4.5 Article

Physiological responses of wild zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) to heatwaves

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 223, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.225524

关键词

Blood parameters; Climate change; Evaporative water loss; Metabolic rate; Physiological stress; Temperature

类别

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [DP170103619]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Desert birds inhabit hot, dry environments that are becoming hotter and drier as a consequence of dimate change. Extreme weather such as heatwaves can cause mass-mortality events that may significantly impact populations and species. There are currently insufficient data concerning physiological plasticity to inform models of species' response to extreme events and develop mitigation strategies. Consequently, we examine here the physiological plasticity of a small desert bird in response to hot (mean maximum ambient temperature=42.7 degrees C) and cooler (mean maximum ambient temperature=31.4 degrees C) periods during a single Austral summer. We measured body mass, metabolic rate, evaporative water loss and body temperature, along with blood parameters (corticosterone, glucose and uric acid) of wild zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) to assess their physiological state and determine the mechanisms by which they respond to heatwaves. Hot days were not significant stressors; they did not result in modification of baseline blood parameters or an inability to maintain body mass, provided drinking water was available. During heatwaves, finches shifted their thermoneutral zone to higher temperatures. They reduced metabolic heat production, evaporative water loss and wet thermal conductance, and increased hyperthermia, especially when exposed to high ambient temperature. A consideration of the significant physiological plasticity that we have demonstrated to achieve more favourable heat and water balance is essential for effectively modelling and planning for the impacts of climate change on biodiversity.

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

4.5
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