Cited by 1,994Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesAvian ecology and behaviorWildlife Ecology and Conservation

EltonTraits 1.0: Species‐level foraging attributes of the world's birds and mammals: Ecological Archives E095‐178

Open access
Wilman, Hamish, Belmaker, Jonathan, Simpson, Jennifer, de la Rosa, Carolina, Rivadeneira, Marcelo M., Jetz, Walter·2014·Ecology

Abstract

Species are characterized by physiological, behavioral, and ecological attributes that are all subject to varying evolutionary and ecological constraints and jointly determine species' role and function in ecosystems. Attributes such as diet, foraging strata, foraging time, and body size, in particular, characterize a large portion of the “Eltonian” niches of species. Here we present a global species‐level compilation of these key attributes for all 9993 and 5400 extant bird and mammal species derived from key literature sources. Global handbooks and monographs allowed the consistent sourcing of attributes for most species. For diet and foraging stratum we followed a defined protocol to translate the verbal descriptions into standardized, semiquantitative information about relative importance of different categories. Together with body size (continuous) and activity time (categorical) this enables a much finer distinction of species' foraging ecology than typical categorical guild assignments allow. Attributes lacking information for specific species are flagged, and interpolated values based on taxonomy are provided instead. The presented data set is limited by, among others, these select cases missing observed data, by errors and uncertainty in the expert assessment as presented in the literature, and by the lack of intraspecific information. However, the standardized and transparent nature and complete global coverage of the data set should support an array of potential studies in biogeography, community ecology, macroevolution, global change biology, and conservation. Potential uses include comparative work involving these traits as focal or secondary variables, ecological research on the trait or trophic structure of communities, or conservation science concerned with the loss of function among species or in ecosystems in a changing world. We hope that this publication will spur the sharing, collaborative curation, and extension of data to the benefit of a more integrative, rigorous, and global biodiversity science.

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 · 10.1890/13-1917.1

Cites

Statistics

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?

  • The species in Fig. 2 included strict faunivores (90-100% animal matter) as well as omnivores (40-60% animal matter).

    “Notably, the species in Fig. 2 included strict faunivores (90-100% animal matter) as well as omnivores (40-60% animal matter) (Wilman et al. 2014).”

    From Digestive anatomy and diet of free-ranging maned wolf (Chrysocyon brachyurus) (2025) · cites this paper as Wilman et al. 2014

    The paper’s main text (p. 1) describes a species-level dataset with semiquantitative information on the relative importance of diet categories. It does not identify the species in the citing paper’s Fig. 2 or give the stated 90–100% and 40–60% animal-matter ranges; searches for those ranges and diet labels found no matching passage. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Vanga curvirostris and Oriolus oriolus are omnivorous passeriforms that are aerial and canopy foragers and range in mass from 64 to 79 g.

    “Both are omnivorous passeriforms that are aerial and canopy foragers and range in mass from 64 to 79 g (37).”

    From Developmental origins of mosaic evolution in the avian cranium (2018) · cites this paper as [37]

    The paper (p. 1) describes a dataset of bird diets, foraging strata, and body sizes, but our copy contains no entries for Vanga curvirostris or Oriolus oriolus. Searches for the species names and the stated mass and foraging traits found no passage verifying those specific attributes; the paper says the complete dataset is published separately in Ecological Archives. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    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.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilman, H., Belmaker, J., Simpson, J., de la Rosa, C., Rivadeneira, M. M., & Jetz, W.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • Universidad Católica del Norte (CL)
Corresponding author
Jetz, Walter
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-07
Volume
95
Issue
7
Pages
2027-2027
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
OpenAlex
W1882658170
Cited by
1,994
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 198 · 2025: 262 · 2024: 253 · 2023: 246 · 2022: 206 · 2021: 253 · 2020: 216 · 2019: 143 · 2018: 93 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
38.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Ecology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
feeding ecology, diet, foraging time, body size, birds, mammals, species traits, trophic structure, functional diversity, macroevolution, biogeography

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