What is the status of metabolic theory one century after Pütter invented the von Bertalanffy growth curve?
ABSTRACT Metabolic theory aims to tackle ecological and evolutionary problems by explicitly including physical principles of energy and mass exchange, thereby increasing generality and deductive power. Individual growth models (IGMs) are the fundamental basis of metabolic theory because they represe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 2021-04, Vol.96 (2), p.557-575 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 575 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 557 |
container_title | Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society |
container_volume | 96 |
creator | Kearney, Michael R. |
description | ABSTRACT
Metabolic theory aims to tackle ecological and evolutionary problems by explicitly including physical principles of energy and mass exchange, thereby increasing generality and deductive power. Individual growth models (IGMs) are the fundamental basis of metabolic theory because they represent the organisational level at which energy and mass exchange processes are most tightly integrated and from which scaling patterns emerge. Unfortunately, IGMs remain a topic of great confusion and controversy about the origins of the ideas, their domain and breadth of application, their logical consistency and whether they can sufficiently capture reality. It is now 100 years since the first theoretical model of individual growth was put forward by Pütter. His insights were deep, but his model ended up being attributed to von Bertalanffy and his ideas largely forgotten. Here I review Pütter's ideas and trace their influence on existing theoretical models for growth and other aspects of metabolism, including those of von Bertalanffy, the Dynamic Energy Budget (DEB) theory, the Gill‐Oxygen Limitation Theory (GOLT) and the Ontogenetic Growth Model (OGM). I show that the von Bertalanffy and GOLT models are minor modifications of Pütter's original model. I then synthesise, compare and critique the ideas of the two most‐developed theories, DEB theory and the OGM, in relation to Pütter's original ideas. I formulate the Pütter, DEB and OGM models in the same structure and with the same notation to illustrate the major similarities and differences among them. I trace the confusion and controversy regarding these theories to the notions of anabolism, catabolism, assimilation and maintenance, the connections to respiration rate, and the number of parameters and state variables their models require. The OGM model has significant inconsistencies that stem from the interpretation of growth as the difference between anabolism and maintenance, and these issues seriously challenge its ability to incorporate development, reproduction and assimilation. The DEB theory is a direct extension of Pütter's ideas but with growth being the difference between assimilation and maintenance rather than anabolism and catabolism. The DEB theory makes the dynamics of Pütter's ‘nutritive material’ explicit as well as extending the scheme to include reproduction and development. I discuss how these three major theories for individual growth have been used to explain ‘macrometabolic’ patterns incl |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/brv.12668 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2461863636</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2461863636</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p2798-9b7200716003e140086f3b6a8856bc0fc5d0cb711579b1a523764e597cfd8c6a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkctOwzAQRS0EolBY8APIEhs2ae04sZMVohUvqRII8dpFjuPQlDQutpMq_8aOH8NJCwvGi7m6czQa-QJwgtEIuxqnuhlhn9JoBxzggMYejsK33V4HHosJHoBDYxYIOYOSfTAgxEchxewAfLzOuYWFgXYuobHc1gaqHC6l5akqC9H5SrdQVRIKWdnaaZ5bqeHD95ftelE1zpdZv6FRFZxIbXnJqzxv4btWazuHotaNvDgCezkvjTze9iF4vr56mt56s_ubu-nlzFv5LI68OGU-QgxThIjEAUIRzUlKeRSFNBUoF2GGRMowDlmcYh76hNFAhjETeRYJyskQnG_2rrT6rKWxybIwQpbuJqlqk_gBxREl3RuCs3_oQtW6ctc5KqaMoRgHjjrdUnW6lFmy0sWS6zb5_UYHjDfAuihl-zfHKOnySVw-SZ9PMnl86QX5AbvMgmo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2496770914</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>What is the status of metabolic theory one century after Pütter invented the von Bertalanffy growth curve?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Kearney, Michael R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kearney, Michael R.</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT
