477 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 146,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.