Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 633

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

DNA metabarcoding illuminates dietary niche partitioning by African large herbivores

Open access
Kartzinel, Tyler R., Chen, Patricia A., Coverdale, Tyler C., Erickson, David L., Kress, W. John, Kuzmina, Maria L., Rubenstein, Daniel I., Wang, Wei, Pringle, Robert M.·2015·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1503283112
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Significance: Theory holds that sympatric large mammalian herbivores (LMH) must partition food resources to coexist, and traditional frameworks categorize LMH along a spectrum from grass-eating grazers to non–grass-eating browsers. Yet it has never been clear how finely LMH partition the enormous species diversity subsumed within these two broad plant types. By sequencing plant DNA from LMH fecal samples, we analyzed the diets of an LMH assemblage in Kenya. Diet composition was similar within species and strongly divergent across species, irrespective of feeding guild: Grazers ate similar total amounts of grass but different suites of grass species. These results suggest that species-specific plant traits may be key to understanding the dietary differences thought to underpin LMH diversity.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1503283112

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. GG Hutchinson, Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? Am Nat 93, 145–159 (1959). · DOI · Paper page
  2. RE Ricklefs, Disintegration of the ecological community. Am Nat 172, 741–750 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  3. PJ Jarman, ARE Sinclair, Feeding strategy and the patternof resource partitioning in ungulates. Serengeti: Dynamics of an Ecosystem, eds ARE Sinclair, M Norton-Griffiths (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), pp. 130–163 (1979).
  4. GE Belovsky, Generalist herbivore foraging and its role in competitive interactions. Animal Zool 26, 51–69 (1986).
  5. KT Uno, , Late Miocene to Pliocene carbon isotope record of differential diet change among East African herbivores. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108, 6509–6514 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  6. D Codron, , Diets of savanna ungulates from stable carbon isotope composition of feces. J Zool (Lond) 273, 21–29 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  7. SJ McNaughton, NJ Georgiadis, Ecology of African grazing and browsing mammals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17, 39–65 (1986). · DOI · Paper page
  8. HF Lamprey, Ecological separation of the large mammal species in the Tarangire Game Reserve, Tanganyika. East African Wildlife Journal 1, 63–92 (1963). · DOI · Paper page
  9. SH Ambrose, MJ DeNiro, The isotopic ecology of East African mammals. Oecologia 69, 395–406 (1986). · DOI · Paper page
  10. TE Cerling, JM Harris, BH Passey, Diets of east African Bovidae based on stable isotope analysis. J Mammal 84, 456–470 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  11. JT du Toit, H Olff, Generalities in grazing and browsing ecology: Using across-guild comparisons to control contingencies. Oecologia 174, 1075–1083 (2014). · DOI
  12. D Codron, JA Lee-Thorp, M Sponheimer, J Codron, Nutritional content of savanna plant foods: Implications for browser/grazer models of ungulate diversification. Eur J Wildl Res 53, 100–111 (2007). · DOI
  13. D Codron, , Significance of diet type and diet quality for ecological diversity of African ungulates. J Anim Ecol 76, 526–537 (2007). · DOI
  14. RHV Bell, A grazing ecosystem in the Serengeti. Sci Am 225, 86–93 (1971). · DOI · Paper page
  15. PJ Jarman, The social organization of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 48, 215–267 (1974). · DOI · Paper page
  16. R Arsenault, N Owen-Smith, Resource partitioning by grass height among grazing ungulates does not follow body size relation. Oikos 117, 1711–1717 (2008). · DOI
  17. EJ Kleynhans, AE Jolles, MRE Bos, H Olff, Resource partitioning along multiple niche dimensions in differently sized African savanna grazers. Oikos 120, 591–600 (2011). · DOI
  18. P Duncan, TJ Foose, IJ Gordon, CG Gakahu, M Lloyd, Comparative nutrient extraction from forages by grazing bovids and equids: A test of the nutritional model of equid/bovid competition and coexistence. Oecologia 84, 411–418 (1990). · DOI · Paper page
  19. DF Vesey-FitzGerald, Grazing succession among East African game animals. J Mammal 41, 161–172 (1960). · DOI · Paper page
  20. KD Farnsworth, S Focardi, JA Beecham, Grassland-herbivore interactions: How do grazers coexist? Am Nat 159, 24–39 (2002). · DOI
  21. HH de longh, , Resource partitioning among African savanna herbivores in North Cameroon: The importance of diet composition, food quality, and body mass. J Trop Ecol 27, 503–513 (2011). · doi:10.1017/s0266467411000307
  22. JPGM Cromsigt, H Olff, Resource partitioning among savanna grazers mediated by local heterogeneity: an experimental approach. Ecology 87, 1532–1541 (2006). · DOI
  23. S Bagchi, ME Ritchie, Body size and species coexistence in consumer-resource interactions: A comparison of two alternative theoretical frameworks. Theor Ecol 5, 141–151 (2012). · DOI
  24. MR Perrin, R Brereton-Stiles, Habitat use and feeding behaviour of the buffalo and the white rhinoceros in the Hluhluwe-Umfolozi Game Reserve. S Afr J Wildl Res 29, 72–80 (1999).
