1. Ecology
  2. Evolutionary Biology
Download icon

Reversal of the adipostat control of torpor during migration in hummingbirds

  1. Erich R Eberts  Is a corresponding author
  2. Chris Guglielmo
  3. Kenneth C Welch Jr
  1. University of Toronto, Canada
  2. University of Western Ontario, Canada
Short Report
  • Cited 0
  • Views 849
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2021;10:e70062 doi: 10.7554/eLife.70062

Abstract

Many small endotherms use torpor to reduce metabolic rate and manage daily energy balance. However, the physiological 'rules' that govern torpor use are unclear. We tracked torpor use and body composition in ruby-throated hummingbirds (Archilochus colubris), a long-distance migrant, throughout the summer using respirometry and quantitative magnetic resonance. During the mid-summer, birds entered torpor at consistently low fat stores (~5% of body mass), and torpor duration was negatively related to evening fat load. Remarkably, this energy-emergency strategy was abandoned in the late summer when birds accumulated fat for migration. During the migration period, birds were more likely to enter torpor on nights when they had higher fat stores, and fat gain was positively correlated with the amount of torpor used. These findings demonstrate the versatility of torpor throughout the annual cycle and suggest a fundamental change in physiological feedback between adiposity and torpor during migration. Moreover, this study highlights the underappreciated importance of facultative heterothermy in migratory ecology.

Data availability

All data is available in the main text or the supplementary materials. Analyses reported in this article can be reproduced using the data and code provided by Eberts et al., (2021).

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Erich R Eberts

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    For correspondence
    erich.eberts@mail.utoronto.ca
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4259-8752
  2. Chris Guglielmo

    Department of Biology, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Kenneth C Welch Jr

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3283-6510

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (06129-2015 RGPIN)

  • Kenneth C Welch Jr

Human Frontier Science Program (RGP0062/2016)

  • Kenneth C Welch Jr

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery Grant (05245-2015 RGPIN)

  • Chris Guglielmo

Canada Foundation for Innovation, Ontario Research Fund

  • Chris Guglielmo

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Details of animal husbandry and all experiments were approved by the University of Toronto (protocol # 20011649) and the University of Western Ontario Animal Care Committees (protocol #2018-092). Hummingbirds were captured under Ontario Collecting Permit SC-00041.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Chima Nwaogu, University of Cape Town, South Africa

Publication history

  1. Received: May 5, 2021
  2. Preprint posted: May 15, 2021 (view preprint)
  3. Accepted: November 19, 2021
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: December 6, 2021 (version 1)
  5. Accepted Manuscript updated: December 7, 2021 (version 2)
  6. Version of Record published: December 31, 2021 (version 3)
  7. Version of Record updated: January 10, 2022 (version 4)

Copyright

© 2021, Eberts et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 849
    Page views
  • 103
    Downloads
  • 0
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Ecology
    Barbara C Klump et al.
    Research Article

    The temporary storage and re-use of tools can significantly enhance foraging efficiency. New Caledonian crows in one of our study populations use two types of stick tools – hooked and non-hooked – which differ in raw material, manufacture costs, and foraging performance. Using a large sample of wild-caught, temporarily captive New Caledonian crows, we investigated experimentally whether individuals prefer one tool type over the other when given a choice and whether they take better care of their preferred tools between successive episodes of use, safely storing them underfoot or in nearby holes. Crows strongly preferred hooked stick tools made from Desmanthus virgatus stems over non-hooked stick tools. Importantly, this preference was also reflected in subsequent tool-handling behaviour, with subjects keeping hooked stick tools safe more often than non-hooked stick tools sourced from leaf litter. These results suggest that crows ‘value’ hooked stick tools, which are both costlier to procure and more efficient to use, more than non-hooked stick tools. Results from a series of control treatments suggested that crows altered their tool ‘safekeeping’ behaviour in response to a combination of factors, including tool type and raw material. To our knowledge, our study is the first to use safekeeping behaviour as a proxy for assessing how non-human animals value different tool types, establishing a novel paradigm for productive cross-taxonomic comparisons.

    1. Ecology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Michal Motyka et al.
    Research Article

    Conservation efforts must be evidence-based, so rapid and economically feasible methods should be used to quantify diversity and distribution patterns. We have attempted to overcome current impediments to the gathering of biodiversity data by using integrative phylogenomic and three mtDNA fragment analyses. As a model, we sequenced the Metriorrhynchini beetle fauna, sampled from ~700 localities in three continents. The species-rich dataset included ~6,500 terminals, ~1,850 putative species delimited at 5% uncorrected pairwise threshold, possibly ~1,000 of them unknown to science. Neither type of data could alone answer our questions on biodiversity and phylogeny. The phylogenomic backbone enabled the integrative delimitation of robustly defined natural genus-group units that will inform future research. Using constrained mtDNA analysis, we identified the spatial structure of species diversity, very high species-level endemism, and a biodiversity hotspot in New Guinea. We suggest that focused field research and subsequent laboratory and bioinformatic workflow steps would substantially accelerate the inventorying of any hyperdiverse tropical group with several thousand species. The outcome would be a scaffold for the incorporation of further data from environmental sequencing and ecological studies. The database of sequences could set a benchmark for the spatiotemporal evaluation of biodiversity, would support evidence-based conservation planning, and would provide a robust framework for systematic, biogeographic, and evolutionary studies.