Is there a minimum size for endothermic animals? Why can ectothermic

>>2447876
>teaching hummingbirds to have a thirst for blood
he'll kill again, anon.
what have you done to us all?

>>2447915
it's just sweet water with food colouring.

>>2447876
Tiny bat is tiny.

>>2447915
oh there are blood drinking birds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxbVPymFA54

just off the top of my head:
if endothermic vertebrates were very small, they would then be competing with a massive number of more efficient (ectothermic) invertebrates for a resources/a niche. because invertebrates can't be very big, endothermic vertebrates have much less competition in these larger size categories.

>>2448101
>brushie brushie brushie

File: 9419d935ba7bacd721f4bb4cf16f4b0d--transparent-frog-glass-frog.jpg (24KB, 427x320px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 427x320px

Maybe it's due to the reproduction rate? Being that small means you're at the absolute bottom of the food chain, so you need to have tons of offspring in the hope that some will make it to maturity.

Rodents and small birds have a lot of offspring, but not even close to the amount insects or even small amphibians do for instance.

The ratio of volume to surface decreases the smaller the animal is.So small animals have more surface from which they can lose(or gain) heat which makes internal heat production just a waste of resources as small animals will always tend to aquire their environments temperature much faster than big animals

>>2447876
The only benefit of vertebrates is that they can grow to large sizes, any smaller and invertebrates would have the advantage.

>>2450720
Why?

>>2448966
>>2449533
>>2450290
>>2450720
This has been very enlightening, thank y'all. I'm glad I got satisfying answers.

>>2452525
It's difficult for invertebrates to grow very large because it becomes difficult to molt, when an invertebrate is molting, it is very vulnerable and the process can take several days.

File: how_insects_breathe.jpg (57KB, 550x259px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 550x259px

>>2452525
>>2452612
also, insects and many inverts don't have any lungs, they breathe passively through trachea tubes. They would need specialized breathing-equipment like a bag of extra oxygen-rich atmosphere around their body or else they would simply suffocate.

Our air isn't that oxygen rich now, that makes breathing impossible for a large insect.
Picture should make it clear.

One of those giant prehistoric dragonflies that was several feet long (and existed when oxygen levels were much higher) would not be dangerous today. Its organs could not get enough oxygen for it to live, it'd be totally harmless and dead within minutes or hours.

Physics is a bitch. Ants are only strong because they are small. If you scale up a shape, its volume (weight and heat generation) increases much more than its surface area (strength in the case of muscles, heat loss in the case of skin)
This is why a tiny mouse can hold its body up on legs that look like tooth-picks, but an elephant needs tree-trunk like wide legs that are thicker relative to its body than the mouse's legs are to its mouse body.
A man-sized ant would not only suffocate from lack of air, but its weight would increase like a 1000x more than its strength increased, so it couldn't even lift itself off the ground with giant totally useless ant legs. It'd be crushed to death by the weight of its own body (while also suffocating. I don't know which would kill it first.)
The same applies to mammals, we're just better adapted for large scale with specialized breathing apparatus and body shapes. A whale on a beach dies from having its internal organs crushed by the weight of its own body because of the square-cube-law being a cunt.

>>2452687
>those giant prehistoric dragonflies that was several feet long (and existed when oxygen levels were much higher)
They lived past the times of elevated oxygen and survived millions of years in times of reduced oxygen.

so that little theory was discarded about 15 years ago. Almost as soon as it was first published.

>>2452687
Just curious, what about fish?

>>2452688
>that little theory
>doesn't even know what the word "Theory" means in science
Small insects survived the low oxygen, the large ones went extinct.
Notice how you have literally zero evidence to the contrary except your shitposting.

>>2452695
I assumed since you were out of date on this subject by 15 years you are scientifically illiterate. That's why I said "theory."

>The presence of very large Meganeuridae with wing spans rivaling those of Meganeura during the Permian, when the oxygen content of the atmosphere was already much lower than in the Carboniferous, presented a problem to the oxygen-related explanations in the case of the giant dragonflies. However, despite the fact that meganeurids had the largest known wing spans, their bodies were not very large, being smaller than those of several living Coleoptera; therefore they were not true giant insects, only being giant in comparison with their living relatives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meganeura

>>2452693
what about fish? Fish are vertebrates just like mammals. The whale shark is a fish and it's one of the largest animals on the planet.
Sharks have a heart that constantly pumps blood to their gills, rather than our lungs. Both have similar purpose, large surface area in contact with oxygen-rich air or water, the oxygen is extracted and the oxygenated blood circulates through the rest of the body which is too large for passive breathing like an insect.

>>2452697
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meganeura
oh hey, you're an illiterate dumbfuck, linking an article that itself says exactly the opposite of your 1000-year-out-of-date belief.

"Recent analysis of the flight energetics of modern insects and birds suggests that both the oxygen levels and air density provide an upper bound on size. The presence of very large Meganeuridae with wing spans rivaling those of Meganeura during the Permian, when the oxygen content of the atmosphere was already much lower than in the Carboniferous, presented a problem to the oxygen-related explanations in the case of the giant dragonflies. However, despite the fact that meganeurids had the largest known wing spans, their bodies were not very large, being smaller than those of several living Coleoptera; therefore they were not true giant insects"

>>2452704
>The presence of very large Meganeuridae with wing spans rivaling those of Meganeura during the Permian, when the oxygen content of the atmosphere was already much lower than in the Carboniferous, presented a problem to the oxygen-related explanations in the case of the giant dragonflies

>very large Meganeuridae with wing spans rivaling those of Meganeura during the Permian, when the oxygen content of the atmosphere was already much lower
>very large Meganeuridae
>when the oxygen content of the atmosphere was already much lower

File: usher-eating-popcorn.jpg (77KB, 502x401px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 502x401px

>>2452688
>>2452695
>>2452697
>>2452704

File: bugfight.jpg (79KB, 625x351px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 625x351px

>>2452706

>>2452709
I am indeed. I love it when amateur "biologists" fight with each other. It is as informing as it is entertaining.

>>2452719
the angry one is the only amateur here.

>>2452721
No offense, I know nothing myself. I can't tell whose right or not, I just find the exchange interesting.

>>2452723
angry-anon was absolutely correct about insect respiration and size. He was just incorrect about giant dragonflies being a good example of this.

and since he was a dick I trolled him with science. Sadly he ended the battle early by accidentally cutting his own throat. I don't think he meant to quote the part of the Wikipedia article that proved him wrong.

>>2448966
so there are no large ectotherms because only invertebrates can be ectotherms, and invertebrates cannot be large, and there are no small endotherms because ectothermy is more efficient?

>>2452729
There are large ectotherms, Crocodiles are an example. Almost all fish are also ectothermic, and some of them get very large. Though endothermy is fairly common in large fish. Many tuna and great white sharks for example are warm-blooded.

It's just that at very small sizes endothermy is very hard to maintain, and isn't as efficient as a small ectotherm.

File: 1448459818521.jpg (67KB, 700x714px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 700x714px

>>2452705
>that reading cromprehension
Boy, you ain't the sharpest tool in the shed.

>>2452687
Oh look, new kurzegesagt video explaining this.
https://youtu.be/f7KSfjv4Oq0

>>2452802
lol why should i listen to you retart
you cunt even spell ploperly