The maximum attainable body size of herbivorous mammals: morphophysiological constraints on foregut, and adaptations of hindgut fermenters
- PMID: 12712314
- DOI: 10.1007/s00442-003-1254-z
The maximum attainable body size of herbivorous mammals: morphophysiological constraints on foregut, and adaptations of hindgut fermenters
Abstract
An oft-cited nutritional advantage of large body size is that larger animals have lower relative energy requirements and that, due to their increased gastrointestinal tract (GIT) capacity, they achieve longer ingesta passage rates, which allows them to use forage of lower quality. However, the fermentation of plant material cannot be optimized endlessly; there is a time when plant fibre is totally fermented, and another when energy losses due to methanogenic bacteria become punitive. Therefore, very large herbivores would need to evolve adaptations for a comparative acceleration of ingesta passage. To our knowledge, this phenomenon has not been emphasized in the literature to date. We propose that, among the extant herbivores, elephants, with their comparatively fast passage rate and low digestibility coefficients, are indicators of a trend that allowed even larger hindgut fermenting mammals to exist. The limited existing anatomical data on large hindgut fermenters suggests that both a relative shortening of the GIT, an increase in GIT diameter, and a reduced caecum might contribute to relatively faster ingesta passage; however, more anatomical data is needed to verify these hypotheses. The digestive physiology of large foregut fermenters presents a unique problem: ruminant-and nonruminant-forestomachs were designed to delay ingesta passage, and they limit food intake as a side effect. Therefore, with increasing body size and increasing absolute energy requirements, their relative capacity has to increase in order to compensate for this intake limitation. It seems that the foregut fermenting ungulates did not evolve species in which the intake-limiting effect of the foregut could be reduced, e.g. by special bypass structures, and hence this digestive model imposed an intrinsic body size limit. This limit will be lower the more the natural diet enhances the ingesta retention and hence the intake-limiting effect. Therefore, due to the mechanical characteristics of grass, grazing ruminants cannot become as big as the largest browsing ruminant. Ruminants are not absent from the very large body size classes because their digestive physiology offers no particular advantage, but because their digestive physiology itself intrinsically imposes a body size limit. We suggest that the decreasing ability for colonic water absorption in large grazing ruminants and the largest extant foregut fermenter, the hippopotamus, are an indication of this limit, and are the outcome of the competition of organs for the available space within the abdominal cavity. Our hypotheses are supported by the fossil record on extinct ruminant/tylopod species which did not, with the possible exception of the Sivatheriinae, surpass extant species in maximum body size. In contrast to foregut fermentation, the GIT design of hindgut fermenters allows adaptations for relative passage acceleration, which explains why very large extinct mammalian herbivores are thought to have been hindgut fermenters.
Similar articles
-
A case of non-scaling in mammalian physiology? Body size, digestive capacity, food intake, and ingesta passage in mammalian herbivores.Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2007 Oct;148(2):249-65. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2007.05.024. Epub 2007 Jun 7. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2007. PMID: 17643330 Review.
-
Modelling digestive constraints in non-ruminant and ruminant foregut-fermenting mammals.Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2008 Sep;151(1):78-84. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2008.06.001. Epub 2008 Jun 10. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2008. PMID: 18586113
-
Intake, ingesta retention, particle size distribution and digestibility in the hippopotamidae.Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2004 Dec;139(4):449-59. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpb.2004.10.002. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol. 2004. PMID: 15596390
-
Modelling the nutritional ecology of ungulate herbivores: evolution of body size and competitive interactions.Oecologia. 1992 Mar;89(3):428-434. doi: 10.1007/BF00317422. Oecologia. 1992. PMID: 28313093
-
Review: Comparative methane production in mammalian herbivores.Animal. 2020 Mar;14(S1):s113-s123. doi: 10.1017/S1751731119003161. Animal. 2020. PMID: 32024568 Review.
Cited by
-
Life in a Central European warm-temperate to subtropical open forest: Paleoecology of the rhinocerotids from Ulm-Westtangente (Aquitanian, Early Miocene, Germany).Naturwissenschaften. 2024 Feb 14;111(1):10. doi: 10.1007/s00114-024-01893-w. Naturwissenschaften. 2024. PMID: 38353735
-
Trunk picking from a truncating menu: Dry season forage selection by Asian elephant in a multi-use landscape.PLoS One. 2022 Jul 8;17(7):e0271052. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271052. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35802712 Free PMC article.
-
Genome of a giant isopod, Bathynomus jamesi, provides insights into body size evolution and adaptation to deep-sea environment.BMC Biol. 2022 May 13;20(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s12915-022-01302-6. BMC Biol. 2022. PMID: 35562825 Free PMC article.
-
Short duration overnight cattle kraaling in natural rangelands: Does time after kraal use affect their utilization by wildlife and above ground grass parameters?PLoS One. 2022 Apr 28;17(4):e0248795. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248795. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35482714 Free PMC article.
-
Anthropogenic disruptions to longstanding patterns of trophic-size structure in vertebrates.Nat Ecol Evol. 2022 Jun;6(6):684-692. doi: 10.1038/s41559-022-01726-x. Epub 2022 Apr 21. Nat Ecol Evol. 2022. PMID: 35449460
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources