Whole-organism performance traits are key intermediaries between the organism and the environment. Because performance traits are energetically costly to both build and maintain, performance will compete with other life-history traits over a limited pool of acquired energetic resources at any given time, potentially leading to trade-offs in performance expression. Although these trade-offs can have important implications for organismal fitness we currently lack a conceptual framework for predicting both where trade-offs might be expected, and which traits may be especially prone to trade-offs with other fitness-related life-history traits. We propose such a framework based on an estimate of the energetic requirements of locomotion in vertebrates, the ecological cost of transport. By analyzing existing data on mammalian energetic budgets and life-history, we found that species with higher costs of locomotion also tended to be those with "slow" life histories that invest relatively less in current reproduction than "fast" life-history species. We discuss the potential implications of ectothermy for masking such relationships, and how this framework might be expanded upon in the future.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 August 2017.
All research outputs
#28,611,663
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Integrative & Comparative Biology
#1,678
of 1,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,133
of 357,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Integrative & Comparative Biology
#81
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 357,463 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
