MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2757014100 · doi:10.1111/1365-2435.12996

Metabolic scaling of individuals vs. populations: Evidence for variation in scaling exponents at different hierarchical levels

2017· article· en· W2757014100 on OpenAlex
Tommy Norin, A. Kurt Gamperl

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFunctional Ecology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersRocky Mountain Research StationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDanmarks Frie Forskningsfond
KeywordsBiologyScalingBasal metabolic rateMetabolic rateExponentPopulationEcologyDemographyMathematicsEndocrinologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The power scaling of metabolic rate with body mass is fundamental to animal biology, due to the profound influence that animal size has on ecology and physiology. Yet the value of the scaling exponent ( b ) is highly debated. This scaling exponent has been suggested to be fixed at 0.67 or 0.75, or to vary systematically with cell size or metabolic intensity between the boundaries of 0.67 and 1. Despite this tremendous interest in the value of scaling exponents, little is known about metabolic scaling within individual animals and how this relates to population‐level scaling. Here, we conducted a long‐term study that repeatedly characterised the complete metabolic profile of a group of 68 individual fish (cunner, Tautogolabrus adspersus ) by measuring their standard metabolic rate ( SMR ), routine metabolic rate ( RMR ), active metabolic rate ( AMR ) and aerobic scope ( AS ) in five separate trials over 10 months (fish mass range, 0.5–19.5 g). At all levels of metabolic intensity, the mean exponents for the group of fish at any single point in time (i.e. within trials; b SMR = 0.89, b RMR = 0.89, b AMR = 0.94, b AS = 0.96) were higher than those characterising the group as it aged (i.e. across trials; b SMR = 0.82, b RMR = 0.84, b AMR = 0.90, b AS = 0.92), and both were higher than the mean exponents for individual fish as they grew (i.e. across trials but within individuals; b SMR = 0.74, b RMR = 0.79, b AMR = 0.83, b AS = 0.85). This variation in scaling relationships, which occurred at different hierarchical levels and across time as the fish aged, may have implications for bioenergetics and ecosystem modelling and for individual ecological and physiological studies where body mass adjustments are made using specific scaling exponents to compare traits of interest between different‐sized individuals. The findings suggest that studies on fish population dynamics should apply metabolic scaling exponents that are significantly higher than those used in studies on individuals. However, the generality of this assertion should be confirmed by future work, as a few existing studies on endotherms (mainly birds) have reported shallower scaling relationships for basal metabolic rate between individuals as compared to within individuals. A plain language summary is available for this article.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it