Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Discussion, Literature cited, Results -…
Abstract
Background
-
As body mass increases so does BMR in mammals and birds
As BMR increases mass-specific body mass decreases in birds and mammals
Average body mass, BMR, and mass specific BMR and not equal in birds and mammals
Mammals who live in tropical habitats have a higher BMR than mammals who don't live in tropical habitats
Methods
Organisms: Mammals and Aves.
Experiment: Theoretical, Predicting hypothesis and then extracting data from quardvark to compare and interprete.
Results
In both mammals and birds a mass increase causes BMR to increase and a BMR increase causes mass-specific body mass to decrease
Average body mass and BMR is much higher in mammals but mass-specific body mass is higher in birds
Mammals who live in tropical habitats have a higher BMR
Introduction
Background
Body size directly affects metabolic rate and larger animals tend to live longer. Activity levels also affect metabolic levels and vary from 2/3 to 1.
Unknown/Problem
It isn't accurate to compare body mass to metabolism because there's so many physical constraints that affect the metabolic state of an organism. Although a lot can be learned from comparing mammals and aves, they have many differences that can throw off data.
Questions/Hypothesis
How does body mass, BMR, mass-specific body mass and habitat affect mammals and birds. Who has a higher body mass, BMR, and mass-specific body mass birds or mammals?
There is a direct correlation to an increase in body mass and BMR causing BMR and mass-specific body mass to increase as well, because the data shows a positive increase as the organism gets bigger. Because most mammals are bigger than most aves their body mass and BMR is bigger. Aves mass-specific body mass is higher than mammals on average. Because mammals who live in tropical habitats have a higher temperature their BMR is higher than mammals who don't live in tropical habitats.
Approach
The hypothesis will be tested by taking the data from Quardvark and doing an analysis by putting line and bar graphs together to compare numbers.
Methods
Design
Data on body mass, BMR, mass-specific, and habitat was collected from the Quardvark database and put into graphs to compare numbers.
subjects
Species of all age and sex from mammals and aves were tested except for a few outliers that affected data.
Procedure
Searched data on mammals and aves on Quardvark and narrowed down information to body mass, BMR, and mass-specific body mass, and habitat. This data was transferred to excel and put into tables and graphs to get a better understanding of the comparisons.
Discussion
From the data we gathered it’s fair to say the hypothesis are supported. Because of mammals bigger structure they had a higher body mass and BMR and the aves had a higher mass-specific BMR due to their activity levels.
The mammals who lived in tropical habitats had a higher BMR because it is warmer in the tropical climate making their metabolism work better.
. In both aves and mammals there was a direct correlation to body mass increasing and BMR increasing as well as BMR increasing and mass-specific BMR increasing due to the energy being used as the organism gets bigger. On the other hand, in both mammals and aves the mass-specific BMR decreased when the body mass increased.
Literature cited
Glazier D. Jun 2008. Effects of Metabolic Level on the Body Size Scaling of Metabolic Rates in Birds and Mammals. Proceedings: Biological Sciences. 275(1641). 1405-1410.
Speakman J. Feb 2005. Body size, energy metabolism, and lifespan. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 208. 1717-1730.
-
Results
When looking at the line graph on figure one it illustrates a positive slope heading in the increasing direction. This indicates that as the body mass is increasing the BMR is increasing as well in aves. In figure two the line graph is heading upward in the positive direction. This shows that the mammals body mass increases so does the BMR. When looking at figure 3 there’s a line graph heading in the negative direction, this that as the aves body mass increases their mass-specific BMR decreases. Looking at figure 4 the non-tropical mammals had a BMR of 15 and tropical mammals had a BMR of 50. In figure 5 the mammals had a higher body mass of 11185 compared to aves body mass of 305. In figure 6 mammals had a higher BMR of 10 compared to aves BMR of 1. In figure 7 aves had a higher mass-specific BMR of 0.010 compared to mammals 0.005.