The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison and quantification of carnivore diet by faecal analysis: a critique, with recommendations, based on a study of the Fox Vulpes vulpes
Abstract
Failure to address many of the difficulties inherent in the analysis of carnivore faeces has hitherto limited the value of this technique in comparing carnivore diets or quantifying carnivore food consumption. In this review, major problems are discussed, and improved procedures designed to overcome them are recommended. The principal improvements recommended for laboratory procedures address the microscopic fraction of faeces, which cannot be analysed visually. This fraction may be derived from a variety of sources, leading to bias in previous techniques, particularly with regard to the importance of earthworms and birds. Attention to the microscopic fraction is necessary for correct comparison or quantitative determination of diet. Particular attention is given to statistical procedures which quantify the errors that arise in collection of samples, or during analysis. Clear statement of such errors will lead to greater comparability between studies. The procedures recommended here define the limits to accuracy in relation to sample size, total faecal production, and laboratory methods. In conjunction with adequate pilot studies, these techniques will allow more effective design of ecological studies relating to carnivore diet and food consumption.
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.
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
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. (1986) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1177013815 · Cited by 6,033
The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data
Aitchison, J. (1986) · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-4109-0 · Cited by 4,383
Cox, D. R., & Hinkley, D. V. (1974) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2887-0 · Cited by 3,089
Goszczyński, J. (1974) · Acta Theriologica · doi:10.4098/at.arch.74-1 · Cited by 154
Variation in the diet of foxes in Scotland
Kolb, H. H., & Hewson, R. (1979) · Acta Theriologica · doi:10.4098/at.arch.79-8 · Cited by 33
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- Artois M., 1987, Les fèces du renard (Vulpes vulpes) comme indice de consommation ou de préférence alimentaire et ďactivite, Cahiers ďEthologie appliqués, 7, 275
- Brunner H., 1974, The Identification of Mammalian Hair
- Buckman H. O., 1969, The Nature and Properties of Soils
- Burrows R., 1968, Wild Fox
- Calisti M., 1990, Food habits and trophic niche variation of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes L; 1758) in a Mediterranean coastal area, Revue ď Ecologie (La Terreetla Vie), 45, 309, 10.3406/revec.1990.2008 · DOI
- 10.2307/3798199 · DOI
- Corbet G. B., 1969, The Identification of British Mammals
- Cox D. R., 1970, The Analysis of Binary Data
- 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1966.tb02948.x · DOI · Paper page
- Debrot S., 1982, Atlas des Polls de Mammiferes ďEurope
- 10.2307/1382166 · DOI
- Erlinge S., 1984, Predation on brown hare and ring‐necked pheasant populations in southern Sweden, Holarctic Ecology, 7, 300
- Fienberg S. E., 1977, The Analysis of Cross‐Classified Categorical Data
- 10.2307/2425177 · DOI
- 10.2307/3808674 · DOI
- 10.2307/3800614 · DOI
- 10.2307/2424663 · DOI
- 10.2307/4136 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/155517b0 · DOI
- 10.2307/2089 · DOI
- 10.2307/3797647 · DOI
- Macdonald D. W., 1987, Running with the Fox
- 10.2307/1380339 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1977.tb04201.x · DOI
- Richards D., 1989, Toxocara canis in foxes, The Game Conservancy Review of 1988, 20, 109
- 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1987.tb03739.x · DOI
- 10.2307/3799055 · DOI
- Schantz T., 1980, The Red Fox. Symposium on Behaviour and Ecology, 53, 10.1007/978-94-017-5592-4_5 · DOI
- Seber G. A. F., 1982, The Estimation of Animal Abundance and Related Parameters
- Snedecor G. W., 1980, Statistical Methods
- 10.2307/3895829 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1136/vr.102.12.257 · DOI
- Woodruff A. W., 1976, Toxocariasis as a public health problem, Environmental Health, 1, 29
- 10.2307/3544695 · DOI
- Yalden D. W., 1990, The Analysis of Owl Pellets
- 10.1080/00063658509476867 · DOI
- 10.1080/00063658509476855 · DOI
Cited by
Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests
Karanth, K. U., & Sunquist, M. E. (1995) · The Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.2307/5647 · Cited by 661
Competition and intraguild predation among three sympatric carnivores
Fedriani, J. M., Fuller, T. K., Sauvajot, R. M., & York, E. C. (2000) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s004420000448 · Cited by 463
Karanth, K. U., & Sunquist, M. E. (2000) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2000.tb01076.x · Cited by 412
Contesse, P., Hegglin, D., Gloor, S., Bontadina, F., & Deplazes, P. (2004) · Mammalian Biology · doi:10.1078/1616-5047-00123 · Cited by 337
de Almeida Jácomo, A. T., Silveira, L., & Diniz‐Filho, J. A. F. (2004) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1017/s0952836903004473 · Cited by 193
Metadata
- Authors
- REYNOLDS, J. C., & AEBISCHER, N. J.
- Venue
- Mammal Review
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1991-09
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 97-122
- ISSN
- 0305-1838 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2907
- OpenAlex
- W2158938295
- Cited by
- 426
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 3.13
- 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: Comparison and quantification of carnivore diet by faecal analysis: a critique, with recommendations, based on a study of the Fox Vulpes vulpes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2907.1991.tb00113.x
- The paper
- REYNOLDS, J. C., & AEBISCHER, N. J. (1991). Comparison and quantification of carnivore diet by faecal analysis: a critique, with recommendations, based on a study of the Fox Vulpes vulpes. Mammal Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2907.1991.tb00113.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.