Metabolic theory aims to tackle ecological and evolutionary problems by explicitly including physical principles of energy and mass exchange, thereby increasing generality and deductive power. Individual growth models (IGMs) are the fundamental basis of metabolic theory because they represent the organisational level at which energy and mass exchange processes are most tightly integrated and from which scaling patterns emerge. Unfortunately, IGMs remain a topic of great confusion and controversy about the origins of the ideas, their domain and breadth of application, their logical consistency and whether they can sufficiently capture reality. It is now 100 years since the first theoretical model of individual growth was put forward by Pütter. His insights were deep, but his model ended up being attributed to von Bertalanffy and his ideas largely forgotten. Here I review Pütter's ideas and trace their influence on existing theoretical models for growth and other aspects of metabolism, including those of von Bertalanffy, the Dynamic Energy Budget (DEB) theory, the Gill‐Oxygen Limitation Theory (GOLT) and the Ontogenetic Growth Model (OGM). I show that the von Bertalanffy and GOLT models are minor modifications of Pütter's original model. I then synthesise, compare and critique the ideas of the two most‐developed theories, DEB theory and the OGM, in relation to Pütter's original ideas. I formulate the Pütter, DEB and OGM models in the same structure and with the same notation to illustrate the major similarities and differences among them. I trace the confusion and controversy regarding these theories to the notions of anabolism, catabolism, assimilation and maintenance, the connections to respiration rate, and the number of parameters and state variables their models require. The OGM model has significant inconsistencies that stem from the interpretation of growth as the difference between anabolism and maintenance, and these issues seriously challenge its ability to incorporate development, reproduction and assimilation. The DEB theory is a direct extension of Pütter's ideas but with growth being the difference between assimilation and maintenance rather than anabolism and catabolism. The DEB theory makes the dynamics of Pütter's ‘nutritive material’ explicit as well as extending the scheme to include reproduction and development. I discuss how these three major theories for individual growth have been used to explain ‘macrometabolic’ patterns including the scaling of respiration, the temperature–size rule (first modelled by Pütter), and the connection to life history. Future research on the connections between theory and data in these macrometabolic topics have the greatest potential to advance the status of metabolic theory and its value for pure and applied problems in ecology and evolution.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1464-7931</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-185X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/brv.12668</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33205617</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Assimilation ; Catabolism ; Confusion ; dynamic energy budget ; Energy budget ; Energy Metabolism ; Exchanging ; growth model ; Growth models ; Life history ; Maintenance ; metabolic theory ; Metabolism ; Models, Biological ; Models, Theoretical ; ontogenetic growth model ; Ontogeny ; Reproduction ; Respiration ; scaling ; Temperature ; temperature size rule ; von Bertalanffy growth</subject><ispartof>Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2021-04, Vol.96 (2), p.557-575</ispartof><rights>2020 Cambridge Philosophical Society</rights><rights>2020 Cambridge Philosophical Society.</rights><rights>Biological Reviews © 2021 Cambridge Philosophical Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0002-3349-8744</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fbrv.12668$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fbrv.12668$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33205617$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kearney, Michael R.</creatorcontrib><title>What is the status of metabolic theory one century after Pütter invented the von Bertalanffy growth curve?</title><title>Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society</title><addtitle>Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc</addtitle><description>ABSTRACT
Metabolic theory aims to tackle ecological and evolutionary problems by explicitly including physical principles of energy and mass exchange, thereby increasing generality and deductive power. Individual growth models (IGMs) are the fundamental basis of metabolic theory because they represent the organisational level at which energy and mass exchange processes are most tightly integrated and from which scaling patterns emerge. Unfortunately, IGMs remain a topic of great confusion and controversy about the origins of the ideas, their domain and breadth of application, their logical consistency and whether they can sufficiently capture reality. It is now 100 years since the first theoretical model of individual growth was put forward by Pütter. His insights were deep, but his model ended up being attributed to von Bertalanffy and