Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.

Although relationships between intestinal morphology between trophic groups in reptiles are widely assumed and represent a cornerstone of ecomorphological narratives, few comparative approaches actually tested this hypothesis on a larger scale. We collected data on lengths of intestinal sections of...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Monika I Hoppe, Carlo Meloro, Mark S Edwards, Daryl Codron, Marcus Clauss, María J Duque-Correa
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/42cf6ad5e8774ecba9dae57909562940
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:42cf6ad5e8774ecba9dae57909562940
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:42cf6ad5e8774ecba9dae579095629402021-12-02T20:05:13ZLess need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0253182https://doaj.org/article/42cf6ad5e8774ecba9dae579095629402021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253182https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203Although relationships between intestinal morphology between trophic groups in reptiles are widely assumed and represent a cornerstone of ecomorphological narratives, few comparative approaches actually tested this hypothesis on a larger scale. We collected data on lengths of intestinal sections of 205 reptile species for which either body mass (BM), snout-vent-length (SVL) or carapax length (CL) was recorded, transforming SVL or CL into BM if the latter was not given, and analyzed scaling patterns with BM and SVL, accounting for phylogeny, comparing three trophic guilds (faunivores, omnivores, herbivores), and comparing with a mammal dataset. Length-BM relationships in reptiles were stronger for the small than the large intestine, suggesting that for the latter, additional factors might be relevant. Adding trophic level did not consistently improve model fit; only when controlling for phylogeny, models indicated a longer large intestine in herbivores, due to a corresponding pattern in lizards. Trophic level effects were highly susceptible to sample sizes, and not considered strong. Models that linked BM to intestine length had better support than models using SVL, due to the deviating body shape of snakes. At comparable BM, reptiles had shorter intestines than mammals. While the latter finding corresponds to findings of lower tissue masses for the digestive tract and other organs in reptiles as well as our understanding of differences in energetic requirements between the classes, they raise the hitherto unanswered question what it is that reptiles of similar BM have more than mammals. A lesser effect of trophic level on intestine lengths in reptiles compared to mammals may stem from lesser selective pressures on differentiation between trophic guilds, related to the generally lower food intake and different movement patterns of reptiles, which may not similarly escalate evolutionary arms races tuned to optimal agility as between mammalian predators and prey.Monika I HoppeCarlo MeloroMark S EdwardsDaryl CodronMarcus ClaussMaría J Duque-CorreaPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 7, p e0253182 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Monika I Hoppe Carlo Meloro Mark S Edwards Daryl Codron Marcus Clauss María J Duque-Correa Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.
description	Although relationships between intestinal morphology between trophic groups in reptiles are widely assumed and represent a cornerstone of ecomorphological narratives, few comparative approaches actually tested this hypothesis on a larger scale. We collected data on lengths of intestinal sections of 205 reptile species for which either body mass (BM), snout-vent-length (SVL) or carapax length (CL) was recorded, transforming SVL or CL into BM if the latter was not given, and analyzed scaling patterns with BM and SVL, accounting for phylogeny, comparing three trophic guilds (faunivores, omnivores, herbivores), and comparing with a mammal dataset. Length-BM relationships in reptiles were stronger for the small than the large intestine, suggesting that for the latter, additional factors might be relevant. Adding trophic level did not consistently improve model fit; only when controlling for phylogeny, models indicated a longer large intestine in herbivores, due to a corresponding pattern in lizards. Trophic level effects were highly susceptible to sample sizes, and not considered strong. Models that linked BM to intestine length had better support than models using SVL, due to the deviating body shape of snakes. At comparable BM, reptiles had shorter intestines than mammals. While the latter finding corresponds to findings of lower tissue masses for the digestive tract and other organs in reptiles as well as our understanding of differences in energetic requirements between the classes, they raise the hitherto unanswered question what it is that reptiles of similar BM have more than mammals. A lesser effect of trophic level on intestine lengths in reptiles compared to mammals may stem from lesser selective pressures on differentiation between trophic guilds, related to the generally lower food intake and different movement patterns of reptiles, which may not similarly escalate evolutionary arms races tuned to optimal agility as between mammalian predators and prey.
format	article
author	Monika I Hoppe Carlo Meloro Mark S Edwards Daryl Codron Marcus Clauss María J Duque-Correa
author_facet	Monika I Hoppe Carlo Meloro Mark S Edwards Daryl Codron Marcus Clauss María J Duque-Correa
author_sort	Monika I Hoppe
title	Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.
title_short	Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.
title_full	Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.
title_fullStr	Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.
title_full_unstemmed	Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.
title_sort	less need for differentiation? intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/42cf6ad5e8774ecba9dae57909562940
work_keys_str_mv	AT monikaihoppe lessneedfordifferentiationintestinallengthofreptilesascomparedtomammals AT carlomeloro lessneedfordifferentiationintestinallengthofreptilesascomparedtomammals AT marksedwards lessneedfordifferentiationintestinallengthofreptilesascomparedtomammals AT darylcodron lessneedfordifferentiationintestinallengthofreptilesascomparedtomammals AT marcusclauss lessneedfordifferentiationintestinallengthofreptilesascomparedtomammals AT mariajduquecorrea lessneedfordifferentiationintestinallengthofreptilesascomparedtomammals
_version_	1718375476554104832

Less need for differentiation? Intestinal length of reptiles as compared to mammals.

Ejemplares similares