Concept explainers
Size and Life
Physicists look for simple models and general principles that underlie and explain diverse physical phenomena. In the first 13 chapters of this textbook, you’ve seen that just a handful of general principles and laws can be used to solve a wide range of problems. Can this approach have any relevance to a subject like biology? It may seem surprising, but there are general 'laws of biology“’ that apply, with quantitative accuracy, to organisms as diverse as elephants and mice.
Let’s look at an example. An elephant uses more metabolic power than a mouse. This is not surprising, as an elephant is much bigger. But recasting the data shows an interesting trend. When we looked at the energy required to raise the temperature of different substances, we considered specific heat. The “specific” meant that we considered the heat required for 1 kilogram. For animals, rather than metabolic rate, we can look at the specific metabolic rate, the metabolic power used per kilogram of tissue. If we factor out the mass difference between a mouse and an elephant, are their specific metabolic powers the same?
In fact, the specific metabolic rate varies quite a bit among mammals, as the graph of specific metabolic rate versus mass shows. But there is an interesting trend: All of the data points lie on a single smooth curve. In other words, there really is a biological law we can use to predict a mammal’s metabolic rate knowing only its mass M. In particular, the specific metabolic rate is proportional to M –0.25. Because a 4000 kg elephant is 160,000 times more massive than a 25 g mouse, the mouse’s specific metabolic power is (160,000)0.25 = 20 times that of the elephant. A law that shows how a property scales with the size of a system is called a scaling law.
A similar scaling law holds for birds, reptiles, and even bacteria. Why should a single simple relationship hold true for organisms that range in size from a single cell to a 100 ton blue whale? Interestingly, no one knows for sure. It is a matter of current research to find out just what this and other scaling laws tell us about the nature of life.
Perhaps the metabolic-power scaling law is a result of
If heat dissipation were the only factor limiting metabolism, we can show that the specific metabolic rate should scale as M–0.33quite different from the M–0.25 scaling observed. Clearly, another factor is at work. Exactly what underlies the M–0.25 scaling is still a matter of debate, but some recent analysis suggests the scaling is due to limitations not of heat transfer but of fluid flow. Cells in mice, elephants, and all mammals receive nutrients and oxygen for metabolism from the bloodstream. Because the minimum size of a capillary is about the same for all mammals, the structure of the circulatory system must vary from animal to animal. The human aorta has a diameter of about 1 inch; in a mouse, the diameter is approximately l/20th of this. Thus a mouse has fewer levels of branching to smaller and smaller blood vessels as we move from the aorta to the capillaries. The smaller blood vessels in mice mean that viscosity is more of a factor throughout the circulatory system. The circulatory system of a mouse is quite different from that of ail elephant.
A model of specific metabolic rate based on blood-flow limitations predicts a M–0.25 law, exactly as observed. The model also makes other testable predictions. For example, the model predicts that the smallest possible mammal should have a body mass of about 1 gram—exactly the size of the smallest shrew. Even smaller animals have different types of circulatory' systems; in the smallest animals, nutrient transport is by diffusion alone. But the model can be extended to predict that the specific metabolic rate for these animals will follow a scaling law similar to that for mammals, exactly as observed. It is too soon to know if this model will ultimately prove to be correct, but it’s indisputable that there are large-scale regularities in biology that follow mathematical relationships based on the laws of physics.
The following questions are related to the passage "Size and Life" on the previous page.
A typical timber wolf has a mass of 40 kg, a typical jackrabbit a mass of 2.5 kg. Given the scaling law presented in the passage, we’d expect the wolf to use ________ times more energy than a jackrabbit in the course of a day.
- A. 2
- B. 4
- C. 8
- D. 16
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solutionChapter P Solutions
College Physics: A Strategic Approach (3rd Edition)
Additional Science Textbook Solutions
Campbell Biology: Concepts & Connections (9th Edition)
Biology: Life on Earth (11th Edition)
Introductory Chemistry (6th Edition)
Cosmic Perspective Fundamentals
Campbell Biology (11th Edition)
Anatomy & Physiology (6th Edition)
- 3. A measurement taken from the UW Jacobson Observatory (Latitude: 47.660503°, Longitude: -122.309424°, Altitude: 220.00 feet) when its local sidereal time is 120.00° makes the following observations of a space object (Based on Curtis Problems 5.12 + 5.13): Azimuth: 225.00° Azimuth rate: 2.0000°/s. Elevation: 75.000° Elevation rate: -0.5000°/s Range: 1500.0 km Range rate: -1.0000 km/s a. What are the r & v vectors (the state vector) in geocentric coordinates? (Answer r = [-2503.47 v = [17.298 4885.2 5.920 5577.6] -2.663]) b. Calculate the orbital elements of the satellite. (For your thoughts: what type of object would this be?) (Partial Answer e = 5.5876, 0=-13.74°) Tip: use Curtis algorithms 5.4 and 4.2.arrow_forwardConsider an isotope with an atomic number of (2(5+4)) and a mass number of (4(5+4)+2). Using the atomic masses given in the attached table, calculate the binding energy per nucleon for this isotope. Give your answer in MeV/nucleon and with 4 significant figures.arrow_forwardA: VR= 2.4 cm (0.1 V/cm) = 0.24 V What do Vector B an C represent and what are their magnitudesarrow_forward
- 4. Consider a cubesat that got deployed below the ISS and achieved a circular orbit of 410 km altitude with an inclination of 51.600°. What is the spacing, in kilometers, between successive ground tracks at the equator: a. Ignoring J2 (Earth's oblateness) effects b. Accounting for J2 effects c. Compare the two results and comment [Partial Answer: 35.7km difference]arrow_forwardplease solve and explainarrow_forwardTwo ice skaters, both of mass 68 kgkg, approach on parallel paths 1.6 mm apart. Both are moving at 3.0 m/sm/s with their arms outstretched. They join hands as they pass, still maintaining their 1.6 mm separation, and begin rotating about one another. Treat the skaters as particles with regard to their rotational inertia. a) What is their common angular speed after joining hands? Express your answer in radians per second. b) Calculate the change in kinetic energy for the process described in a). Express your answer with the appropriate units. c) If they now pull on each other’s hands, reducing their radius to half its original value, what is their common angular speed after reducing their radius? Express your answer in radians per second. d) Calculate the change in kinetic energy for the process described in part c). Express your answer with the appropriate units.arrow_forward
- Physics for Scientists and Engineers: Foundations...PhysicsISBN:9781133939146Author:Katz, Debora M.Publisher:Cengage LearningUniversity Physics Volume 1PhysicsISBN:9781938168277Author:William Moebs, Samuel J. Ling, Jeff SannyPublisher:OpenStax - Rice UniversityPhysics for Scientists and Engineers, Technology ...PhysicsISBN:9781305116399Author:Raymond A. Serway, John W. JewettPublisher:Cengage Learning