Literature DB >> 15316726

The power requirements (Glossophaginae: Phyllostomidae) in nectar-feeding bats for clinging to flowers.

Christian C Voigt1.   

Abstract

Nectar-feeding bats are the heaviest pollinators exploiting flowers in a hovering foraging mode. As hovering flight is considered to be energetically costly, clinging to flowers would be beneficial from an energetic perspective. I examined the rate of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide release during clinging flower visitation in two 10-g Glossophaga soricina (Glossophinae: Phyllostomidae) to evaluate the potential energetic benefit of clinging versus hovering. In addition, I measured the duration of flower visits of free-ranging glossophagine bats to Markea neurantha (Solanaceae), a bat-pollinated plant that allows both hovering and clinging flower visitation. After 20 s of clinging to an artificial respiratory mask, the bats' respiratory exchange ratio did not significantly deviate from 1, indicating the combustion of sugar. The average oxygen uptake rate equaled 1.39 ml min(-1) (+/-0.38 SD, STPD) and the carbon dioxide release rate equaled 1.33 ml min(-1) (+/-0.20 SD, STPD) for feeder visits longer than 20 s (n = 79). Converting the oxygen uptake rate into power input yielded 0.49 W, less than a third of the power requirements for hovering for a 10-g bat. Free-ranging 10-g glossophagine bats exploited flowers of M. neurantha for, on average, 0.32 s (+/-0.14 SD, n = 273) during hovering and for 0.39 s (+/-0.18 SD, n = 152) during clinging visitations. A comparison between the power requirements of flower exploitation in differently sized bats indicates that clinging would benefit larger nectar-feeding bats to a greater extent than smaller species.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15316726     DOI: 10.1007/s00360-004-0442-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol B        ISSN: 0174-1578            Impact factor:   2.200


  13 in total

1.  Fuel selection in rufous hummingbirds: ecological implications of metabolic biochemistry.

Authors:  R K Suarez; J R Lighton; C D Moyes; G S Brown; C L Gass; P W Hochachka
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  No cost of echolocation for bats in flight.

Authors:  J R Speakman; P A Racey
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1991-04-04       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Sulphur-containing "perfumes" attract flower-visiting bats.

Authors:  O von Helversen; L Winkler; H J Bestmann
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  The energy cost of flight: do small bats fly more cheaply than birds?

Authors:  Y Winter; O von Helversen
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 2.200

5.  Nectar intake and energy expenditure in a flower visiting bat.

Authors:  O V Helversen; H -U Reyer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1984-08       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Energetic cost of hovering flight in nectar-feeding bats (Phyllostomidae: Glossophaginae) and its scaling in moths, birds and bats.

Authors:  C C Voigt; Y Winter
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 2.200

7.  One-step N2-dilution technique for calibrating open-circuit VO2 measuring systems.

Authors:  M A Fedak; L Rome; H J Seeherman
Journal:  J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol       Date:  1981-09

8.  Intraspecific scaling of flight power in the bat Glossophaga soricina (Phyllostomidae).

Authors:  C C Voigt
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.200

9.  Reproductive energetics of the nectar-feeding bat Glossophaga soricina (Phyllostomidae).

Authors:  C C Voigt
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2003-01-25       Impact factor: 2.200

10.  Energetic cost of hovering flight in a nectar-feeding bat measured with fast-response respirometry.

Authors:  Y Winter
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 2.200

View more
  3 in total

1.  On 'various contrivances': pollination, phylogeny and flower form in the Solanaceae.

Authors:  Sandra Knapp
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-02-12       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Field metabolic rates of phytophagous bats: do pollination strategies of plants make life of nectar-feeders spin faster?

Authors:  Christian C Voigt; Detlev H Kelm; G Henk Visser
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2005-11-09       Impact factor: 2.200

3.  How to budget metabolic energy: torpor in a small Neotropical mammal.

Authors:  Detlev H Kelm; Otto von Helversen
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2007-05-09       Impact factor: 2.230

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.