UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Respiratory mechanics of high altitude waterfowl York, Julia McRae 2016

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
24-ubc_2016_september_york_julia.pdf [ 2.87MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 24-1.0307458.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0307458-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0307458-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0307458-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0307458-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0307458-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0307458-source.json
Full Text
24-1.0307458-fulltext.txt
Citation
24-1.0307458.ris

Full Text

        RESPIRATORY MECHANICS OF HIGH ALTITUDE WATERFOWL    by  Julia McRae York   B.Sc., The University of British Columbia 2015   A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER OF SCIENCE   in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Zoology)   THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver)     August, 2016      © Julia McRae York, 2016 ii  ABSTRACT Birds living at high altitude (>3,000 meters) are not only able to cope with reduced oxygen availability due to hypobaria, but they are also able to achieve one of the most metabolically costly form of locomotion at these altitudes: flight. To perform such a metabolically demanding activity, in addition to energetically expensive daily tasks such as foraging, predator escape, and reproduction, all in oxygen limited (hypoxic) conditions, means that high altitude birds must enhance oxygen supply to maintain oxygen homeostasis. The primary means of increasing oxygen supply is increasing ventilation of the respiratory gas exchange surface. However, the metabolic cost of ventilation is unknown for birds at rest, as is whether this cost varies among bird species. In this thesis, the cost and work of breathing are compared in fourteen avian species to determine whether variation in the work of breathing is due to mechanical or morphological changes in the respiratory system, and if any observed changes are associated with living at high altitude. High altitude birds tended to have large and compliant respiratory systems compared with low altitude taxa, which reduces the work of breathing. However, the evidence also suggests that respiratory morphology and mechanics in birds may be more constrained by life history strategy than by evolutionary time at altitude, although species in this study that have no high altitude sister taxa (their lineages have never radiated to high altitude) struggled the most with increasing oxygen supply. Finally, birds at rest were estimated to have a lower cost of breathing than mammals, contrary to the hypothesis that cost of breathing would be high in birds due to the heavy flight muscles weighing down the sternum.   iii  PREFACE This thesis is the original intellectual product of the author, J. York, under the supervision of W.K. Milsom. Experimental procedures were performed according to UBC Animal Care Committee protocols A12-0013 and A16-0019 under the guidelines of the Canadian Council on Animal Care. Wild animals were collected in accordance with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Scientific Taking Permit 101-15 and el Ministerio del Ambiente de Perú carta numero 005-2014 y resolución directoral numero 36087-2012. The data chapters in this thesis (chapters 2 and 3) are being prepared to submit for publication. The contributions of the listed authors are as follows: Chapter 2: JMY collected and analyzed the data, prepared the figures, and wrote the manuscript. MS analyzed the CT scan data. WKM assisted with data collection and manuscript revisions.  Chapter 3: JMY collected and analyzed the data, prepared the figures, and wrote the manuscript. BAC assisted in animal care during experiments. CMI and SLL provided hypoxic ventilatory response data. LA and RC assisted with animal capture and care. GRS, NJD, and PBF assisted with field work. KGM assisted with field work and provided phylogenetic data. WKM assisted with data collection and manuscript revisions.    iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .......................................................................................................................... ii Preface .......................................................................................................................... iii Table of Contents ........................................................................................................  iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................ vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................  vii List of Symbols and Abbreviations ............................................................................ ix Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... x Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Definitions ........................................................................................................... 7 Compliance ................................................................................................ 7 Resistance ................................................................................................. 9 Tau ............................................................................................................ 9 Respiratory system volumes ...................................................................... 9 Effective ventilation, efficacy, and optimal breathing ............................... 