4.2 Article

Metabolic rate does not decrease with starvation in Gryllus bimaculatus when changing fuel use is taken into account

Journal

PHYSIOLOGICAL ENTOMOLOGY
Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 84-89

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3032.2010.00765.x

Keywords

Energy reserves; Gryllidae; orthoptera; Respiratory exchange ratio; Respiratory Quotient; starvation

Categories

Funding

  1. NERC
  2. European Social Fund
  3. Royal Society
  4. NSERC (Canada)
  5. NERC [NE/G005303/1, NE/H02249X/1, NE/E005403/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/H02249X/1, NE/G005303/1, NE/E005403/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many behavioural traits are considered to be condition-dependent, reflecting the differential allocation of resources to fitness-related traits and maintenance, although the physiological underpinnings of condition dependence are not well understood. In the present study, the hypothesis that condition dependence in male Gryllus bimaculatus De Geer is mediated by a decrease in metabolic rate with declining condition is tested. CO2 production is measured by flow-through respirometry, with insect condition manipulated through starvation. Crickets starved for 7 days have lower CO2 emission rates than individuals starved for only 24 h. However, carbohydrate reserves are depleted in the first 3 days, suggesting that the initial metabolism is primarily fuelled by carbohydrate, with a shift to lipid stores after 3 days. If the metabolic rate is estimated using respiratory quotients reflecting this shift in fuels, there is no difference in metabolic rate between crickets starved for 24 h and 7 days, suggesting that metabolic rate does not decrease with declining condition. This implies that a decrease in metabolic rate during starvation may not be a general pattern in insects, and emphasizes the need to consider fuel use during metabolic rate estimation in starvation studies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available