Field metabolic rates and water uptake in the blossom-bat Syconycteris australis (Megachiroptera)

Citation
F. Geiser et Dk. Coburn, Field metabolic rates and water uptake in the blossom-bat Syconycteris australis (Megachiroptera), J COMP PH B, 169(2), 1999, pp. 133-138
Citations number
32
Categorie Soggetti
Animal Sciences",Physiology
Journal title
JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY B-BIOCHEMICAL SYSTEMIC AND ENVIRONMENTALPHYSIOLOGY
ISSN journal
01741578 → ACNP
Volume
169
Issue
2
Year of publication
1999
Pages
133 - 138
Database
ISI
SICI code
0174-1578(199903)169:2<133:FMRAWU>2.0.ZU;2-A
Abstract
Blossom-bats, Syconycteris australis (18 g) are known to be highly active t hroughout the night. Since this species frequently enters torpor, we postul ated that their use of heterothermy may be related to a high energy expendi ture in the field. To test this hypothesis we measured field metabolic rate s (FMR) of S. australis at a subtropical site using the doubly labelled wat er (DLW) method. We also measured DLW turnover in captive animals held at c onstant ambient temperature (T-a) with ad libitum food to estimate whether T-a and food availability affect energy expenditure under natural condition s. The FMR of S. australis was 8.55 mi CO2 g(-1) h(-1) or 76.87 kJ day(-1) which is 7.04 times the basal metabolic rate (BMR) and one of the highest v alues reported for endotherms to date. Mass-specific energy expenditure by bats in the laboratory was about two-thirds of that of bats in the field, b ut some of this difference was explained by the greater body mass in captiv e bats. This suggests that foraging times in the field and laboratory were similar, and daily energy expenditure was not strongly affected by T-a or a d libitum food. Water uptake in the field was significantly higher than in the laboratory, most likely because nectar contained more water than the la boratory diet. Our study shows that S. australis has a FMR that is about do uble that predicted for its size although its BMR is lower than predicted. This supports the view that caution must be used in making assumptions from measurements of BMR in the laboratory about energy and other biological re quirements in free-ranging animals.