↓ Skip to main content

Too risky to settle: avian community structure changes in response to perceived predation risk on adults and offspring

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Too risky to settle: avian community structure changes in response to perceived predation risk on adults and offspring
Published in
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, August 2013
DOI 10.1098/rspb.2013.0762
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fangyuan Hua, Robert J. Fletcher, Kathryn E. Sieving, Robert M. Dorazio

Abstract

Predation risk is widely hypothesized as an important force structuring communities, but this potential force is rarely tested experimentally, particularly in terrestrial vertebrate communities. How animals respond to predation risk is generally considered predictable from species life-history and natural-history traits, but rigorous tests of these predictions remain scarce. We report on a large-scale playback experiment with a forest bird community that addresses two questions: (i) does perceived predation risk shape the richness and composition of a breeding bird community? And (ii) can species life-history and natural-history traits predict prey community responses to different types of predation risk? On 9 ha plots, we manipulated cues of three avian predators that preferentially prey on either adult birds or offspring, or both, throughout the breeding season. We found that increased perception of predation risk led to generally negative responses in the abundance, occurrence and/or detection probability of most prey species, which in turn reduced the species richness and shifted the composition of the breeding bird community. Species-level responses were largely predicted from the key natural-history trait of body size, but we did not find support for the life-history theory prediction of the relationship between species' slow/fast life-history strategy and their response to predation risk.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 3%
United States 2 2%
Portugal 1 1%
India 1 1%
Unknown 85 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 28%
Researcher 20 22%
Student > Master 12 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 19 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 70 76%
Environmental Science 14 15%
Unspecified 4 4%
Mathematics 2 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 1%
Other 1 1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 June 2013.
All research outputs
#9,879,635
of 12,366,983 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#6,965
of 7,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,599
of 148,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#105
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,366,983 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,350 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.3. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 148,040 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.