Comparison of the largest and smallest males metabolic rate and leg mass from The hidden cost of sexually selected traits: the metabolic expense of maintaining a sexually selected weapon
journal contributionposted on 02.11.2018 by Ummat Somjee, H. Arthur Woods, Meghan Duell, Christine W. Miller
Any type of content formally published in an academic journal, usually following a peer-review process.
a) We took the upper and lower quartile of males based on total body mass, and categorized these as males as ‘large’ or ‘small’ respectively. The largest quartile of males (average leg mass is 6.8% of body mass, n=13) and the smallest quartile of males (average leg mass is 5.3% of body mass, n=12) differed in relative leg mass (GLM: Walds χ2 = 4.73, df = 1, 21, p=0.04; Figure S1, Note: error bars display standard errors). b) The largest males had the largest drop in mass-specific RMR after leg loss compared to small males (GLM: Walds χ2 =4.29, df = 1, 23, p=0.03) but still not as large as predicted based on the relatively larger size of the leg (see Figure 3).