Cargando…
Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017)
Griebeler and Werner offer a formal comment on Myhrvold, 2016 defending the conclusions of Werner and Griebeler, 2014. Although the comment criticizes several aspects of methodology in Myhrvold, 2016, all three papers concur on a key conclusion: the metabolism of extant endotherms and ectotherms can...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5831047/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29489880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192912 |
_version_ | 1783303116983107584 |
---|---|
author | Myhrvold, Nathan P. |
author_facet | Myhrvold, Nathan P. |
author_sort | Myhrvold, Nathan P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Griebeler and Werner offer a formal comment on Myhrvold, 2016 defending the conclusions of Werner and Griebeler, 2014. Although the comment criticizes several aspects of methodology in Myhrvold, 2016, all three papers concur on a key conclusion: the metabolism of extant endotherms and ectotherms cannot be reliably classified using growth-rate allometry, because the growth rates of extant endotherms and ectotherms overlap. A key point of disagreement is that the 2014 paper concluded that despite this general case, one can nevertheless classify dinosaurs as ectotherms from their growth rate allometry. The 2014 conclusion is based on two factors: the assertion (made without any supporting arguments) that the comparison with dinosaurs must be restricted only to extant sauropsids, ignoring other vertebrate groups, and that extant sauropsid endotherm and ectotherm growth rates in a data set studied in the 2014 work do not overlap. The Griebeler and Werner formal comment presents their first arguments in support of the restriction proposition. In this response I show that this restriction is unsupported by established principles of phylogenetic comparison. In addition, I show that the data set studied in their 2014 work does show overlap, and that this is visible in one of its figures. I explain how either point effectively invalidates the conclusion of their 2014 paper. I also address the other methodological criticisms of Myhrvold 2016, and find them unsupported. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5831047 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58310472018-03-19 Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017) Myhrvold, Nathan P. PLoS One Formal Comment Griebeler and Werner offer a formal comment on Myhrvold, 2016 defending the conclusions of Werner and Griebeler, 2014. Although the comment criticizes several aspects of methodology in Myhrvold, 2016, all three papers concur on a key conclusion: the metabolism of extant endotherms and ectotherms cannot be reliably classified using growth-rate allometry, because the growth rates of extant endotherms and ectotherms overlap. A key point of disagreement is that the 2014 paper concluded that despite this general case, one can nevertheless classify dinosaurs as ectotherms from their growth rate allometry. The 2014 conclusion is based on two factors: the assertion (made without any supporting arguments) that the comparison with dinosaurs must be restricted only to extant sauropsids, ignoring other vertebrate groups, and that extant sauropsid endotherm and ectotherm growth rates in a data set studied in the 2014 work do not overlap. The Griebeler and Werner formal comment presents their first arguments in support of the restriction proposition. In this response I show that this restriction is unsupported by established principles of phylogenetic comparison. In addition, I show that the data set studied in their 2014 work does show overlap, and that this is visible in one of its figures. I explain how either point effectively invalidates the conclusion of their 2014 paper. I also address the other methodological criticisms of Myhrvold 2016, and find them unsupported. Public Library of Science 2018-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5831047/ /pubmed/29489880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192912 Text en © 2018 Nathan P. Myhrvold http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Formal Comment Myhrvold, Nathan P. Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017) |
title | Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017) |
title_full | Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017) |
title_fullStr | Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017) |
title_full_unstemmed | Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017) |
title_short | Response to formal comment on Myhrvold (2016) submitted by Griebeler and Werner (2017) |
title_sort | response to formal comment on myhrvold (2016) submitted by griebeler and werner (2017) |
topic | Formal Comment |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5831047/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29489880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192912 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT myhrvoldnathanp responsetoformalcommentonmyhrvold2016submittedbygriebelerandwerner2017 |