QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Brzek, P. Articles by Konarzewski, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Brzek, P. Articles by Konarzewski, M.

Effect of food shortage on the physiology and competitive abilities of sand martin (Riparia riparia) nestlings

Pawel Brzk^* and Marek Konarzewski

Institute of Biology, University of Bialystok, wierkowa Street 20B, 15-950 Bialystok, PO Box 109, Poland

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Intestinal mass versus body mass in the three experimental groups of nestlings. The solid line is the regression line for the pooled data set. The broken lines depict within-group regressions, as indicated in the key. FR, FR/AL, food-restricted groups; AL, group fed ad libitum.

View larger version (11K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Body mass increments in the three experimental groups of nestlings. Horizontal lines denote mean values, while boxes denote S.E.M. Different letters indicate a significant difference among all groups (ANOVA). FR, FR/AL, food-restricted groups; AL, group fed ad libitum.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. (A) Resting metabolic rate versus body mass, (B) fat mass versus dry lean body mass, (C) pectoral muscle mass versus body mass and (D) mass of intestines versus body mass in the two food-restricted groups (FR and FR/AL nestlings). Dashed lines and squares denote FR nestlings, while dotted lines and triangles denote FR/AL young. The filled square in D denotes the outlying data point from the FR group (see Results).

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. (A) Mass-specific resting metabolic rate (RMR), (B) lean-dry-mass-specific fat mass, (C) body-mass-specific pectoral muscle mass and (D) body-mass-specific intestinal mass in the three treatment groups. Different letters indicate significant differences between FR versus AL, and FR/AL versus AL groups only (Mann–Whitney U-tests). Horizontal lines denote median values, while boxes denote 25th and 75th centiles. The filled square denotes the outlying data point from the FR group (see Results). FR, FR/AL, food-restricted groups; AL, group fed ad libitum.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Body temperature after 2.5 days of rearing in the three experimental groups of nestlings. Horizontal lines denote median values, while boxes denote 25th and 75th centiles. Different letters indicate a significant difference among all groups (Mann–Whitney U-test). FR, FR/AL, food-restricted groups; AL, group fed ad libitum.

View larger version (13K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Intestinal L-proline uptake rate in the proximal (A) and middle (B) part of the gut. Horizontal lines denote mean values, while boxes denote S.E.M. Different letters indicate a significant difference among all groups (ANOVA). FR, FR/AL, food-restricted groups; AL, group fed ad libitum.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Locomotor activity, quantified as the ratio of the number of feeding bouts when the young were found in the nest tunnel to the total number of bouts. Horizontal lines denote median values, while boxes denote 25th and 75th centiles. Different letters indicate a significant difference among all groups (Mann–Whitney U-test). FR, FR/AL, food-restricted groups; AL, group fed ad libitum.