↓ Skip to main content

The early bird gets the worm: foraging strategies of wild songbirds lead to the early discovery of food sources

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Letters, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
twitter
28 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
The early bird gets the worm: foraging strategies of wild songbirds lead to the early discovery of food sources
Published in
Biology Letters, December 2013
DOI 10.1098/rsbl.2013.0578
Pubmed ID
Authors

Damien R. Farine, Stephen D. J. Lang

Abstract

Animals need to manage the combined risks of predation and starvation in order to survive. Theoretical and empirical studies have shown that individuals can reduce predation risk by delaying feeding (and hence fat storage) until late afternoon. However, little is known about how individuals manage the opposing pressures of resource uncertainty and predation risks. We suggest that individuals should follow a two-part strategy: prioritizing the discovery of food early in the day and exploiting the best patch late in the day. Using automated data loggers, we tested whether a temporal component exists in the discovery of novel foraging locations by individuals in a mixed-species foraging guild. We found that food deployed in the morning was discovered significantly more often than food deployed in the afternoon. Based on the diurnal activity patterns in this population, overall rates of new arrivals were also significantly higher than expected in the morning and significantly lower than expected in the afternoon. These results align with our predictions of a shift from patch discovery to exploitation over the course of the day.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 tweeters 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 4%
United Kingdom 3 4%
Sweden 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 73 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 25%
Researcher 14 17%
Student > Master 13 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 5%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 51 61%
Environmental Science 12 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 12 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 113. 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 27 February 2019.
All research outputs
#189,456
of 16,056,369 outputs
Outputs from Biology Letters
#260
of 2,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,030
of 172,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Letters
#6
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,056,369 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,787 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
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 172,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.