Chris Carbone
Zoological Society of London
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Chris Carbone.
Ecology | 2009
Kate E. Jones; Jon Bielby; Marcel Cardillo; Susanne A. Fritz; Justin O'Dell; C. David L. Orme; Kamran Safi; Wes Sechrest; Elizabeth H. Boakes; Chris Carbone; Christina Connolly; Michael J. Cutts; Janine K. Foster; Richard Grenyer; Michael B. Habib; Christopher A. Plaster; Samantha A. Price; Elizabeth A. Rigby; Janna Rist; Amber G. F. Teacher; Olaf R. P. Bininda-Emonds; John L. Gittleman; Georgina M. Mace; Andy Purvis
Analyses of life-history, ecological, and geographic trait differences among species, their causes, correlates, and likely consequences are increasingly important for understanding and conserving biodiversity in the face of rapid global change. Assembling multispecies trait data from diverse literature sources into a single comprehensive data set requires detailed consideration of methods to reliably compile data for particular species, and to derive single estimates from multiple sources based on different techniques and definitions. Here we describe PanTHERIA, a species-level data set compiled for analysis of life history, ecology, and geography of all known extant and recently extinct mammals. PanTHERIA is derived from a database capable of holding multiple geo-referenced values for variables within a species containing 100 740 lines of biological data for extant and recently extinct mammalian species, collected over a period of three years by 20 individuals. PanTHERIA also includes spatial databases o...
Nature | 1999
Chris Carbone; Georgina M. Mace; S. Craig Roberts; David W. Macdonald
Species in the mammalian order Carnivora exhibit a huge diversity of life histories with body sizes spanning more than three orders of magnitude. Despite this diversity, most terrestrial carnivores can be classified as either feeding on invertebrates and small vertebrates or on large vertebrates. Small carnivores feed predominantly on invertebrates probably because they are a superabundant resource (sometimes 90% of animal biomass); however, intake rates of invertebrate feeders are low, about one tenth of those of vertebrate feeders. Although small carnivores can subsist on this diet because of low absolute energy requirements, invertebrate feeding appears to be unsustainable for larger carnivores. Here we show, by reviewing the most common live prey in carnivore diets, that there is a striking transition from feeding on small prey (less than half of predator mass) to large prey (near predator mass), occurring at predator masses of 21.5–25 kg. We test the hypothesis that this dichotomy is the consequence of mass-related energetic requirements and we determine the predicted maximum mass that an invertebrate diet can sustain. Using a simple energetic model and known invertebrate intake rates, we predict a maximum sustainable mass of 21.5 kg, which matches the point where predators shift from small to large prey.
PLOS Biology | 2007
Chris Carbone; Amber G. F. Teacher; J. Marcus Rowcliffe
Mammalian carnivores fall into two broad dietary groups: smaller carnivores (<20 kg) that feed on very small prey (invertebrates and small vertebrates) and larger carnivores (>20 kg) that specialize in feeding on large vertebrates. We develop a model that predicts the mass-related energy budgets and limits of carnivore size within these groups. We show that the transition from small to large prey can be predicted by the maximization of net energy gain; larger carnivores achieve a higher net gain rate by concentrating on large prey. However, because it requires more energy to pursue and subdue large prey, this leads to a 2-fold step increase in energy expenditure, as well as increased intake. Across all species, energy expenditure and intake both follow a three-fourths scaling with body mass. However, when each dietary group is considered individually they both display a shallower scaling. This suggests that carnivores at the upper limits of each group are constrained by intake and adopt energy conserving strategies to counter this. Given predictions of expenditure and estimates of intake, we predict a maximum carnivore mass of approximately a ton, consistent with the largest extinct species. Our approach provides a framework for understanding carnivore energetics, size, and extinction dynamics.
The American Naturalist | 2005
Chris Carbone; Guy Cowlishaw; Nick J. B. Isaac; J. Marcus Rowcliffe
Day range (daily distance traveled) is an important measure for understanding relationships between animal distributions and food resources. However, our understanding of variation in day range across species is limited. Here we present a day range model and compare predictions against a comprehensive analysis of mammalian day range. As found in previous studies, day range scales near the \documentclass{aastex} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{bm} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{pifont} \usepackage{stmaryrd} \usepackage{textcomp} \usepackage{portland,xspace} \usepackage{amsmath,amsxtra} \usepackage[OT2,OT1]{fontenc} \newcommand\cyr{ \renewcommand\rmdefault{wncyr} \renewcommand\sfdefault{wncyss} \renewcommand\encodingdefault{OT2} \normalfont \selectfont} \DeclareTextFontCommand{\textcyr}{\cyr} \pagestyle{empty} \DeclareMathSizes{10}{9}{7}{6} \begin{document} \landscape
Archive | 1999
Daniel A. Cristol; Mitchell B. Baker; Chris Carbone
Ecology Letters | 2010
Nick J. B. Isaac; Chris Carbone
1/ 4
Animal Behaviour | 1996
Chris Carbone; Alasdair I. Houston
The American Naturalist | 2009
Nathalie Pettorelli; Jakob Bro-Jørgensen; Sarah M. Durant; Tim M. Blackburn; Chris Carbone
\end{document} power of body mass. Also, consistent with model predictions, taxonomic groups differ in the way day range scales with mass, associated with the most common diet types and foraging habitats. Faunivores have the longest day ranges and steepest body mass scaling. Frugivores and herbivores show intermediate and low scaling exponents, respectively. Day range in primates did not scale with mass, which may be consistent with the prediction that three‐dimensional foraging habitats lead to lower exponents. Day ranges increase with group size in carnivores but not in other taxonomic groups.
Methods in Ecology and Evolution | 2014
J. Marcus Rowcliffe; Roland Kays; Bart Kranstauber; Chris Carbone; Patrick A. Jansen
The annual migrations of birds are impressive phenomena that raise interesting physiological, evolutionary, and ecological questions. One facet of migration that has long intrigued biologists is the occurrence of differential migration, in which distance traveled differs between portions of a population. For example, in the eastern United States female Dark-eyed Juncos (Junco hyemalis) migrate farther into the winter range than males (Ketterson and Nolan, 1976), and among Snow Geese (Anser caerulescens) blue-morph and white-morph individuals separate longitudinally during migration (Cooke et al., 1975). (All common and scientific names follow Sibley and Monroe, 1990, and can be found in Tables I–III unless given in the text).
Animal Conservation | 2002
Chris Carbone; Sarah Christie; K. Conforti; Tim Coulson; N. Franklin; Joshua Ginsberg; M. Griffiths; J. Holden; Margaret F. Kinnaird; R. Laidlaw; Antony J. Lynam; David W. Macdonald; D. Martyr; Charles McDougal; L. Nath; Timothy G. O'Brien; John Seidensticker; J. L.D. Smith; Ronald Lewis Tilson; W. N. Wan Shahruddin
The metabolic theory of ecology links physiology with ecology, and successfully predicts many allometric scaling relationships. In recent years, proponents and critics of metabolic theory have debated vigorously about the scaling of metabolic rate. We show that the controversy arose, in part, because researchers examined the mean exponent separately from the variance. We estimate both quantities simultaneously using linear mixed-effects models and data from 1242 animal species. Metabolic rate scaling converges on the predicted value of 3/4 but is highly heterogeneous: 50% of orders lie outside the range 0.68-0.82. These findings are robust to several forms of statistical uncertainty. We then test competing hypotheses about the variation. Metabolic theory is currently unable to explain differences in scaling among orders, but the patterns are not consistent with competing explanations either. We conclude that current theories are inadequate to explain the full range of metabolic scaling patterns observed in nature.