2001
DOI: 10.1006/jare.2000.0778
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thermal acclimation and non-shivering thermogenesis in three species of South American rodents: a comparison between arid and mesic habitats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
13
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
2
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Among them, responses to warm experimental treatments include: lowered energy intake with no elevation-related differences (Hammond et al, 2001), increase in body weight and decrease in maximum and resting metabolic rate (Novoa et al, 2005;Nespolo and Rosenmann, 1997;Nespolo et al, 1999Nespolo et al, , 2001Antinuchi and Bush, 2000). As for Phyllotis, there is evidence of decrease in energy intake (Bozinovic and Nespolo, 1997), slowdown of digestion turnover time (Naya et al, 2005) and depressed thermogenic capacity when acclimated to 30 • C (Nespolo et al, 2001). Our results under this thermal treatment are strongly consistent with a decrease in energy expenditure, a slowdown in passage and digestive rates, a relatively small amount of feces produced and therefore an increase in the proportion of energy extracted from food.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Among them, responses to warm experimental treatments include: lowered energy intake with no elevation-related differences (Hammond et al, 2001), increase in body weight and decrease in maximum and resting metabolic rate (Novoa et al, 2005;Nespolo and Rosenmann, 1997;Nespolo et al, 1999Nespolo et al, , 2001Antinuchi and Bush, 2000). As for Phyllotis, there is evidence of decrease in energy intake (Bozinovic and Nespolo, 1997), slowdown of digestion turnover time (Naya et al, 2005) and depressed thermogenic capacity when acclimated to 30 • C (Nespolo et al, 2001). Our results under this thermal treatment are strongly consistent with a decrease in energy expenditure, a slowdown in passage and digestive rates, a relatively small amount of feces produced and therefore an increase in the proportion of energy extracted from food.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This value is surprising, because it is similar to the smallest known value in mammals, which is found in the shrew Suncus ethruscus (0.23 μm), and similar to that of Mus musculus (0.29 μm) (Gehr et al, 1981). Since P. darwini is not a very small mammal and probably does not have particularly high energetic requirements compared to other mammals (see Nespolo et al 2001), we considered the possibility that the values measured were artificially diminished by the methods. In this case, the fixative and buffer used in this study would have produced a thickness barrier 6-24% thinner than the combination used by Gehr et al (1981( , for small mammals (Maina, 2002a).…”
Section: Figmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…One approach often used in acclimation experiments is to acclimate for a 'standard' period (e.g. Heimer and Morrison, 1978;Nespolo et al, 2001a). That approach (with the implicit assumption of consistent response rates) could generate misleading conclusions if the kinetics of acclimation differed between individuals or among groups or species (see above).…”
Section: Individual Variation In V O∑max and Ventilatory Traitsmentioning
confidence: 99%