16Global warming appears to favour smaller-bodied organisms, but whether larger species are also 17 more vulnerable to thermal extremes, as suggested for past mass-extinction events, is still an 18 open question. Here, we tested whether interspecific differences in thermal tolerance (heat and 19 cold) of ectotherm organisms are linked to differences in their body mass and genome size (as a 20 proxy for cell size). Since the vulnerability of larger, aquatic taxa to warming has been attributed 21 to the oxygen limitation hypothesis, we also assessed how body mass and genome size modulate 22 thermal tolerance in species with contrasting breathing modes, habitats and life-stages. A 23 database with the upper (CTmax) and lower (CTmin) critical thermal limits and their 24 methodological aspects was assembled comprising more than 500 species of ectotherms. Our 25 results demonstrate that thermal tolerance in ectotherms is dependent on body mass and genome 26 size and these relationships became especially evident in prolonged experimental trials where 27 energy efficiency gains importance. During long-term trials, CTmax was impaired in larger-28 bodied water-breathers, consistent with a role for oxygen limitation. Variation in CTmin was 29 mostly explained by the combined effects of body mass and genome size and it was enhanced in 30 larger-celled, air-breathing species during long-term trials, consistent with a role for 31 depolarization of cell membranes. Our results highlight the importance of accounting for 32 phylogeny and exposure duration. Especially when considering long-term trials, the observed 33 effects on thermal limits are more in line with the warming-induced reduction in body mass 34 observed during long-term rearing experiments.
36The capacity of organisms to take up and transform resources from their environment is a 37 key attribute governing growth, reproduction and subsequently affecting population dynamics, 38 community composition and ecosystem functioning [1,2]. Such capacity seems to be mainly 39 dictated by the species' body mass [3]. Macroecological and paleoecological data show spatial 40 (e.g. Bergmann's rule [4,5]) and temporal (Lilliput's effect [6]) variation in body mass, which 41 share a common point related to the environmental temperature: at warmer, tropical latitudes and 42 during the past mass extinctions, warming appears to select for smaller-bodied species [5,[7][8][9].
43Body size reductions with warming appear to be stronger in aquatic taxa than in terrestrial taxa 44 [5]. In tandem with body size reductions, both aquatic and terrestrial species are shifting their 45 distribution towards cooler habitats and their phenology to earlier and hence, cooler conditions 46 [10,11]. One approach that has been taken to clarify the extent and variation in species 47 redistributions, and to determine which taxonomic groups are potentially more vulnerable to the 48 effects of climate change, is that of comparative studies that analyze thermal tolerance limits 49 (upper and lower) synthesized...