Relationships Among Powered Flight, Metabolic Rate, Body Mass, Genome Size, and the Retrotransposon Complement of Volant Birds

Ji, Yanzhu; DeWoody, J. Andrew

doi:10.1007/s11692-016-9405-4

Cited by 11 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We successfully replicated Uyeda et al's study [9] in which the effect of genome size was not included in our final model. Although limited to extant taxa, this result is inconsistent with previous studies on amniotes that found evidence for an effect, particularly in birds [5][6][7], though others did not find evidence for a relationship [4,8]. Given previous suggestions in the literature, we further included an interaction between genome size and the presence/absence of endothermy to test for a difference in the effect of genome size on BMR; this parameter was not included in our final model either.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Studies generally support a link between genome size and metabolic rate in amniotes [4][5][6][7]14], except in a few cases [4,8,10]. Differences in support among these studies may be due to methodology, sample size, and taxonomic focus (denser sampling of one clade vs broader sample).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ji and DeWoody [8] found no evidence for a relationship between BMR and genome size using phylogenetic independent contrasts on a sample of 13 bird taxa. They hypothesize, however, that BMR may contribute to shaping the transposable element landscape in birds and play a role in driving the rate of insertions and deletions (indels).…”

Section: The Effect Of Powered Flight On Genome Sizementioning

confidence: 91%

“…The evidence generally suggests that a relationship might exist in birds and mammals but not in ectothermic groups, specifically actinopterygians and lissamphibians [3]. The evidence, however, on the relationship between genome size and metabolic rate in birds is conflicting among studies [4][5][6][7][8]; this is likely due to differences in sample size and methodology (e.g., ordinary least-squares regression, regression of extracted residuals from body mass correlations, and the use of phylogenetic comparative methods).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Relationship Between Genome Size and Metabolic Rate in Extant Vertebrates

Gardner

Laurin

Organ

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genome size has long been hypothesized to affect metabolic rate in various groups of animals. The mechanism behind this proposed association is the nucleotypic effect, in which large nucleus and cell sizes influence cellular metabolism through surface-to-volume ratios.Here, we provide a review of the recent literature on the relationship between genome size and metabolic rate. We also conduct an analysis using phylogenetic comparative methods and a large sample of extant vertebrates. We find no evidence that the effect of genome size improves upon models in explaining metabolic rate variation. Not surprisingly, our results show a strong positive relationship between metabolic rate and body mass, as well as a substantial difference in metabolic rate between endothermic and ectothermic vertebrates, controlling for body mass. The presence of endothermy can also explain elevated rate shifts in metabolic rate. We further find no evidence for a punctuated model of evolution for metabolic rate. Our results do not rule out the possibility that genome size affects cellular physiology in some tissues, but we find little support for a direct functional connection between genome size and overall metabolism in extant vertebrates.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Effect Of Powered Flight On Genome Sizementioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Relationship Between Genome Size and Metabolic Rate in Extant Vertebrates

Gardner

Laurin

Organ

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New discoveries about extant groups abound, including fully endothermic fish [ 18 ], seasonally endothermic reptiles [ 19 ], and a seasonally ectothermic mammal [ 20 – 22 ]. New insights into extant groups also come from novel molecular and physiological approaches [ 23 – 31 ]. Anatomical features that have long been associated with endothermy, like respiratory turbinates, have been questioned [ 32 ].…”

Section: An Unjustified Restriction To Sauropsidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017)

Myhrvold

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Griebeler and Werner offer a formal comment on Myhrvold, 2016 defending the conclusions of Werner and Griebeler, 2014. Although the comment criticizes several aspects of methodology in Myhrvold, 2016, all three papers concur on a key conclusion: the metabolism of extant endotherms and ectotherms cannot be reliably classified using growth-rate allometry, because the growth rates of extant endotherms and ectotherms overlap. A key point of disagreement is that the 2014 paper concluded that despite this general case, one can nevertheless classify dinosaurs as ectotherms from their growth rate allometry. The 2014 conclusion is based on two factors: the assertion (made without any supporting arguments) that the comparison with dinosaurs must be restricted only to extant sauropsids, ignoring other vertebrate groups, and that extant sauropsid endotherm and ectotherm growth rates in a data set studied in the 2014 work do not overlap. The Griebeler and Werner formal comment presents their first arguments in support of the restriction proposition. In this response I show that this restriction is unsupported by established principles of phylogenetic comparison. In addition, I show that the data set studied in their 2014 work does show overlap, and that this is visible in one of its figures. I explain how either point effectively invalidates the conclusion of their 2014 paper. I also address the other methodological criticisms of Myhrvold 2016, and find them unsupported.

show abstract

Skepticism, the critical standpoint, and the origin of birds: a partial critique of Havstad and Smith (2019)

Pourtless¹

2022

Biol Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationships Among Powered Flight, Metabolic Rate, Body Mass, Genome Size, and the Retrotransposon Complement of Volant Birds

Cited by 11 publications

References 51 publications

The Relationship Between Genome Size and Metabolic Rate in Extant Vertebrates

The Relationship Between Genome Size and Metabolic Rate in Extant Vertebrates

Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017)

Skepticism, the critical standpoint, and the origin of birds: a partial critique of Havstad and Smith (2019)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About