Cited by 59Animal Behavior and ReproductionEvolution and Paleontology StudiesAvian ecology and behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contrasting impacts of competition on ecological and social trait evolution in songbirds

Open access

Abstract

Competition between closely related species has long been viewed as a powerful selective force that drives trait diversification, thereby generating phenotypic diversity over macroevolutionary timescales. However, although the impact of interspecific competition has been documented in a handful of iconic insular radiations, most previous studies have focused on traits involved in resource use, and few have examined the role of competition across large, continental radiations. Thus, the extent to which broad-scale patterns of phenotypic diversity are shaped by competition remain largely unclear, particularly for social traits. Here, we estimate the effect of competition between interacting lineages by applying new phylogenetic models that account for such interactions to an exceptionally complete dataset of resource-use traits and social signaling traits for the entire radiation of tanagers (Aves, Thraupidae), the largest family of songbirds. We find that interspecific competition strongly influences the evolution of traits involved in resource use, with a weaker effect on plumage signals, and very little effect on song. Our results provide compelling evidence that interspecific exploitative competition contributes to ecological trait diversification among coexisting species, even in a large continental radiation. In comparison, signal traits mediating mate choice and social competition seem to diversify under different evolutionary models, including rapid diversification in the allopatric stage of speciation.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003563

Cites

82 of 82 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

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?

  • Most divergence in species traits may have accumulated while in allopatry, before secondary contact.

    “However, it is likely that most divergence in species traits may have accumulated while in allopatry, before secondary contact.”

    From Acoustic indices as proxies for biodiversity: a meta‐analysis (2022) · cites this paper as Drury et al., 2018

    The Introduction (page unavailable) proposes that species may diverge in allopatry before secondary contact, making evolution in allopatry more important than later interactions. But it presents this as a possibility, not a finding that most trait divergence accumulated then. The Results and discussion (page unavailable) distinguish traits: song may diverge early, while interspecific competition strongly influences resource-use traits. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Drury, J. P., Tobias, J. A., Burns, K. J., Mason, N. A., Shultz, A. J., & Morlon, H.
Affiliations
  • Durham University (GB)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • San Diego State University (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Drury, Jonathan P.
Venue
PLOS Biology
Published
2018-01-31
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
e2003563
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
OpenAlex
W2785617100
Cited by
55
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3
FWCI
5.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1354006)
  • University of California, Los Angeles
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (616419)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
Keywords
interspecific competition, exploitative competition, trait diversification, Thraupidae, songbirds, social signaling, plumage coloration, song evolution, phylogenetic comparative analysis, speciation, allopatric speciation, mate choice
MeSH terms
Animals, Behavior, Animal, Competitive Behavior, Ecology, Biological Evolution, Phenotype, Phylogeny, Social Behavior, Signal Transduction, Songbirds, Sociological Factors

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