1,720,993 research outputs found
Trace Element Data from A Brief Update on Developments in Early Hominin Biogeochemistry
No full text<p>Data from Sponheimer, M., Lee-Thorp, J.A. & Codron, D. (2013). A Brief Update on Developments in Early Hominin Biogeochemistry. In R. Armitage & J. Burton (Eds), Archaeological Chemistry VIII. American Chemical Society.</p
Body mass-species richness (<i>M-S</i>) distributions, represented on a log<sub>2</sub>-scale, of extinct (non-avian) dinosaurs, in comparison with distributions of mammals and birds from the Mesozoic and present-day distributions.
No full text<p>Data for Mesozoic vertebrates compiled in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0077110#pone.0077110-Codron1" target="_blank">[4]</a>, see references therein for primary sources, and data for extant mammals and birds are from <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0077110#pone.0077110-Smith1" target="_blank">[29]</a>–<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0077110#pone.0077110-Dunning2" target="_blank">[31]</a>. Red curves are fitted visually to aid interpretation.</p
Descriptive statistics for log<sub>2</sub><i>M</i><sub>adult</sub> (kg) of Mesozoic dinosaur, mammal, and bird taxa, and for living mammals and birds.
No full text<p><i>n</i> = number of taxa; SW = Shapiro Wilks’ test for normal distribution.</p><p>Modern mammal subgroups: Incl. recent extinctions = data includes species that went extinct in the Late Pleistocene; Excl. airborne groups = data excludes the airborne mammalian orders Chrioptera (bats) and Dermoptera (colugos); carnivores = members of the Order Carnivora; Herbivores = members of the Orders Artiodactyla, Perissodactyla, Proboscidea, and Hyracoidea.</p
Prey partitioning amongst different-sized predators that arises in models where no prey partitioning was assumed <i>a priori</i>.
No full text<p>In a) and b) bubbles represent relative contributions of different-sized prey to predator diets, based on numbers or total biomass (kg) consumed, respectively; for c) niche breadths were calculated based relative numbers of prey consumed per size class.</p
<i>M-S</i> distributions of extant mammal herbivores and carnivores.
No full text<p>For comparison with <i>M-S</i> dinosaur distributions, only larger-bodied groups of mammals were included here, i.e. we omitted data for rodents, insectivores, and other smaller-bodied mammal groups. Thus, herbivores are represented only by the four living ungulate Orders (Artiodactyla, Perissodactyla, Proboscidea, and Hyracoidea), and carnivores by the Order Carnivora. Red curves are fitted visually to aid interpretation.</p
Outcomes of the size-specific competition model, comparing outcomes for <i>M-S</i> distributions of dinosaur (with a higher number of size-specific niche overlaps due to their more complex ontogenetic histories) and mammal communities.
No full text<p>Competition co-efficients (α) represent the proportion of density-dependent mortalities that occur, due to competition between dinosaurs (subscript DD), between mammals (MM), from mammals on dinosaurs (MD), and from dinosaurs on mammals (DM). Post K-T extinction scenarios were simulated by setting initial conditions to exclude all individuals above 25 kg.</p
Predicted <i>M-S</i> distributions of carnivorous dinosaur and mammal assemblages, based on a model incorporating differences in availability of prey of different body sizes, and the resultant biomass intake (and requirements) by predators.
No full text<p>Prey partitioning was assumed by setting prey:predator mass ratios at 1∶1, i.e. each predator is assumed to eat prey of its size only. When prey partitioning was not assumed, predators were allowed to feed on any prey they encountered of their size or smaller. Red curves are fitted visually to aid interpretation.</p
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
