Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 231

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adaptation to Single Resources and the Evolution of Crossbill (Loxia) Diversity

Benkman, Craig W.·1993·Ecological Monographs

Abstract

I quantitatively test the hypothesis that four taxa or "types" (species or subspecies) of Red Crossbills (Loxia curvirostra) in the Pacific Northwest have diversified morphologically in bill characters in response to alternative adaptive peaks presented by their food: seeds in conifer cones. Hypothetically, each adaptive peak corresponds to one conifer species whose seeds are (1) produced regularly from year to year, (2) held in cones through late winter when seed is most limiting, and (3) protected from depletion by potential noncrossbill competitors. Four such conifers, termed "key conifers," are present (Tsuga heterophylla, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Pinus ponderosa, and Pinus contorta var. latifolia). I use data on foraging efficiency for 31 captive crossbills of four types to determine the optimal bill size and palate structure for foraging on the key conifers. As predicted, if each type is adapted for foraging on a key conifer, the observed morphology of a given type is often the predicted optimal size morphology of foraging on its respective key conifer. Two of the types have mean bill sizes (bill depth) equalling their predicted optimal size. For one of the remaining types, the observed differs from the optimum by 0.4 mm; I was unable to predict an optimal size for the remaining type. Optimal bill size varies with season. Bill sizes corresponded more closely to the optima for winter (lean period) than for summer. Observed mean width of the palate groove, in which crossbills hold conifer seeds while the seeds are being husked, was consistently close to the estimated optimal groove width. Optimal groove width was correlated (r 2 = 1.00, n = 4) with seed size (cube root of mass), suggesting optimal groove width is determined by seed size. Overall, each crossbill type has either the optimal bill size or optimal husking groove width, or both, for foraging on their key conifers. Fitness set analyses indicate that there are substantial trade—offs in foraging efficiency. The best phenotype for foraging on one conifer is often only one—half as efficient on other conifers. All four fitness sets are concave, implying selection against intermediate phenotypes. I conclude, first, that reliability of seeds on key conifers during periods of food scarcity is a critical feature in the ecology and evolution of crossbills. Second, optimization of morphological traits occurs even in populations in highly variable environments. Third, disruptive selection against intermediate phenotypes is likely. This should maintain, if not reinforce, the distinctiveness of types. Fourth, the diversity of cone structure and seed size among key conifers is ultimately responsible for the diversification of crossbills.

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 · 10.2307/2937103

Cites

2 of 2 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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 231

Metadata

Authors
Benkman, C. W.
Venue
Ecological Monographs
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-08
Volume
63
Issue
3
Pages
305-325
ISSN
  • 0012-9615 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7015
OpenAlex
W2048699081
Cited by
231
References
2
FWCI
9.25
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: Adaptation to Single Resources and the Evolution of Crossbill (Loxia) Diversity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2937103
The paper
Benkman, C. W. (1993). Adaptation to Single Resources and the Evolution of Crossbill (Loxia) Diversity. Ecological Monographs. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937103

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.