Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30698987›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology2019

Inadequacy of typical physiological experimental protocols for investigating consequences of stochastic weather events emerging from global warming.

Warren W Burggren

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Warren W BurggrenDevelopmental Integrative Biology Research Group, Department of Biological Sciences, University of North Texas , Denton, Texas.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasingly variable, extreme, and nonpredictable weather events are predicted to accompany climate change, and such weather events will especially affect temperate, terrestrial environments. Yet, typical protocols in comparative physiology that examine environmental change typically employ simple step-wise changes in the experimental stressor of interest (e.g., temperature, water availability, oxygen, nutrition). Such protocols fall short of mimicking actual natural environments and may be inadequate for fully exploring the physiological effects of stochastic, extreme weather events. Indeed, numerous studies from the field of thermal biology, especially, indicate nonlinear and sometimes counterintuitive findings associated with variable and fluctuating (but rarely truly stochastic) protocols for temperature change. This Perspective article suggests that alternative experimental protocols should be employed that go beyond step-wise protocols and even beyond variable protocols employing circadian rhythms, for example, to those that actually embrace nonpredictable elements. Such protocols, though admittedly more difficult to implement, are more likely to reveal the capabilities (and, importantly, the limitations) of animals experiencing weather, as distinct from climate. While some possible protocols involving stochasticity are described as examples to stimulate additional thought on experimental design, the overall goal of this Perspective article is to encourage comparative physiologists to entertain incorporation of nonpredictable experimental conditions as they design future experimental protocols.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeGlobal WarmingResearch DesignStochastic ProcessesWeatherAnimalsClimateHumans

Identifiers

PMID30698987
PMCPMC6483216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.