Literature DB >> 16342078

Scaling of body frontal area and body width in birds.

R L Nudds1, J M V Rayner.   

Abstract

By analyzing a homogenous dataset we show, in contradiction to a previous study, that the scaling of body frontal area (S(b)) with body mass (m(b)) does not differ between passerine and nonpasserine birds. It is likely that comparison of data collected from live passerines with data collected from frozen nonpasserines had led to the incorrect conclusion that the scaling of S(b) varied between the taxa. We suggest that body dimensions collected from frozen specimens, or specimens stored in alcohol, are not applicable to live birds, and that both the current equations presented in the literature for predicting S(b) from m(b) may lead to inaccurate estimates. Using data from preserved specimens, we found that S(b) scales isometrically with m(b) (S(b) proportional, variant m(b) (0.66)), and therefore we found no evidence for larger birds being more streamlined than smaller birds. S(b) scales with negative allometry against wingspan (b), however, and b scales with positive allometry against m(b), so larger birds have smaller S(b) relative to b. In addition, it appears that dorsoventral flattening of the body is a general characteristic of bird's bodies but that it is more pronounced in larger birds, suggesting perhaps a function in terms of increased lift during forward flight. It appears that bird's bodies obey the surface-to-area geometric scaling law, but bird body shape may vary in relation to aerodynamic function. We suggest that a large-scale study, simultaneously measuring S(b) and m(b) in live passerines and nonpasserines, is required to improve the predictive power of S(b) upon m(b) scaling equations, which play a key role in the estimation of mechanical power consumption in flight in birds. Furthermore, the relations between bird body shape and axial skeleton dimensions, with reference to aerodynamic adaptation, warrant further investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16342078     DOI: 10.1002/jmor.10409

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Morphol        ISSN: 0022-2887            Impact factor:   1.804


  7 in total

1.  Flight performance of the largest volant bird.

Authors:  Daniel T Ksepka
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Sexual size dimorphism, prey morphology and catch success in relation to flight mechanics in the peregrine falcon: a simulation study.

Authors:  Robin Mills; Graham K Taylor; Charlotte K Hemelrijk
Journal:  J Avian Biol       Date:  2019-03-20       Impact factor: 2.248

3.  The relationship between sternum variation and mode of locomotion in birds.

Authors:  Talia M Lowi-Merri; Roger B J Benson; Santiago Claramunt; David C Evans
Journal:  BMC Biol       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 7.431

4.  Higher-order phylogeny of modern birds (Theropoda, Aves: Neornithes) based on comparative anatomy. II. Analysis and discussion.

Authors:  Bradley C Livezey; Richard L Zusi
Journal:  Zool J Linn Soc       Date:  2007-01-01       Impact factor: 3.286

5.  Gull-inspired joint-driven wing morphing allows adaptive longitudinal flight control.

Authors:  C Harvey; V B Baliga; C D Goates; D F Hunsaker; D J Inman
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 4.293

6.  Did pterosaurs feed by skimming? Physical modelling and anatomical evaluation of an unusual feeding method.

Authors:  Stuart Humphries; Richard H C Bonser; Mark P Witton; David M Martill
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 8.029

7.  Physics-based simulations of aerial attacks by peregrine falcons reveal that stooping at high speed maximizes catch success against agile prey.

Authors:  Robin Mills; Hanno Hildenbrandt; Graham K Taylor; Charlotte K Hemelrijk
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 4.475

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.