  25. HHT Prins, , Co-existence and niche segregation of three small bovids in southern Mozambique. J Af Ecol 44, 186–198 (2006). · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2028.2006.00619.x
  26. EM Soininen, , Analysing diet of small herbivores: The efficiency of DNA barcoding coupled with high-throughput pyrosequencing for deciphering the composition of complex plant mixtures. Front Zool 6, 16 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  27. SG Newmaster, , Examination of two new technologies to assess the diet of woodland caribou: Video recorders attached to collars and DNA barcoding. Can J For Res 43, 897–900 (2013). · DOI
  28. S Carrière, Photographic key for the microhistological identification of some Artic vascular plants. Arctic 55, 247–268 (2002). · doi:10.14430/arctic709
  29. F Pompanon, , Who is eating what: Diet assessment using next generation sequencing. Mol Ecol 21, 1931–1950 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  30. E Willerslev, , Fifty thousand years of Arctic vegetation and megafaunal diet. Nature 506, 47–51 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  31. DJ Augustine, Response of native ungulates to drought in semi-arid Kenyan rangeland. Afr J Ecol 48, 1009–1020 (2010). · DOI
  32. P Taberlet, , Power and limitations of the chloroplast trnL (UAA) intron for plant DNA barcoding. Nucleic Acids Res 35, e14 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  33. RK Colwell, , Models and estimators linking individual-based and sample-based rarefaction, extrapolation, and comparison of assemblages. J Plant Ecol 5, 3–21 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  34. JR Goheen, , Piecewise disassembly of a large-herbivore community across a rainfall gradient: The UHURU experiment. PLoS ONE 8, e55192 (2013). · DOI
  35. D Codron, , Assessing diet in savanna herbivores using stable carbon isotope ratio of faeces. Koedoe 48, 115–124 (2005). · doi:10.4102/koedoe.v48i1.170
  36. M De Cáceres, P Legendre, Associations between species and groups of sites: Indices and statistical inference. Ecology 90, 3566–3574 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  37. M De Barba, , DNA metabarcoding multiplexing and validation of data accuracy for diet assessment: Application to omnivorous diet. Mol Ecol Resour 14, 306–323 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  38. S Krätli, N Schareika, Living off uncertainty: The intelligent animal production of dryland pastoralists. Eur J Dev Res 22, 605–622 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  39. WO Odadi, MK Karachi, SA Abdulrazak, TP Young, Protein supplementation reduces non-grass foraging by a primary grazer. Ecol Appl 23, 455–463 (2013). · DOI
  40. DJ Augustine, Spatial heterogeneity in the herbaceous layer of a semi-arid savanna ecosystem. Plant Ecol 167, 319–332 (2003). · DOI
  41. P Steuer, , Is there an influence of body mass on digesta mean retention time in herbivores? A comparative study on ungulates. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 160, 355–364 (2011). · DOI
  42. RM Hansen, MM Mugambi, SM Bauni, Diets and trophic ranking of ungulates of the Northern Serengeti. J Wildl Manage 49, 823–829 (1985). · DOI
  43. IJ Gordon, AW Illius, The nutritional ecology of African ruminants: A reinterpretation. J Anim Ecol 65, 18–28 (1996). · DOI
  44. V Novotny, , Why are there so many species of herbivorous insects in tropical rainforests? Science 313, 1115–1118 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  45. ML Forister, , The global distribution of diet breadth in insect herbivores. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112, 442–447 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  46. HHT Prins, Competition between wildlife and livestock in Africa. Wildlife Conservation by Sustainable Use, ed HHT Prins (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2000). · DOI · Paper page
  47. WO Odadi, MK Karachi, SA Abdulrazak, TP Young, African wild ungulates compete with or facilitate cattle depending on season. Science 333, 1753–1755 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  48. CF Dorman, B Gruber, J Fruend, Introducing the bipartite package: Analysing ecological networks. R News 8, 8–11 (2008).
  49. ; R Core Development Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2013).
  50. P Legendre, M-J Fortin, Spatial pattern and ecological analysis. Vegetatio 80, 107–138 (1989). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 633

Metadata

Authors
Kartzinel, T. R., Chen, P. A., Coverdale, T. C., Erickson, D. L., Kress, W. J., Kuzmina, M. L., Rubenstein, D. I., Wang, W., & Pringle, R. M.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2015-06
Volume
112
Issue
26
Pages
8019-8024
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.1503283112
OpenAlex
W2167406761
Cited by
633
References
3
FWCI
47.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
www.pnas.org/site/misc/userlicense.xhtml (vor)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DEB-1355122)
  • National Geographic Society (9291-13)

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: DNA metabarcoding illuminates dietary niche partitioning by African large herbivores. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1503283112
The paper
Kartzinel, T. R., Chen, P. A., Coverdale, T. C., Erickson, D. L., Kress, W. J., Kuzmina, M. L., Rubenstein, D. I., Wang, W., & Pringle, R. M. (2015). DNA metabarcoding illuminates dietary niche partitioning by African large herbivores. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1503283112

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.