Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 254

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The ‘island rule’ in birds: medium body size and its ecological explanation

Open access
Clegg, Sonya M., Owens, P. F.·2002·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Do birds show a different pattern of insular evolution from mammals? Mammals follow the 'island rule', with large-bodied species getting smaller on islands and small-bodied species getting bigger. By contrast, the traditional view on birds is that they follow no general island rule for body size, but that there is an insular trend for large bills. Insular shifts in feeding ecology are, therefore, widely assumed to be the primary cause of divergence in island birds. We use a comparative approach to test these ideas. Contrary to the traditional view, we find no evidence for increased bill size in insular populations. Instead, changes in both bill size and body size obey the 'island rule'. The differences between our results and the traditional view arise because previous analyses were based largely on passerines. We also investigate some ecological factors that are thought to influence island evolution. As predicted by the traditional view, shifts in bill size are associated with feeding ecology. By contrast, shifts in body size are associated with the potential for intraspecific competition and thermal ecology. All these results remain qualitatively unchanged when we use different methods to score the ecological factors and restrict our analyses to taxa showing pronounced morphological divergence. Because of strong covariation between ecological factors, however, we cannot estimate the relative importance of each ecological factor. Overall, our results show that the island rule is valid for both body size and bill length in birds and that, in addition to feeding ecology, insular shifts in the level of intraspecific competition and the abiotic environment also have a role.

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 · 10.1098/rspb.2002.2024

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

See all 254

Metadata

Authors
Clegg, S. M., & Owens, P. F.
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
2002-07-07
Volume
269
Issue
1498
Pages
1359-1365
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2167697707
Cited by
254
References
2
FWCI
5.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: The ‘island rule’ in birds: medium body size and its ecological explanation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.2002.2024
The paper
Clegg, S. M., & Owens, P. F. (2002). The ‘island rule’ in birds: medium body size and its ecological explanation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2024

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.