4.4 Article

The routine metabolic rate of mulloway (Argyrosomus japonicus: Sciaenidae) and yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi: Carangidae) acclimated to six different temperatures

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2009.01.008

关键词

Routine metabolic rate; Metabolism; Temperature; Oxygen consumption; Open-top respirometry; Oxygen transfer

资金

  1. Australian Aquafin CRC
  2. Australian Government's CRC program, the FRDC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the mass-specific routine metabolic rate (RMR) of similar sized mulloway (Argyrosomus japonicus), a sedentary species, and yellowtail kingfish (Seriola lalandi), a highly active species, acclimated at one of several temperatures ranging from 10-35 degrees C. Respirometry was carried out in an open-top static system and RMR corrected for seawater-atmosphere O-2 exchange using mass-balance equations. For both species RMR increased linearly with increasing temperature (T). RMR for mulloway was 5.78T-29.0 mg O-2 kg(-0.8) h(-1) and for yellowtail kingfish was 12.11T-39.40 mg O-2 kg(-0.8) h(-1). The factorial difference in RMR between mulloway and yellowtail kingfish ranged from 2.8 to 2.2 depending on temperature. The energetic cost of routine activity can be described as a function of temperature for mulloway as 1.93T-9.68 kJ kg(-0.8) day(-1) and for yellowtail kingfish as 4.04T-13.14 kJ kg(-0.8) day(-1). Over the full range of temperatures tested Q(10) values were approximately 2 for both species while Q(10) responses at each temperature increment varied considerably with mulloway and yellowtail kingfish displaying thermosensitivities indicative of each species respective niche habitat. RMR for mulloway was least thermally dependent at 28.5 degrees C and for yellowtail kingfish at 22.8 degrees C. Activation energies (E-a) calculated from Arrhenius plots were not significantly different between mulloway (47.6 kJ mol(-1)) and yellowtail kingfish (44.1 kJ mol(-1)). Crown Copyright (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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