Cited by 213Physiological and biochemical adaptationsCardiovascular and exercise physiologyEvolution and Paleontology Studies

The maximum oxygen consumption and aerobic scope of birds and mammals: getting to the heart of the matter

Open access
Bishop, Charles M·1999·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Resting or basal metabolic rates, compared across a wide range of organisms, scale with respect to body mass as approximately the 0.75 power. This relationship has recently been linked to the fractal geometry of the appropriate transport system or, in the case of birds and mammals, the blood vascular system. However, the structural features of the blood vascular system should more closely reflect maximal aerobic metabolic rates rather than submaximal function. Thus, the maximal aerobic metabolic rates of birds and mammals should also scale as approximately the 0.75 power. A review of the literature on maximal oxygen consumption and factorial aerobic scope (maximum oxygen consumption divided by basal metabolic rate) suggests that body mass influences the capacity of the cardiovascular system to raise metabolic rates above those at rest. The results show that the maximum sustainable metabolic rates of both birds and mammals are similar and scale as approximately the 0.88 +/- 0.02 power of body mass (and aerobic scope as approximately the 0.15 +/- 0.05 power), when the measurements are standardized with respect to the differences in relative heart mass and haemoglobin concentration between species. The maximum heart beat frequency of birds and mammals is predicted to scale as the -0.12 +/- 0.02 power of body mass, while that at rest should scale as -0.27 +/- 0.04.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.1999.0919

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • The relative mechanical and metabolic capacities of flying animals tend to decline with increasing size.

    “the relative mechanical and metabolic capacities of flying animals tend to decline with increasing size”

    From The physiology and biomechanics of avian flight at high altitude (2006) · cites this paper as Bishop, 1999

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bishop, C. M.
Affiliations
Bangor University (GB)
Corresponding author
Bishop, Charles M
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
1999-11-22
Volume
266
Issue
1435
Pages
2275-2281
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W1994953217
Cited by
213
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 13
FWCI
0.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Physiological and biochemical adaptations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
Keywords
VO2max, aerobic scope, basal metabolic rate, allometric scaling, body mass, birds, mammals, cardiovascular system, cardiac mass, hemoglobin levels, fractal geometry, blood vascular system
MeSH terms
Animals, Basal Metabolism, Birds, Body Weight, Heart, Mammals, Organ Size, Oxygen Consumption, 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