The Company of Biologists

Table 2.

Linear regression of O₂ consumption rate per unit hovering power output (V̇_O₂/W),assuming either perfect (P_per) or zero elastic storage(P_zero), versus respiratory quotient (RQ) and predicted relative difference in V̇_O₂/W between fat and carbohydrate metabolism

	Bird no.	Linear regression of V̇_O₂/W versus RQ	r²	Predicted percentage difference^*
C. anna
Using P_per	1	=2.17-0.96×RQ	0.82	18.9
	2	=2.32-0.99×RQ	0.59	17.7
	3	=1.92-0.82×RQ	0.44	17.7
	4	=2.00-0.85×RQ	0.51	17.7
				Mean=18.0±0.6
Using P_zero	1	=1.00-0.42×RQ	0.69	17.4
	2	=1.03-0.40×RQ	0.54	15.5
	3	=1.15-0.46×RQ	0.42	16.4
	4	=1.24-0.50×RQ	0.46	16.4
				Mean=16.4±0.8
S. rufus
Using P_per	5	=1.89-0.80×RQ	0.82	17.5
	6	=1.79-0.70×RQ	0.74	15.8
	7	=1.73-0.71×RQ	0.65	16.9
	8	=1.83-0.84×RQ	0.79	19.8
	9	=1.70-0.67×RQ	0.79	15.8
	10	=1.81-0.69×RQ	0.81	15.1
				Mean=16.8±1.7
Using P_zero	5	=0.71-0.29×RQ	0.79	16.8
	6	=0.67-0.26×RQ	0.73	15.3
	7	=0.54-0.22×RQ	0.67	16.8
	8	=0.56-0.26×RQ	0.80	19.7
	9	=0.51-0.19×RQ	0.78	14.6
	10	=0.53-0.19×RQ	0.78	13.8
				Mean=16.2±2.1

	Bird no.	Linear regression of V̇_O₂/W versus RQ	r²	Predicted percentage difference^*
C. anna
Using P_per	1	=2.17-0.96×RQ	0.82	18.9
	2	=2.32-0.99×RQ	0.59	17.7
	3	=1.92-0.82×RQ	0.44	17.7
	4	=2.00-0.85×RQ	0.51	17.7
				Mean=18.0±0.6
Using P_zero	1	=1.00-0.42×RQ	0.69	17.4
	2	=1.03-0.40×RQ	0.54	15.5
	3	=1.15-0.46×RQ	0.42	16.4
	4	=1.24-0.50×RQ	0.46	16.4
				Mean=16.4±0.8
S. rufus
Using P_per	5	=1.89-0.80×RQ	0.82	17.5
	6	=1.79-0.70×RQ	0.74	15.8
	7	=1.73-0.71×RQ	0.65	16.9
	8	=1.83-0.84×RQ	0.79	19.8
	9	=1.70-0.67×RQ	0.79	15.8
	10	=1.81-0.69×RQ	0.81	15.1
				Mean=16.8±1.7
Using P_zero	5	=0.71-0.29×RQ	0.79	16.8
	6	=0.67-0.26×RQ	0.73	15.3
	7	=0.54-0.22×RQ	0.67	16.8
	8	=0.56-0.26×RQ	0.80	19.7
	9	=0.51-0.19×RQ	0.78	14.6
	10	=0.53-0.19×RQ	0.78	13.8
				Mean=16.2±2.1

Predicted relative difference in V̇_O₂/Wbetween an RQ of 0.71 (fat) and 1.0 (carbohydrate).

View Large

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only