10 Chapter 2: Respiratory mechanics, morphometrics, and cost of breathing of the bar-headed goose (Anser indicus), barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis), and Andean goose (Chloephaga melanoptera) ............................................................... 13 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 13 Methods ............................................................................................................. 17 Respiratory mechanics ............................................................................ 17 Lung mass and tracheal volumes ............................................................ 17 CT scans .................................................................................................. 20 Results .............................................................................................................. 20 Respiratory capacities.............................................................................. 20 CT scans  ................................................................................................. 21 Static mechanics ...................................................................................... 21 Dynamic mechanics ................................................................................. 21 Discussion ........................................................................................................ 24 Future directions ...................................................................................... 29 Chapter 3: Respiratory mechanics of eleven avian species resident at different altitudes ....................................................................................................................... 43 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 43 Methods ............................................................................................................. 47 Results .............................................................................................................. 50 Respiratory system morphology and static mechanics ............................ 51 Cost and benefit of increasing tidal volume ............................................. 52 Dynamic mechanics and work of breathing in vivo .................................. 53 Do birds use an energetically optimal combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency ................................................................................. 54 Discussion ........................................................................................................ 55 Morphological and mechanical variation associated with altitude ............ 55 Costs and benefits of deep versus rapid breathing .................................. 56 Cost of breathing in vivo .......................................................................... 58 When do birds breathe optimally? ..........................................................  58 Those ruddy ducks! ................................................................................. 59 v  Chapter conclusions ................................................................................ 60 Future directions ...................................................................................... 62 Chapter 4: Discussion ................................................................................................ 83 Sternal recumbency  ........................................................................................... 83 Subtracting endotracheal tube resistance .......................................................... 84 Lung volume estimates ....................................................................................... 85 Avian respiratory morphometry  .......................................................................... 86 Tracheal volumes ............................................................................................... 88 Avian respiratory mechanics .............................................................................. 90 Cost of breathing ................................................................................................ 90 References ................................................................................................................. 100 Appendix .................................................................................................................... 110   vi  LIST OF TABLES  Table 2.1: Volume and mechanics measurements for three species of geese ............. 33  Table 2.2: Static compliance values measured as the slope of the static compliance curve at its steepest point .............................................................................................. 37  Table 3.1: Species compared in this study and respiratory mechanics values ............. 64  Table 3.2: Static compliance measured as the slope of the static compliance curves in Figure 3.2 ...................................................................................................................... 69  Table 3.3: Respiratory mechanics measurements for three breathing strategies compared ...................................................................................................................... 73  Table 4.1: Air sac and lung volume measurements from the literature and this study .. 93  Table 4.2: Respiratory mechanics comparison table .................................................... 96  Table 4.3: Cost of breathing estimates for all fourteen species studied ........................ 98  Table 5.1: Equations for frequency isopleth lines used to generate data.................... 111   vii  LIST OF FIGURES  Figure 1.1: Flow of air in the avian respiratory system ................................................. 