Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 255

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interactive effects of concealment, parental behaviour and predators on the survival of open passerine nests

Weidinger, Karel·2002·Journal of Animal Ecology

Abstract

1 A simple model of relative effects of parental behaviour (parents present vs. absent) and nest concealment on probability of nest predation was evaluated by measuring survival of paired natural/artificial nests of four open nesting passerines over 3 years. 2 The ratio of rodent to corvid predation (i) decreased from yellowhammer (small eggs, ground/near ground nests) through blackcap (small, shrub) to song thrush and blackbird (medium sized, shrub/subcanopy); (ii) was highest in years when rodent abundance peaked – this effect was clear in yellowhammer, detectable in blackcap, but not found in thrushes. An inverse relationship was found between mean annual nest survival and abundance of the major nest predator for each species. Predators differed between poorly (corvids) and well-concealed (rodents) nests in blackcap. 3 The effects on nest survival differed among species, including: positive effect of parental behaviour combined with neutral effect of concealment (thrushes); independent positive effects of behaviour and concealment (yellowhammer); neutral effect of behaviour combined with positive effect of concealment (blackcap). These patterns are consistent with hypothesis that relatively larger species with conspicuous nests (thrushes) should either engage in more vigorous nest defence or their defence is more efficient, compared with smaller species with less conspicuous nests (blackcap). 4 The positive relationship between nest concealment and survival resulted either from an effect of nest site per se (yellowhammer) or from an effect of parental behaviour (blackcap) that changed from negative (nest disclosure) to positive (nest defence) between poorly and well-concealed nests, respectively. The view that lack of a within-species relationship between nest concealment and survival (thrushes) results from parental behaviour compensating for predation risk associated with poor nest concealment was not supported. 5 This study demonstrated (i) multiple interactions among factors influencing the rate of nest predation, both between and within species; (ii) potential bias associated with drawing general conclusions from small-scale experiments.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00611.x

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 33 references

Cited by

See all 255

Metadata

Authors
Weidinger, K.
Venue
Journal of Animal Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-05
Volume
71
Issue
3
Pages
424-437
ISSN
  • 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2656
OpenAlex
W2111837604
Cited by
255
References
33
FWCI
7.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Interactive effects of concealment, parental behaviour and predators on the survival of open passerine nests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00611.x
The paper
Weidinger, K. (2002). Interactive effects of concealment, parental behaviour and predators on the survival of open passerine nests. Journal of Animal Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00611.x

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.