Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Discussion, Results, Literature Cited,…
Abstract
Background
It is known that birds have less mass, and that flying is a less efficient mode of transportation than mammals.
-
-
Results
In this data, it is seen that the average mass and average BMR from mammals is greater than that of birds. However, for the average Mass-Specific BMR, birds had a greater value than mammals.
Introduction
Question & Hypothesis
-
Hypothesis:
If the mass-specific BMRs of a bird and a mammal are measured, then the bird will have a higher mass-specific BMR than the mammal.
It is known that birds have less mass, and that flying is a less efficient mode of transportation than mammals use, therefore it can be logically thought that birds will have a higher mass-specific BMR than mammals
Background
It is known that birds have less mass and have a less efficient mode of transportation compared to mammals. There have been many studies in the past examining body mass and BMR, as well as mass-specific BMR.
Although both warm blooded, birds and mammals vary greatly from each other in their modes of transportaion and thier average size.
Unknown/Problem
-
We are doing this study to see if there is a difference in the mass-specific BMR of birds vs mammals.
-
Methods
-
Subjects
64 species of Aves, 295 species of Mammalia
-
Procedures
I collected Mass and BMR data for both mammals and birds from an online database called Quaardvark. I then calculated mass-specific BMR of each species by dividing the BMR by the Mass using Excel. I then took the average BMR of each category, birds and mammals, and compared the two averages. I also graphed the Mass vs BMR of both birds and mammals, as well as the Mass vs Mass-specific BMR. I then also made graphs comapring the average mass, BMR, and Mass-specific BMR of birds and mammals
Discussion
Middle Paragraphs
During the data analysis phase of this project, I discovered that the mammals that were in the subset of data had a higher average mass than the birds in the data set. The mammals had an average mass of 11185g whereas birds averaged a mass of 305g. I also discovered that mammals have a higher average BMR than birds. This is because mammals have an average BMR of 10.1W and birds had an average BRM of 1.3W.
It was seen that in both birds and mammals there was a positive correlation in the relationship of body mass and BMR. This means that as their body mass increased there was an increase in their BMR. When looking at body mass and mass specific BMR in both birds and mammals, there was a negative correlation between them. This means that as the body mass increases the mass specific BMR will decrease. This indicates that their volume to surface area is changing indicating that smaller animals are less efficient.
Many similar studies have been performed looking at and comparing mass specific BMR and body mass in various animals. In a comparison of daily energy expenditure (DEE) and mass, it was indicated that mass-specific DEE is dependent upon body mass (Speakman 2005). This means that the energy an individual cell expends is dependent upon the mass of the animal it is a part of. This research supports my findings that mass-specific BMR is dependent upon the body mass of the specimen. In another research paper, it is supported that metabolic rate is dependent upon the body mass (Glazier 2008). This further supports one of my secondary findings that there is a positive correlation between body mass and BMR, which is a type of metabolic rate.
-
First Paragraph
After examining the bird data provided from the Quaardvark system, I found that the average mass specific BMR to be 0.0107 W/g. When looking at the mammal data from the same source, I found that the average mass specific BMR to be 0.005 W/g. When these two values were compared, it was seen that birds have approximately double the mass specific BMR than that of mammals.
Results
Paragraphs
When looking at the data the following results were observed. When analyzing the relationship between body mass and BMR in mammals and birds it was see that there is a positive correlation between body mass and BMR (figs. 1 & 2). When analyzing the relationship between body mass and mass-specific BMR in mammals and birds it was see that there is a negative correlation between body mass and mass-specific BMR (figs. 3 & 4). When comparing the average mass of birds versus mammals the graph shows that mammals have a larger average body mass than birds (fig. 5). When comparing the average BMR of birds versus mammals, the graph shows that mammals have a higher average BMR than birds (fig. 6). When comparing the average mass-specific BMR of birds versus mammals, the graph shows that birds have a higher mass-specific BMR than mammals (fig. 7).
-
Figures
See end of the document for figures. I could not get them to work in this system, so i had to add them at the end.
Literature Cited
End Citations
Glazier DS. Effects of Metabolic Level on the Body Size Scaling of Metabolic Rate in Birds and Mammals. Proceedings: Biological Sciences. 2008 [accessed 2024 Sep 17];275(1641):1405–1410. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25249672
-
-
-