Scaling of insect metabolic rate is inconsistent with the nutrient supply network model

250 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

An Exploration on Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Production by Insect Species Suitable for Animal or Human Consumption (2010, unknown): “82 [33,34].”
Body size variation in insects: a macroecological perspective (2010, background): “Examples include various aspects of biochemistry (Darveau et al., 2005a, b), stoichiometry (Fagan et al., 2002; Woods et al., 2004), metabolic rate (Chown et al., 2007), gas exchange characteristics (Lighton, 1991; C.R. White et al., 2007), wing loading and stroke frequency (Casey, May & Morgan,…”
Lipid content of terrestrial arthropods in relation to body size, phylogeny, ontogeny and sex (2011, background): “75 (Chown et al., 2007) and energy reserves show scaling of M1 (present study), it follows that fasting endurance will be greater for larger insects, and show scaling of M0.”
Energy limitation as a selective pressure on the evolution of sensory systems (2008, background): “Many invertebrates have remarkable tolerance under hypoxic or J. E. Niven and S. B. Laughlin anoxic conditions, possibly due to their low metabolic rates in comparison to vertebrates (e.g. Niven and Scharlemann, 2005; Chown et al., 2007).”
Handbook of protocols for standardized measurement of terrestrial invertebrate functional traits (2017, unknown): “and strongly correlated with an individual’s metabolic rate (Chown et al. 2007).”