Abstract
Most studies on torpor in mammals and birds have been conducted in the laboratory. We compared whether patterns of torpor of several mammals and birds differ between the laboratory and field. Our comparison shows that in most species patterns of torpor in the laboratory differ substantially from those in the field. Some species, even if they use torpor extensively in the field, appear most reluctant to enter torpor in captivity. Moreover, torpor in the field is often more frequent, deeper, and longer than in captivity. Our comparison suggests that laboratory studies are likely to underestimate use and depth of torpor in the wild and thus may underestimate its impact on energy expenditure and survival.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
