1254394701

1254394701



106

inter-individual variation in metabolic performance due to sex and body size without removing the effect of organ mass on metabolic rates. BMR and Msum variations were not significantly affected by scx and Msum was not related to sizc. However, the effect of body size on BMR approached significance (p = 0.06). We therefore chose to use a conservative approach and extracted size residuals of BMR to consider this weak effect. We testcd for the effccts of sex and body size on organ masses with the same approach and extracted residuals for fiirther analysis when the effects were significant. This was found to be the case for muscles, cardiopulmonary organs, excretory organs, brain and skin but not for digestive organs. The following step was to test for relationships between residual BMR or whole Msum and residuals of organ mass (except for digestive organs). We did this using data for the whole year and then for each period independently. We used a model selection approach based on second order Aikaike information criteria (AICc) to highlight the best model explaining variations in metabolic performance. Standardized coefficients (P) were used to order organs according to their relative influence on the dependent variable.

In GLM analyses, significant differences between periods were examined using Tukey tests. For all analyses, model residuals were tested for normality using one sample Kolmogorov-Smimov test. Data are presented as least sąuare means ± s.e.m. Model selection were performed in R using the MuMIn package (Barton, 2013).

4.5 Results

4.5.1 Seasonal variation in body mass and metabolic performance

Size-independent body mass (size: Fj.72-8.5, p < 0.01) varied over the year (period: F3.t2=7.3, p<0 .001). Body mass increased by 7.0% between fali and midwinter (Tukey: p< 0.0001), decreased by 4.0% (Tukey: p < 0.05) by the end of winter and remained constant until summer (figurę 4.2). Size-independent body mass was positively related to time of capture (Fł,72=5.5, p < 0.05) and was also dependent on sexes (F|i72 = 35.7, p< 0.0001) with males being on average 7.8% heavier than females (males: 11.6 ± 0.1 g; females: 10.8 ± 0.1 g,) and this effect did not change between the periods (period*sex: p = 0.4). Size-independent lean dry mass (size: F 1,73 — 11.5, p < 0.01) was not affected by time of capture (p = 0.2) or the interaction term



Wyszukiwarka

Podobne podstrony:
177ANNEXES Table A.l Inter-seasonal variation in body mass, basal metabolic ratę (BMR), summit metab
177ANNEXES Table A.l Inter-seasonal variation in body mass, basal metabolic ratę (BMR), summit metab
95 How does flexibility in body composition relate to seasonal changes in metabolic performance in a
141 5.6 Discussion In this study, we investigated the effect of winter metabolism on survival of fre
Pertamk. 14(1). 7-13(1991)The Effects of S02 and NO,, Singly or in Combination on the Growth Perform
00169 ?8fdc7697ba8e0e2234fcfe61c09204 170 McWilliams satisfy ^3 = r/0 = T] + T2. In addition to exa
img012 3 17. In winter months loads stacked outside may be covered in ice and snów, the effect of&nb
page16 (4) Type 3 ■ VW1500 A ■ VW1600 TL Due to its new body design the VW 1600 TL differs distinctl
mb 29 MUSCLS BUILDING, 29 is to escrcise and dewlop tlić npjjor arm. The hand is to be placed in a s
18 Małgorzata Bednarczyk, Ewa Wszendybył-Skulska According to the model presented in Figurę 2, the e
variable that combines the effects of frequency and temperaturę. In view of the fact that all

więcej podobnych podstron