12  Figure 1.2: Volumes and capacities of the respiratory system ..................................... 13  Figure 2.1: (A) Schematic of the experimental set-up to measure flow and pressure.  (B) A hypothetical pressure-volume loop illustrated with measured variables ............... 31  Figure 2.2: Body size and size of the respiratory system of the three species compared. (A) Body mass (B) Vital capacity (C) Tracheal volume normalized to vital capacity .....  32  Figure 2.3: CT scans of the respiratory system of each species, inflated to  30 cm H2O ..................................................................................................................... 35  Figure 2.4: Static compliance curves (A) expressed as volume change (mL) for a given pressure change and (B) expressed as percent of vital capacity change (%) for a given pressure change ........................................................................................................... 36  Figure 2.5: Dynamic compliance and tau compared for three different breathing strategies ....................................................................................................................... 38  Figure 2.6: Work required and effectiveness of the three different breathing strategies compared .....................................................................................................................  39  Figure 2.7: Respiratory mechanics measurements and calculations for the breathing frequency and tidal volume used by each species in vivo in normoxia and hypoxia ..... 40  Figure 2.8: Optimal combinations of tidal volume and breathing frequency in vivo ...... 42  Figure 3.1: Change in effective ventilation for an equal-fold change in tidal volume (solid line) or breathing frequency (dotted line) ............................................................. 63  Figure 3.2: Phylogeny of the species compared in this study ....................................... 66  Figure 3.3: (A) Vital capacity versus body mass (B) Lung mass normalized by body mass (C) Tracheal volume normalized to vital capacity ................................................ 67  Figure 3.4: Static compliance curves of the intact respiratory system .......................... 68  Figure 3.5: Static compliance measured as the slope of the static compliance curves for highland species (blue) and lowland species (grey) ...................................................... 70  Figure 3.6: Static compliance (expressed as mL per cm H2O) versus  vital capacity (mL) ......................................................................................................... 71  viii  Figure 3.7: Difference between cost to increase tidal volume and cost to increase breathing frequency....................................................................................................... 72  Figure 3.8: Dynamic compliance (A and B) and time constant (Tau; C and D) measurements for the actual combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency used by each species breathing 13% O2 (A and C) and 6% O2 (B and D) ............................. 76  Figure 3.9: Minute work of breathing per kg (A and B) and volume of oxygen brought to the gas exchange surface per joule (C and D) while breathing 13% O2 (A and C) and 6% O2 (B and D) ............................................................................................................ 77  Figure 3.10: Relationship of total minute work, minute elastic work, and minute resistive work for one level of minute ventilation ......................................................................... 78  Figure 3.11: Work of breathing (power output) at combinations of breathing frequency and tidal volume for minute ventilations measured in vivo in 18% O2 (black), 13% O2 (red), and 6% O2 (teal) .................................................................................................. 80  Figure 3.12: Measured breathing frequency versus predicted optimal breathing frequency ...................................................................................................................... 82      ix  LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS BMR- basal metabolic rate bpm- breaths per minute C- compliance cm H2O- centimeters of water CT- computerized tomography fR- breathing frequency FRC-functional residual capacity I- inertance IAV- inspiratory aerodynamic valving L- liters min- minute mL- milliliters P- pressure R- resistance TLS- trilaminar substance V- volume V̇- flow V̈- acceleration VC- vital capacity V̇eff- effective ventilation Vt- tidal volume    x  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS From my first month at UBC, almost seven years ago, I have been given the tools, opportunities, and encouragement I needed to learn and grow as a scientist. I owe that to a lot of people.  Primarily, my supervisor Bill Milsom, who makes me feel valued and capable. He is the best kind of mentor; he allows me to be independent, to make mistakes, to travel, and I know he not only cares about my career but also about me as a person. I am very lucky, and forever grateful.  To Doug Althsuler, who gives me verbal encouragement and affirmation when I need it the most, thank you so much. Without you, I never would have figured out my direction and passion in science, or felt confident enough to do so. Jessica Meir, who worked so closely with me for years, who trusted me, and who taught me what it is to be a good leader and mentor, I appreciate you more than I can express here. Yvonne Dzal, who is my friend and example to us all of what it means to be a great scientist and person, thank you for making me feel like I belong. Thank you to my favorite teachers: Cyndie Beale and Mike Gordon, some of the most skilled and talented people I’ve ever encountered.   