4.4 Review

Allometric estimation of metabolic rates in animals

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2010.10.004

Keywords

Scaling; Metabolism; Mammals; Independent contrasts; Reduced major axis; Ordinary least squares

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [DP0987626]
  2. Australian Research Council [DP0987626] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The relationship between body mass (M) and metabolic rate (MR) typically accounts for most (> 90%) of the inter-specific variation in MR. As such, when measurement of a species of interest is not possible, its MR can often be predicted using M. However, choosing an appropriate relationship to make such predictions is critical, and the choice is complicated by ongoing debate about the structure of the relationship between M and MR. The present study examines a range of methods including ordinary least squares (OLS), reduced major axis (RMA), and phylogenetically-informed (PI) approaches for estimating log(MR) from log(M), as well as non-linear approaches for estimating the relationship between MR and M without the need for log-transformation. Using data for the basal metabolic rates of mammals, it is shown that RMA regression overestimates the scaling exponent of MR (b, where MR = aM(b)). suggesting that OLS regression is appropriate for these data. PI approaches are preferred over non-PI ones, and the best estimates of log(MR) are obtained by including information on body temperature, climate, habitat, island endemism, and use of torpor in addition to log(M). However, the use of log-transformed data introduces bias into estimates of MR, while the use of non-linear regression underestimates MR for small mammals. This suggests that no single relationship is appropriate for describing the relationship between MR and M for all mammals, and that relationships for more narrow taxonomic groups or body mass ranges should be used when predicting MR from M. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available