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

First published online April 26, 2005
Journal of Experimental Biology 208, 1627-1634 (2005)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2005
doi: 10.1242/jeb.01503

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 Related articles in JEB 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 Suarez, R. K. Articles by Darveau, C. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Suarez, R. K. Articles by Darveau, C. A.

Multi-level regulation and metabolic scaling

Raul K. Suarez^1,* and Charles A. Darveau²

¹ Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9610, USA
² Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Metabolic rate (O2) as a function of body mass in a number of small mammals (circle, hazel mouse; triangle, edible dormouse; square, ground squirrel; inverted triangle, European hamster; diamond, European hedgehog; hexagon, alpine marmot) during euthermy (solid line) or hibernation (broken line). Metabolic rate (BMR) scales allometrically during euthermia, but during hibernation BMR scales isometrically. The differences between euthermic and hibernating metabolic rates are due to alterations in the rates of energy expenditure in internal organs. Redrawn from Singer et al. (1995).

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Flux control coefficients of ATP turnover (solid line), substrate oxidation (thick broken line), and proton leak (thin broken line), showing shared and changing contributions to control as the system moves towards 100% of state 3 respiration rate. Results were obtained using top-down control analysis. Redrawn from Brand et al. (1993).