The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Behavioural flexibility predicts invasion success in birds introduced to New Zealand
Open accessAbstract
A fundamental question in ecology is whether there are evolutionary characteristics of species that make some better than others at invading new communities. In birds, nesting habits, sexually selected traits, migration, clutch size and body mass have been suggested as important variables, but behavioural flexibility is another obvious trait that has received little attention. Behavioural flexibility allows animals to respond more rapidly to environmental changes and can therefore be advantageous when invading novel habitats. Behavioural flexibility is linked to relative brain size and, for foraging, has been operationalised as the number of innovations per taxon reported in the short note sections of ornithology journals. Here, we use data on avian species introduced to New Zealand and test the link between forebrain size, feeding innovation frequency and invasion success. Relative brain size was, as expected, a significant predictor of introduction success, after removing the effect of introduction effort. Species with relatively larger brains tended to be better invaders than species with smaller ones. Introduction effort, migratory strategy and mode of juvenile development were also significant in the models. Pair‐wise comparisons of closely related species indicate that successful invaders also showed a higher frequency of foraging innovations in their region of origin. This study provides the first evidence in vertebrates of a general set of traits, behavioural flexibility, that can potentially favour invasion success.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1992) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/0047-2484(92)90081-j · Cited by 2,542
Feeding innovations and forebrain size in birds
LEFEBVRE, L., WHITTLE, P., LASCARIS, E., & FINKELSTEIN, A. (1997) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1006/anbe.1996.0330 · Cited by 579
Self-citation
Cited by
Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview
Sih, A., Bell, A., & Johnson, J. C. (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.04.009 · Cited by 2,861
Social intelligence, innovation, and enhanced brain size in primates
Reader, S. M., & Laland, K. N. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.062041299 · Cited by 1,126
Brains, Innovations and Evolution in Birds and Primates
Lefebvre, L., Reader, S. M., & Sol, D. (2004) · Brain, Behavior and Evolution · doi:10.1159/000076784 · Cited by 666
Self-citationA critique of comparative studies of brain size
Healy, S. D., & Rowe, C. (2007) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3748 · Cited by 528
Brain size predicts the success of mammal species introduced into novel environments
Sol, D., Bacher, S., Reader, S. M., & Lefebvre, L. (2008) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/588304 · Cited by 437
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sol, D., & Lefebvre, L.
- Venue
- Oikos
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-09
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 599-605
- ISSN
- 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0706
- OpenAlex
- W2135674422
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.