Cited by 289Comparative Animal Anatomy StudiesPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsEvolution and Paleontology Studies

Morphometrics of the Avian Small Intestine Compared with That of Nonflying Mammals: A Phylogenetic Approach

Lavin, Shana R., Karasov, William H., Ives, Anthony R., Middleton, Kevin M., Garland Jr., Theodore·2008·Physiological and Biochemical Zoology

Abstract

Flying animals may experience a selective constraint on gut volume because the energetic cost of flight increases and maneuverability decreases with greater digesta load. The small intestine is the primary site of absorption of most nutrients (e.g., carbohydrates, proteins, fat) in both birds and mammals. Therefore, we used a phylogenetically informed approach to compare small intestine morphometric measurements of birds with those of nonflying mammals and to test for effects of diet within each clade. We also compared the fit of nonphylogenetic and phylogenetic models to test for phylogenetic signal after accounting for effects of body mass, clade, and/or diet. We provide a new MATLAB program (Regressionv2.m) that facilitates a flexible model-fitting approach in comparative studies. As compared with nonflying mammals, birds had 51% less nominal small intestine surface area (area of a smooth bore tube) and 32% less volume. For animals <365 g in body mass, birds also had significantly shorter small intestines (20%-33% shorter, depending on body mass). Diet was also a significant factor explaining variation in small intestine nominal surface area of both birds and nonflying mammals, small intestine mass of mammals, and small intestine volume of both birds and nonflying mammals. On the basis of the phylogenetic trees used in our analyses, small intestine length and nominal surface area exhibited statistically significant phylogenetic signal in birds but not in mammals. Thus, for…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/590395

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Special adaptations to a volant lifestyle are thought to influence GIT anatomy.

    “Other factors than diet thought to influence GIT anatomy include special adaptations to a volant [15, 21, 22] or a marine [23-25] lifestyle, or the aridity of the habitat [16, 26, 27].”
  • Large-scale studies that accounted for phylogeny did not confirm an association between diet and intestinal length.

    “By contrast, large-scale studies that accounted for phylogeny did not confirm an association between diet and intestinal length [15-19] or GIT complexity [20].”
  • Volant mammals had shorter total intestines than terrestrial mammals.

    “Similar to previous findings, volant mammals had shorter total intestines than terrestrial mammals [15, 21, 22]”
  • As previously described for different datasets except for a study in rodents, intestinal lengths scale at a higher exponent than expected based on simple geometry (i.e., positive allometry at an exponent > 0.33).

    “As previously described for different datasets [15-17, 23, 26] except for a study in rodents [18], intestinal lengths scale at a higher exponent than expected based on simple geometry (i.e., positive allometry at an exponent > 0.33).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 108 · Cited by 289

Authors
Lavin, S. R., Karasov, W. H., Ives, A. R., Middleton, K. M., & Garland Jr., T.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Venue
Physiological and Biochemical Zoology
Published
2008-09
Volume
81
Issue
5
Pages
526-550
ISSN
  • 1522-2152 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5293
OpenAlex
W2043145184
Cited by
289
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 22
FWCI
36.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Physiological and Biochemical Zoology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Comparative Animal Anatomy Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Physiological and biochemical adaptations
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
Keywords
phylogenetic signal, nutrient absorption, villus surface area, digestive capacity, flight energetics, comparative anatomy
MeSH terms
Animals, Birds, Body Weights and Measures, Intestine, Small, Mammals, Models, Biological, Phylogeny, Regression Analysis, Software, Species Specificity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review