his ideas largely forgotten. Here I review Pütter's ideas and trace their influence on existing theoretical models for growth and other aspects of metabolism, including those of von Bertalanffy, the Dynamic Energy Budget (DEB) theory, the Gill‐Oxygen Limitation Theory (GOLT) and the Ontogenetic Growth Model (OGM). I show that the von Bertalanffy and GOLT models are minor modifications of Pütter's original model. I then synthesise, compare and critique the ideas of the two most‐developed theories, DEB theory and the OGM, in relation to Pütter's original ideas. I formulate the Pütter, DEB and OGM models in the same structure and with the same notation to illustrate the major similarities and differences among them. I trace the confusion and controversy regarding these theories to the notions of anabolism, catabolism, assimilation and maintenance, the connections to respiration rate, and the number of parameters and state variables their models require. The OGM model has significant inconsistencies that stem from the interpretation of growth as the difference between anabolism and maintenance, and these issues seriously challenge its ability to incorporate development, reproduction and assimilation. The DEB theory is a direct extension of Pütter's ideas but with growth being the difference between assimilation and maintenance rather than anabolism and catabolism. The DEB theory makes the dynamics of Pütter's ‘nutritive material’ explicit as well as extending the scheme to include reproduction and development. I discuss how these three major theories for individual growth have been used to explain ‘macrometabolic’ patterns including the scaling of respiration, the temperature–size rule (first modelled by Pütter), and the connection to life history. Future research on the connections between theory and data in these macrometabolic topics have the greatest potential to advance the status of metabolic theory and its value for pure and applied problems in ecology and evolution.</description><subject>Assimilation</subject><subject>Catabolism</subject><subject>Confusion</subject><subject>dynamic energy budget</subject><subject>Energy budget</subject><subject>Energy Metabolism</subject><subject>Exchanging</subject><subject>growth model</subject><subject>Growth models</subject><subject>Life history</subject><subject>Maintenance</subject><subject>metabolic theory</subject><subject>Metabolism</subject><subject>Models, Biological</subject><subject>Models, Theoretical</subject><subject>ontogenetic growth model</subject><subject>Ontogeny</subject><subject>Reproduction</subject><subject>Respiration</subject><subject>scaling</subject><subject>Temperature</subject><subject>temperature size rule</subject><subject>von Bertalanffy growth</subject><issn>1464-7931</issn><issn>1469-185X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkctOwzAQRS0EolBY8APIEhs2ae04sZMVohUvqRII8dpFjuPQlDQutpMq_8aOH8NJCwvGi7m6czQa-QJwgtEIuxqnuhlhn9JoBxzggMYejsK33V4HHosJHoBDYxYIOYOSfTAgxEchxewAfLzOuYWFgXYuobHc1gaqHC6l5akqC9H5SrdQVRIKWdnaaZ5bqeHD95ftelE1zpdZv6FRFZxIbXnJqzxv4btWazuHotaNvDgCezkvjTze9iF4vr56mt56s_ubu-nlzFv5LI68OGU-QgxThIjEAUIRzUlKeRSFNBUoF2GGRMowDlmcYh76hNFAhjETeRYJyskQnG_2rrT6rKWxybIwQpbuJqlqk_gBxREl3RuCs3_oQtW6ctc5KqaMoRgHjjrdUnW6lFmy0sWS6zb5_UYHjDfAuihl-zfHKOnySVw-SZ9PMnl86QX5AbvMgmo</recordid><startdate>202104</startdate><enddate>202104</enddate><creator>Kearney, Michael R.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3349-8744</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202104</creationdate><title>What is the status of metabolic theory one century after Pütter invented the von Bertalanffy growth curve?</title><author>Kearney, Michael R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p2798-9b7200716003e140086f3b6a8856bc0fc5d0cb711579b1a523764e597cfd8c6a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Assimilation</topic><topic>Catabolism</topic><topic>Confusion</topic><topic>dynamic energy budget</topic><topic>Energy budget</topic><topic>Energy Metabolism</topic><topic>Exchanging</topic><topic>growth model</topic><topic>Growth models</topic><topic>Life history</topic><topic>Maintenance</topic><topic>metabolic theory</topic><topic>Metabolism</topic><topic>Models, Biological</topic><topic>Models, Theoretical</topic><topic>ontogenetic growth model</topic><topic>Ontogeny</topic><topic>Reproduction</topic><topic>Respiration</topic><topic>scaling</topic><topic>Temperature</topic><topic>temperature size rule</topic><topic>von Bertalanffy growth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kearney, Michael R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kearney, Michael R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>What is the status of metabolic theory one century after Pütter invented the von Bertalanffy growth curve?</atitle><jtitle>Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society</jtitle><addtitle>Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc</addtitle><date>2021-04</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>96</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>557</spage><epage>575</epage><pages>557-575</pages><issn>1464-7931</issn><eissn>1469-185X</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT
