ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND
BMR Basal or standard metabolic rate reflects the minimum amount of energy required to maintain body processes. BMR is directly proportional to body mass and is higher in mammals than birds due to the significantly larger average body mass. Mass-specific BMR is inversely proportional to body weight and is much higher in birds based on the energy requirement per gram of body weight. What is the relationship between BMR and mass-specific BMR in Birds and Amphibians? Are BMR and mass-specific BMR similar in Birds and Amphibians?
METHODS
Multiple species of birds, mammals, and amphibians were used in this theoretical study. The data used was extracted from Quaardvark.
RESULTS
Amphibians have much lower BMR and mass-specific BMR than birds
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
The "baseline" metabolic rate of an animal is measured as the basal metabolic rate (BMR) for an endotherm or as the standard metabolic rate (SMR) for an ectotherm. Endotherms tend to have basal high metabolic rates and high energy needs thanks to their maintenance of a constant body temperature. Ectotherms of similar size tend to have much lower standard metabolic rates and energy requirements, sometimes 10%, percent or less than those of comparable endotherms
UNKNOWN/PROBLEM
Is the BMR and mass-specific BMR of amphibians higher, lower, or the same as it is in birds? The average body mass of birds and mammals is very different hence the much higher mass-specific BMR of birds, but the average body mass of amphibians and birds is much more similar. Does it mean the mass-specific BMRs of Birds and Amphibians are similar?
QUESTION AND HYPOTHESIS
Are BMR and mass-specific BMR similar in amphibians and birds? The BMR and mas-specific BMR of Amphibians are much lower than the ones of birds. Endotherms (Birds) use metabolic heat to keep a stable body temperature, while ectotherms (Amphibians) do not. Amphibians have much lower energy requirements and therefore lower metabolic rates.
APPROACH
Testing the hypothesis by using data available in Quaardvark.
METHODS
DESIGN
The study uses data extracted from Quaardvark and collected in Excel spreadsheet.
SUBJECT
65 species of birds and 13 species of Amphibians are used in the study.
PROCEDURES
Data extracted from Quaardvark is exported to Excel and used to calculate average body mass, BMR, mass-specific BMR, and t-value for birds and amphibians. The relationship between the independent (body mass) and dependent (BMR and mass-specific BMR) is illustrated using scatterplot graphs and trend lines.
RESULTS
PARAGRAPHS
In birds, the body mass and BMR are directly proportional as shown in Table 1. The body mass and mass-specific BMR are inversely proportional as shown in Table 2. In Amphibians the body mass and BMR are directly proportional as shown in Table 3. while the body mass and mass-specific BMR are inversely proportional as shown in Table 4.
FIGURES
Figure 1. Relationship between Body mass (g) and BMR (W) in Birds. Figure 2. Relationship between Body mass (g) and mass-specific BMR (W/g) in Birds. Figure 3. Relationship between Body mass (g) and BMR (W) in Amphibians. Figure 4. Relationship between Body mass (g) and mass-specific BMR (W/g) in Amphibians. Figure 5. T-test Body mass of Birds vs Amphibians. Figure 6. T-test BMR Birds vs Amphibians. Figure 7. T-test Mass specific BMR of Birds vs Amphibians.
TABLES
Table 1. T-test Body mass of Birds vs Amphibians. Table 2. T-test BMR Birds vs Amphibians. Table 3. T-test Mass specific BMR of Birds vs Amphibians.
DISCUSSION
1st PARAGRAPH
BMR and mass-specific BMR of amphibians is much lower when compared to birds.
MIDDLE PARAGRAPHS
Amphibians are ectotherms and have much lower energy requirements than birds despite having the same directly proportional relationship between body mass and BMR and inversely proportional relationship between body mass and mass-specific BMR.
FINAL CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH.
The average body mass of birds is much more similar to the average body mass of amphibians than it is to the average body mass of mammals. Their BMR and mass-specific BMR are, however, very different. Amphibians as ectotherms don't use metabolic heat to maintain body temperature therefore their energy requirements are very low as are their BMR and mass-specific BMR.
LITERATURE CITED
FORMAT FOR END CITATIONS
Hulbert A. 2014. A Sceptics View: “Kleiber’s Law” or the “3/4 Rule” is neither a Law nor a Rule but Rather an Empirical Approximation. Systems. 2(2):186–202. doi:10.3390/systems2020186. https://www.mdpi.com/2079-8954/2/2/186.
Steyermark AC, Miamen AG, Feghahati HS, Lewno AW. 2005. Physiological and morphological correlates of among-individual variation in standard metabolic rate in the leopard frog Rana pipiens. Journal of Experimental Biology. 208(6):1201–1208. doi:10.1242/jeb.01492. [accessed 2020 Aug 19]. https://jeb.biologists.org/content/208/6/1201.
White CR, Phillips NF, Seymour RS. 2006. The scaling and temperature dependence of vertebrate metabolism. Biology Letters. 2(1):125–127. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2005.0378. [accessed 2020 May 3]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1617203/.
Auer SK, Salin K, Anderson GJ, Metcalfe NB. 2018. Individuals exhibit consistent differences in their metabolic rates across changing thermal conditions. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A, Molecular & Integrative Physiology. 217:1–6. doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2017.11.021. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5805842/.
FORMAT FOR IN-TEXT CITATIONS
(Hulbert 2014), (Steyermark et al. 2005), (White et al. 2006),
(Auer et al. 2018)
click to edit