The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fecundity and Seed Dispersal of a Tropical Tree
Abstract
We observed feeding assemblages of birds at a Costa Rican dry—forest population of Casearia corymbosa (Flacourtiaceae) in order to distinguish effective dispersers from a incidental visitors and to examine the relationship between fruit production and depletion by birds at individual plants. On the basis of 1956 recorded visits by birds, the Yellow—green Vireo (Vireo flavoviridis) was the most reliable disperser throughout the season, accounting for 65% of the arillate seeds removed. Other common visitors were the Streaked Flycatcher (Myiodynastes maculatus) 12%, Golden—fronted Woodpecker (Melanerpes aurifrons) 9%, Pale—throated Flycatcher (Myiarchus nuttingi) 8%. All stripped off the oily arils in the crop and regurgitated viable seeds from perches in surrounding forest. Sporadic visitation by 10 other trogons and passerines accounted for the remainder of fruit utilized by birds. Capsules opened early in the morning, and fruit accessible to birds was depleted by early afternoon. At 17 closely monitored plants, birds removed 91% of the accessible arillate seeds. Crop sizes ranged from 1—2700, with dispersal success highest among plants of intermediate fecundity. Variance was attributable to individuals with low fecundity, often missed by birds on all but the most productive days, and to an exceptionally fecund tree that satiated its visitors. The dispersal ecology of the small dry—forest tree offers a unique comparison to that of a more fecund overstory ecotype in wet forest. In secondary dry forest, a protocooperative relationship exists between several bird species and this plant, with an abundant and efficient vireo responsible for most dispersal.In the wet forest, dispersal occurs through a mutualistic relationship with a cotinga (Tityra semifasciata), while most common visitors are "fruit thieves" of little benefit to the plant. These differences are considered in light of comparative ecology of the 2 forms.
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
Hamilton, W. D. (1971) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-5193(71)90189-5 · Cited by 3,506
Cited by
Neotropical Anachronisms: The Fruits the Gomphotheres Ate
Janzen, D. H., & Martin, P. S. (1982) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.215.4528.19 · Cited by 913
Quantity, quality and the effectiveness of seed dispersal by animals
Schupp, E. W. (1993) · Vegetatio · doi:10.1007/bf00052209 · Cited by 664
Gautier-Hion, A., Duplantier, J. M., Quris, R., Feer, F., Sourd, C., Decoux, J. P., Dubost, G., Emmons, L., Erard, C., Hecketsweiler, P., et al. (1985) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/bf00378906 · Cited by 654
Interaction frequency as a surrogate for the total effect of animal mutualists on plants
Vázquez, D. P., Morris, W. F., & Jordano, P. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00810.x · Cited by 599
Determinants of Plant-Animal Coevolution: The Case of Mutualistic Dispersal of Seeds by Vertebrates
Herrera, C. M. (1985) · Oikos · doi:10.2307/3544054 · Cited by 337
Metadata
- Authors
- Howe, H. F., & Vande Kerckhove, G. A.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1979-02
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 180-189
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2104482733
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 21.90
- 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: Fecundity and Seed Dispersal of a Tropical Tree. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1936479
- The paper
- Howe, H. F., & Vande Kerckhove, G. A. (1979). Fecundity and Seed Dispersal of a Tropical Tree. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1936479
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.