Metabolic theory aims to tackle ecological and evolutionary problems by explicitly including physical principles of energy and mass exchange, thereby increasing generality and deductive power. Individual growth models (IGMs) are the fundamental basis of metabolic theory because they represent the organisational level at which energy and mass exchange processes are most tightly integrated and from which scaling patterns emerge. Unfortunately, IGMs remain a topic of great confusion and controversy about the origins of the ideas, their domain and breadth of application, their logical consistency and whether they can sufficiently capture reality. It is now 100 years since the first theoretical model of individual growth was put forward by Pütter. His insights were deep, but his model ended up being attributed to von Bertalanffy and his ideas largely forgotten. Here I review Pütter's ideas and trace their influence on existing theoretical models for growth and other aspects of metabolism, including those of von Bertalanffy, the Dynamic Energy Budget (DEB) theory, the Gill‐Oxygen Limitation Theory (GOLT) and the Ontogenetic Growth Model (OGM). I show that the von Bertalanffy and GOLT models are minor modifications of Pütter's original model. I then synthesise, compare and critique the ideas of the two most‐developed theories, DEB theory and the OGM, in relation to Pütter's original ideas. I formulate the Pütter, DEB and OGM models in the same structure and with the same notation to illustrate the major similarities and differences among them. I trace the confusion and controversy regarding these theories to the notions of anabolism, catabolism, assimilation and maintenance, the connections to respiration rate, and the number of parameters and state variables their models require. The OGM model has significant inconsistencies that stem from the interpretation of growth as the difference between anabolism and maintenance, and these issues seriously challenge its ability to incorporate development, reproduction and assimilation. The DEB theory is a direct extension of Pütter's ideas but with growth being the difference between assimilation and maintenance rather than anabolism and catabolism. The DEB theory makes the dynamics of Pütter's ‘nutritive material’ explicit as well as extending the scheme to include reproduction and development. I discuss how these three major theories for individual growth have been used to explain ‘macrometabolic’ patterns including the scaling of respiration, the temperature–size rule (first modelled by Pütter), and the connection to life history. Future research on the connections between theory and data in these macrometabolic topics have the greatest potential to advance the status of metabolic theory and its value for pure and applied problems in ecology and evolution.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>33205617</pmid><doi>10.1111/brv.12668</doi><tpages>19</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3349-8744</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1464-7931 |
ispartof | Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2021-04, Vol.96 (2), p.557-575 |
issn | 1464-7931 1469-185X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2461863636 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Assimilation Catabolism Confusion dynamic energy budget Energy budget Energy Metabolism Exchanging growth model Growth models Life history Maintenance metabolic theory Metabolism Models, Biological Models, Theoretical ontogenetic growth model Ontogeny Reproduction Respiration scaling Temperature temperature size rule von Bertalanffy growth |
title | What is the status of metabolic theory one century after Pütter invented the von Bertalanffy growth curve? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T06%3A14%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What%20is%20the%20status%20of%20metabolic%20theory%20one%20century%20after%20P%C3%BCtter%20invented%20the%20von%20Bertalanffy%20growth%20curve?&rft.jtitle=Biological%20reviews%20of%20the%20Cambridge%20Philosophical%20Society&rft.au=Kearney,%20Michael%20R.&rft.date=2021-04&rft.volume=96&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=557&rft.epage=575&rft.pages=557-575&rft.issn=1464-7931&rft.eissn=1469-185X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/brv.12668&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2461863636%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2496770914&rft_id=info:pmid/33205617&rfr_iscdi=true |