ArticleDie Naturwissenschaften2026
Conventional methods may cause allometric analyses to be unreliable.
Article in Die Naturwissenschaften, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Contemporary analyses of allometric variation typically entail the fitting of a straight line to logarithmic transformations of the original data, with the slope for the line then being interpreted in the context of untransformed observations. In the process, investigators unwittingly commit statistical errors that may compromise the analyses and ensuing interpretations. Here, I re-examine published data for oxygen consumption vs. body mass in an ontogenetic series of crucian carp (Carassius auratus) to illustrate both the problem and how to avoid it altogether by using nonlinear regression to examine untransformed observations. Whereas a straight line fitted to logarithmic transformations pointed to a two-parameter power equation with an allometric exponent of 0.78 for describing data on the linear scale, the best description for pattern in the original data is shown here to be a straight line with a non-zero intercept. The overall pattern of variation is allometric because of the intercept. However, the pattern of variation over the range in the data is isometric because the implied exponent for the predictor variable is 1. Findings reported here have important implications for the study of bivariate allometry, where the objective of primary importance is to accurately describe the pattern of variation in untransformed observations. The methods applied here provide a useful roadmap for attaining that objective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42377396What 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.