Along the way I’ve been lucky to work and learn in many labs and places. To everyone I met at UBC: Michelle Reichert, Cris Gomez, Till Harter, Emily Gallagher, James Whale, Willy Jardine, everyone in the Milsom and Altshuler labs, and many others, what an amazing department and incredible group of people to be around, I learned so much and miss you all. Thank you to the people at animal care, especially Bev Chua, Gordie Gray, and Cathy Schupli, and the wonderfully competent people in the Zoology office. Thank you to the people at UAF, especially Jeanette Moore, Amy Breen, Tako Raynolds, and Fransika Kohl, examples of happy Alaskan women I hope to be among one day. At Uppsala, my supervisors Hanna Johannesson and Ioana Brännström and my friends Sam Parlett, Jeroen Bart, Brianne Pragg, Johanna Sköld, and Fredrik Norrström, thank you for one of the best years of my life. Thank you to Roelof Hut and the people at Groningen for letting me spend a summer playing with tupaias. In Berkeley, Robert Dudley and the Dudley lab: Ashley Smiley, Sofia Chang, Leeann Louis, Erik Sathe, and Marc Badger, thanks for adopting me and putting up with me while I wrote this thesis. Thank you to all the other scientists I met along the way: my travel buddies Catie Ivy and Neal Dawson, Miriam Scadeng, Graham Scott, Kevin McCracken, Lucy Hawkes, and duck whisperers Rebecca Cheek and Luis Alza.  Thank you to Ali Lubbock and Nick Hill, and everyone else at Sylvan Heights, for my geese and your hospitality. Thank you to Emilio Bautista and family, for raising the Andean geese and taking care of us in San Pedro. Thanks to Canada Diagnostic Centres, the UCSD Veterinary Clinic, and to SeaWorld for the CT scans. Thank you to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Ministerio del Ambiente de Perú for the ability to work on wild ducks. Thank you to the Koshland Biosciences Library at Berkeley who had almost everything I needed, and the Rasmuson Library at UAF who had what Berkeley didn’t.  xi  This research was funded primarily by the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, as well as the National Science Foundation, the American Physiological Society, the Werner and Hildegard Hesse Research Award in Ornithology, and the UBC Department of Zoology.  Thank you to my old friends, Rachel Kaplan, Julia Caulfield, Annie Bender, Claire Todd, Ian Patrick, and Sophia Williams. Finally, thank you to my family, for all the support, encouragement, love, and time spent listening to me talk about this work. 1  Chapter 1 Introduction The avian respiratory system evolved from the earliest true lung that originated in the common ancestor of sarcopterygians and tetrapods. The ancestral vertebrate lung was derived from the respiratory pharynx of basal fishes and was probably paired, tubular, and lacked cartilaginous airways (Perry and Sander, 2004). The complex extant avian lung is small in volume, but has an extremely high surface area; it does not expand or contract during normal breathing but is instead ventilated by compartmentalized air sacs. This allows unidirectional air flow across the gas exchange surface and (mostly) crosscurrent blood flow (Maina, 2005). How and why did this complex system arise? The earliest amniotes had chambered lungs with a cartilaginous bronchus, and they moved away from ancestral buccal respiration and began to use aspiration breathing, although these methods are not mutually exclusive (Perry, 1998; Brainerd and Owerkowicz, 2006). This required switching the respiratory muscles from the cranial and hypobranchial to the axial and abdominal muscles (Jenkin and Milsom, 2014). The common ancestor of saurischinan dinosaurs had postcranial pneumaticity suggesting an avian-like lung where the ventilation and gas exchange portions of the respiratory system were spatially distinct (Wedel, 2006; Wedel, 2009; Bensen et al., 2012). Saurischinan dinosaur lungs were heterogeneous and had asymmetrical branches, indicating that they may have had unidirectional airflow allowing crosscurrent gas exchange (Wedel, 2003; O’Connor, 2006). This ancestral group then branched into the sauropod dinosaurs, who have been hypothesized to have used this efficient gas exchange strategy to achieve their massive body size, and the theropod dinosaurs, 2  who, instead of increasing in size, became bipedal, very fast, and eventually began true, flapping flight (Sereno, 1999; Perry and Sander, 2004; Claessens et al., 2009; Sander et al., 2011). The evolutionary origin of vertebrate flight may have been enabled by the release of respiratory constraints allowed by unidirectional ventilation and crosscurrent gas exchange. This is a matter of some recent debate due to evidence suggesting unidirectional airflow may also occur in extant crocodilians and non-avian sauropsids, and may therefore be an ancestral trait for all diaspids (Cieri and Farmer, 2016).  