Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31616308›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in physiology2019

Strong Evidence for an Intraspecific Metabolic Scaling Coefficient Near 0.89 in Fish.

Christopher L Jerde, Krista Kraskura, Erika J Eliason, Samantha R Csik, Adrian C Stier, Mark L Taper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Inherent instability leads to high costs of hovering in near-neutrally buoyant fishes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Effects of low temperature on growth and metabolism of larval green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) across early ontogeny.Journal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Christopher L JerdeMarine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, United States.
Krista KraskuraDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, United States.
Erika J EliasonMarine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, United States.
Samantha R CsikDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, United States.
Adrian C StierDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, United States.
Mark L TaperDepartment of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As an example of applying the evidential approach to statistical inference, we address one of the longest standing controversies in ecology, the evidence for, or against, a universal metabolic scaling relationship between metabolic rate and body mass. Using fish as our study taxa, we curated 25 studies with measurements of standard metabolic rate, temperature, and mass, with 55 independent trials and across 16 fish species and confronted this data with flexible random effects models. To quantify the body mass - metabolic rate relationship, we perform model selection using the Schwarz Information Criteria (ΔSIC), an established evidence function. Further, we formulate and justify the use of ΔSIC intervals to delineate the values of the metabolic scaling relationship that should be retained for further consideration. We found strong evidence for a metabolic scaling coefficient of 0.89 with a ΔSIC interval spanning 0.82 to 0.99, implying that mechanistically derived coefficients of 0.67, 0.75, and 1, are not supported by the data. Model selection supports the use of a random intercepts and random slopes by species, consistent with the idea that other factors, such as taxonomy or ecological or lifestyle characteristics, may be critical for discerning the underlying process giving rise to the data. The evidentialist framework applied here, allows for further refinement given additional data and more complex models.

Indexed as

evidence functionsevidentialist statisticslikelihoodmetabolic scalingmixed effects modelsSICstandard metabolic rate

Identifiers

PMID31616308
PMCPMC6763608

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.