Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 814

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Molecular identification of prey in predator diets

Symondson, W. O. C.·2002·Molecular Ecology

Abstract

In many situations prey choice by predators in the field cannot be established or quantified using direct observation. The remains of some prey may be visually identified in the guts and faeces of predators but not all predators ingest such hard remains and even those that do consume them may also ingest soft‐bodies prey that leave no recognizable remnants. The result is, at best, a biased picture of prey choice. A range of molecular techniques and applications are reviewed that allow prey remains to be identified, often to the species and even stage level. These techniques, all of which are still in use, include enzyme electrophoresis, a range of immunological approaches using polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies to detect protein epitopes, and recently developed polymerase chain reaction (PCR)‐based methods for detecting prey DNA. Analyses may be postmortem, on invertebrate and vertebrate predators collected from the field, or noninvasive assays of the remains in regurgitated bird pellets or vertebrate faeces. It was concluded that although monoclonal antibodies are currently the most effective method in use today, PCR‐based techniques have proved to be highly effective and versatile in recent laboratory trials and are likely to rapidly displace all other approaches.

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.1365-294x.2002.01471.x

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.

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Symondson, W. O. C.
Venue
Molecular Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-04
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
627-641
ISSN
  • 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-294X
OpenAlex
W2114703217
Cited by
814
References
0
FWCI
16.70
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

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.