4.4 Article

Body-size scaling of metabolic rate in the trilobite Eldredgeops rana

期刊

PALEOBIOLOGY
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 109-122

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1666/0094-8373-39.1.109

关键词

-

资金

  1. Paleontological Research Institution
  2. Paleontological Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We infer the body-size scaling slope of metabolic rate in a trilobite by applying a cell-size model that has been proposed to explain metabolic scaling in living organisms. This application is especially tractable in fossil arthropods with well-preserved compound eyes because the number and size of eye facets appear to be useful proxies for the relative number and size of cells in the body. As a case study, we examined the ontogenetic scaling of facet size and number in a, similar to 390-Myr-old local assemblage of the trilobite Eldredgeops rana, which has well-preserved compound eyes and a wide body-size range. Growth in total eye lens area resulted from increases in both facet area and number in relatively small (presumably young) specimens, but only from increases in facet area in large (presumably more mature) specimens. These results suggest that early growth in E. rana involved both cell multiplication and enlargement, whereas later growth involved only cell enlargement. If the cell-size model is correct, then metabolic rate scaled allometrically in E. rana, and the scaling slope of log metabolic rate versus log body mass decreased from similar to 0.85 to 0.63 as these animals grew. This inferred age-specific change in metabolic scaling is consistent with similar changes frequently observed in living animals. Additional preliminary analyses of literature data on other trilobites also suggest that the metabolic scaling slope was similar to 1 in benthic species, but in pelagic species, as has also been observed in living invertebrates. The eye-facet size (EFS) method featured here opens up new possibilities for examining the bioenergetic allometry of extinct arthropods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据