The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Tropical Wet Forest Treefall Gaps and Distributions of Understory Birds and Plants
Abstract
I examined the patch dynamics of understory birds and fruiting plants in treefall gaps and intact forest sites to determine the importance of gaps in structuring a Costa Rican tropical wet forest community. Understory birds and fruiting plants were censused monthly for 12 mo in 13 gaps and 13 intact forest sites. Of species with adequate sample sizes, 40% of bird species (17 of 42) and 30% of fruiting plant species (10 of 33) were found significantly more often in gaps than in intact forest. In contrast, only 5% of the bird species (2 of 42) and no plant species were found significantly more often in intact forest sites. Frugivorous and nectarivorous bird species were especially common in gaps. Birds of second—growth and forest edge were proportionately more abundant in gaps than were birds of forest interior. Canopy birds were not prevalent in gaps. Plants in gaps tended to produce more fruit over a longer period of time than conspecifics fruiting under a closed canopy. Also, large gaps had higher densities of fruiting plants and fruit—eating birds than small gaps. The high diversity and long fruiting periods of plants in gaps suggest that gaps may be important sources of fruit during periods of fruit scarcity. Given the high density of fruit—eating birds in gaps, seed deposition patterns generated by these birds are probably nonrandom. In particular, seeds may be dispersed into or around the periphery of gaps more often than into closed understory sites. Thus, the distributional patterns of understory fruits and frugivores may reinforce each other; fruiting shrub density affects the distribution of fruit—eating birds, which then influences the distribution of fruiting plants and birds in the next generation.
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
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942661 · Cited by 8,377
Cited by
The keystone-species concept in ecology and conservation.
Mills, L. S., & Doak, D. F. (1993) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1312122 · Cited by 1,306
Macroecology of a host‐parasite relationship
Vaughn, C. C., & Taylor, C. M. (2000) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2000.tb00256.x · Cited by 171
Metadata
- Authors
- Levey, D. J.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1988-08
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1076-1089
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2092261377
- Cited by
- 296
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.32
- 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: Tropical Wet Forest Treefall Gaps and Distributions of Understory Birds and Plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1941263
- The paper
- Levey, D. J. (1988). Tropical Wet Forest Treefall Gaps and Distributions of Understory Birds and Plants. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941263
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.