The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Optimal Foraging: A Selective Review of Theory and Tests
Abstract
Beginning with Emlen (1966) and MacArthur and Pianka (1966) and extending through the last ten years, several authors have sought to predict the foraging behavior of animals by menas of mathematical models. These models are very similar, in that they all assume that the fitness of a foraging animal is a function of the efficiency of foraging measured in terms of some "currency" (Schoener, 1971) - usually energy - and that natural selection has resulted in animals that forage so as to maximize this fitness. As a result of these similarities, the models have become known as "optimal foraging models"; and the theory that embodies them, "optimal foraging theory." The situations to which optimal foraging theory has been applied, with the exception of a few recent studies, can be divided into the following four categories: (1) choice by an animal of which food types to eat (i.e. optimal diet); (2) choice of which patch type to feed in (i.e. optimal patch choice); (3) optimal allocation of time to different patches; and (4) optimal patterns and speed of movements. In this review we discuss each of these categories separately, dealing with both the theoretical developments and the data that permit tests of the predictions. The review is selective in the sense that we emphasize studies that either develop testable predictions or that attempt to test such predictions in a precise quantitative manner. We also discuss what we see to be some of the future developments in the area of optimal foraging theory and how this theory can be related to other areas of biology. Our general conclusion is that the simple models so far formulated are supported reasonably well by available data and that we are optimistic about the value both now and in the future of optimal foraging theory. We argue, however, that these simple models will require much modification, especially to deal with situations that either cannot easily be put into one or another of the above four categories or entail currencies more complicated than just energy.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The mechanisms that determine optimal foraging behaviour include adaptative responses to prey availability, food quality, energy required to handle prey (Pyke et al. 1977, Sundell et al. 2003), and predation risk from larger co-occurring predators (Haswell et al. 2018).”
From Variation in red fox Vulpes vulpes diet in five continents (2022) · cites this paper as Pyke et al. 1977
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
On Optimal Use of a Patchy Environment
MacArthur, R. H., & Pianka, E. R. (1966) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282454 · Cited by 4,593
The Niche Exploitation Pattern of the Blue‐Gray Gnatcatcher
Root, R. B. (1967) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942327 · Cited by 1,806
Experimental Ecology of the Feeding of Fishes
Farris, D. A., Ivlev, V. S., & Scott, D. (1962) · Copeia · doi:10.2307/1439522 · Cited by 1,751
The Role of Time and Energy in Food Preference
Emlen, J. M. (1966) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282455 · Cited by 1,470
Optimal Foraging and the Size Selection of Prey by the Bluegill Sunfish (Lepomis Macrochirus)
Werner, E. E., & Hall, D. J. (1974) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1940354 · Cited by 1,188
Euglossine Bees as Long-Distance Pollinators of Tropical Plants
Janzen, D. H. (1971) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.171.3967.203 · Cited by 759
On the Theory of Optimal Diets
Pulliam, H. R. (1974) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282885 · Cited by 734
Self-citationEcological Implications of Resource Depression
Charnov, E. L., Orians, G. H., & Hyatt, K. (1976) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/283062 · Cited by 689
Self-citationAn Analysis of Diet Selection by Large Generalist Herbivores
Westoby, M. (1974) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282908 · Cited by 554
An Experiment On Spacing-Out as a Defence Against Predation
Tinbergen, N., Impekoven, M., & Franck, D. (1967) · Behaviour · doi:10.1163/156853967x00064 · Cited by 386
Cited by
Neural correlates of decision variables in parietal cortex
Platt, M. L., & Glimcher, P. W. (1999) · Nature · doi:10.1038/22268 · Cited by 1,721
Perceiving affordances: Visual guidance of stair climbing.
Warren, W. H. (1984) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.10.5.683 · Cited by 1,237
Temperature as an Ecological Resource
MAGNUSON, J. J., CROWDER, L. B., & MEDVICK, P. A. (1979) · American Zoologist · doi:10.1093/icb/19.1.331 · Cited by 1,091
Foraging Efficiency and Body Size: A Study of Optimal Diet and Habitat Use by Bluegills
Mittelbach, G. G. (1981) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1937300 · Cited by 915
Research on self-control: An integrating framework
Logue, A. W. (1988) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00053978 · Cited by 792
Metadata
- Authors
- Pyke, G. H., Pulliam, H. R., & Charnov, E. L.
- Venue
- The Quarterly Review of Biology
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1977-06
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 137-154
- ISSN
- 0033-5770 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-7718
- OpenAlex
- W2087369095
- Cited by
- 3,373
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 77.40
- 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: Optimal Foraging: A Selective Review of Theory and Tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/409852
- The paper
- Pyke, G. H., Pulliam, H. R., & Charnov, E. L. (1977). Optimal Foraging: A Selective Review of Theory and Tests. The Quarterly Review of Biology. https://doi.org/10.1086/409852
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.