ReviewBiology2023
The Relevance of Time in Biological Scaling.
Review in Biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Influence of life-history traits on mitochondrial DNA substitution rates exceeds that of metabolic rates in teleost fishes.Current zoology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Various phenotypic traits relate to the size of a living system in regular but often disproportionate (allometric) ways. These "biological scaling" relationships have been studied by biologists for over a century, but their causes remain hotly debated. Here, I focus on the patterns and possible causes of the body-mass scaling of the rates/durations of various biological processes and life-history events, i.e., the "pace of life". Many biologists have regarded the rate of metabolism or energy use as the master driver of the "pace of life" and its scaling with body size. Although this "energy perspective" has provided valuable insight, here I argue that a "time perspective" may be equally or even more important. I evaluate various major ways that time may be relevant in biological scaling, including as (1) an independent "fourth dimension" in biological dimensional analyses, (2) a universal "biological clock" that synchronizes various biological rates/durations, (3) a scaling method that uses various biological time periods (allochrony) as scaling metrics, rather than various measures of physical size (allometry), as traditionally performed, (4) an ultimate body-size-related constraint on the rates/timing of biological processes/events that is set by the inevitability of death, and (5) a geological "deep time" approach for viewing the evolution of biological scaling patterns. Although previously proposed universal four-dimensional space-time and "biological clock" views of biological scaling are problematic, novel approaches using allochronic analyses and time perspectives based on size-related rates of individual mortality and species origination/extinction may provide new valuable insights.
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.