ArticleThe Journal of experimental biology2022
Resting costs too: the relative importance of active and resting energy expenditure in a sub-arctic seabird.
Article in The Journal of experimental biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reintroduced White Storks (Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Plunge-diving into dynamic body acceleration and energy expenditure in the Peruvian booby.The Journal of experimental biology · 2024Article
- Time-energy budgets outperform dynamic body acceleration in predicting daily energy expenditure in kittiwakes, and estimate a very low cost of gliding flight relative to flapping flight.The Journal of experimental biology · 2024Article
- Keystone seabird may face thermoregulatory challenges in a warming Arctic.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Telomere length correlates with physiological and behavioural responses of a long-lived seabird to an ecologically relevant challenge.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breeding is costly for many animals, including birds that must deliver food to a central place (i.e. nest). Measuring energy expenditure throughout the breeding season can provide valuable insight into physiological limitations by highlighting periods of high demand, and ultimately allows improvement of conservation strategies. However, quantifying energy expenditure in wildlife can be challenging, as existing methods do not measure both active (e.g. foraging) and resting energy costs across short and long time scales. Here, we developed a novel method for comparing active and resting costs in 66 pre-breeding and breeding seabirds (black-legged kittiwakes, Rissa tridactyla) by combining accelerometry and triiodothyronine (T3) as proxies for active and resting costs, respectively. Active energy costs were higher during incubation (P=0.0004) and chick rearing (P<0.0001) than during pre-laying, because of an increase in the time spent in flight of 11% (P=0.0005) and 15% (P<0.0001), respectively. Levels of T3, reflecting resting costs, peaked marginally during incubation with a mean (±s.d.) concentration of 4.71±1.97 pg ml-1 in comparison to 2.66±1.30 pg ml-1 during pre-laying (P=0.05) and 3.16±2.85 pg ml-1 during chick rearing (P=0.11). Thus, although chick rearing is often assumed to be the costliest breeding stage by multiple studies, our results suggest that incubation could be more costly as a result of high resting costs. We highlight the importance of accounting for both active and resting costs when assessing energy expenditure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.