↓ Skip to main content

A Conceptual Framework for Clutch-Size Evolution in Songbirds

Overview of attention for article published in The American Naturalist, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
A Conceptual Framework for Clutch-Size Evolution in Songbirds
Published in
The American Naturalist, March 2014
DOI 10.1086/674966
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas E. Martin

Abstract

Causes of evolved differences in clutch size among songbird species remain debated. I propose a new conceptual framework that integrates aspects of traditional life-history theory while including novel elements to explain evolution of clutch size among songbirds. I review evidence that selection by nest predation on length of time that offspring develop in the nest creates a gradient in offspring characteristics at nest leaving (fledging), including flight mobility, spatial dispersion, and self-feeding rate. I postulate that this gradient has consequences for offspring mortality rates and parental energy expenditure per offspring. These consequences then determine how reproductive effort is partitioned among offspring, while reproductive effort evolves from age-specific mortality effects. Using data from a long-term site in Arizona, as well as from the literature, I provide support for hypothesized relationships. Nestling development period consistently explains fledgling mortality, energy expenditure per offspring, and clutch size while accounting for reproductive effort (i.e., total energy expenditure) to thereby support the framework. Tests in this article are not definitive, but they document previously unrecognized relationships and address diverse traits (developmental strategies, parental care strategies, energy requirements per offspring, evolution of reproductive effort, clutch size) that justify further investigations of hypotheses proposed here.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 105 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 24%
Student > Master 21 19%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 6 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 81 72%
Environmental Science 16 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Psychology 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 9 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 23 November 2015.
All research outputs
#1,564,084
of 15,090,804 outputs
Outputs from The American Naturalist
#589
of 3,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,245
of 189,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Naturalist
#10
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,090,804 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 189,024 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.