The function of the extant avian respiratory system is complex and not yet entirely understood. Airflow begins in the trachea, which has complete cartilaginous rings, and can be very long (2.7-fold longer than in a mammal of a similar size) because the neck of most birds functions in reaching and grabbing like the forelimb of other tetrapods (Hinds and Calder, 1971). The trachea divides at the syrinx into the primary bronchi leading to the lungs. The air does not enter the first set of secondary bronchi that arise within the lungs (ventrobronchi), but instead is aerodynamically directed past them to the abdominal and posterior thoracic air sacs by variable resistance and relative angle of the primary and secondary bronchi. In some species, a constriction called the segmentum accelerans positioned just before the ventral secondary bronchi increases the efficiency of this aerodynamic valving (see Figure 1.1; Wang et al., 1992). This aerodynamic flow control is termed “inspiratory aerodynamic valving.” On exhalation, the air enters the lung via the dorsal secondary bronchi (dorsobronchi). The lung consists of unidirectional air passages called parabronchi (tertiary bronchi); off these passages branch the spherical, anastomosing air capillaries in very close association 3  with cross-hatching networks of blood capillaries (Maina, 2015). The blood capillaries are very rigid, and the shape of the air capillaries is maintained by surface tension, the avian-specific surfactant trilaminar substance (TLS), and the nearly constant flow of air through the lung (Bernhard et al., 2001). The strength of these structures, along with the extremely high surface area and lack of pulmonary dead space makes the lung as a whole quite rigid, especially compared to the lungs of mammals or non-avian sauropsids. Between inspiration and expiration, the avian lung changes only 1-10% in volume (Jones et al., 1985; Ponganis et al., 2015). This allows the blood-gas barrier to be extremely thin, directly increasing the rate of oxygen and carbon dioxide diffusion (Perry, 1990; Watson et al., 2007). On subsequent inhalation, the air in the parabronchi is pulled from the lung into the anterior air sacs and then exhaled out the trachea, although the “expiratory dynamic valving” by which this occurs is not yet understood (Maina, 2015). In mammals, the lung must act as both the ventilator and the gas exchange surface; thus the structure of the lung is a compromise constrained by both functions. In birds, the division of the ventilator and the gas exchanger into spatially separate structures relieves each from the functional constraints of the other and increases the efficiency of both ventilation and gas exchange.   No matter how efficient, breathing is dynamic work. The intensity of the work is determined by the specific morphology and mechanics of the individual respiratory system. In birds, the work of breathing is done primarily by the external oblique and the appendicocostalis muscles, which are almost exclusively respiratory muscles (Klein and Codd, 2010). This is in contrast to mammals and non-avian sauropsids, whose 4  abdominal and intercostal muscles have both a respiratory and a locomotor function. Mammals use their diaphragm and intercostal muscles to create negative pressure in the pleural cavity, thereby actively inflating the lung. The exhalation, particularly at rest, is accomplished passively by the elastic recoil of the lung and chest wall. In birds, expiration is powered by a combination of elastic recoil of the air sacs and chest wall and by active contraction of the external oblique muscles (Codd et al., 2005). Birds have also been reported to use their pelvic and tail muscles during expiration, although this is a matter of some debate (Baumel et al., 1990; Claessens, 2009; Klein and Codd, 2010). How can a costal muscle power air sac expansion all the way from the cervical to the caudal end of the bird? The avian sternum hinges with each sternal rib allowing motion of the posterior end of the sternum, which expands and contracts the abdominal cavity (Hillenius and Ruben, 2004). Birds also have uncinate processes on the ribs, which enhance this sternal rotation, help to lower the sternum on inspiration, and brace the dorsal sternum during expiration (Codd, 2010).   For birds, the work to move the sternum during respiration is non-trivial. The flight muscles originate on the ventral side of the sternum and average 17% of total body mass (Dial et al., 1991; Greenewalt, 1962). When weight is added to the sternum (also called “sternal loading”) barnacle geese increase metabolic rate 2.3% for every percent body mass loaded, in contrast to adding weight to the back of the bird which increases metabolic rate 0.95% for every percent body weight loaded (Tickle et al., 2010). This has implications for flight muscle hypertrophy in birds preparing for migration (Portugal et al., 2009). Due to high load on this critically important sternal movement, cost of 5  breathing has been hypothesized to be higher in birds relative to other tetrapods, but metabolic cost of breathing has only been estimated in one bird species: the helmeted guinea fowl (Numida meleagris; Ellerby et al., 2005; Markley and Carrier, 2010). Markley and Carrier (2010) measured oxygen consumption during rest and running, and then artificially ventilated birds with a cannula inserted into the caudal air sac until spontaneous ventilation ceased. The difference in oxygen consumption between the ventilating and non-ventilating birds was assumed to be the cost of breathing. Oddly, Markley and Carrier found, at rest, oxygen consumption increased in the non-ventilating as compared to the ventilating birds. They hypothesized that increased CO2 loss during artificial ventilation caused a pH challenge that required active compensation. Regardless, they were unable to estimate the cost of breathing at rest, but estimated that, during running, respiration accounted for 1.4-3.6% of running metabolic rate, or 0.5-1.5 mL O2 min-1 kg-1. This is within the range of the cost of breathing reported for mammals and somewhat lower than values reported for non-avian sauropsids. They concluded, “Measuring [the metabolic] cost of ventilation is confounded by the manipulation of ventilation rate… the cost of ventilation may be irresolvable.”  In this thesis, we measured the cost of breathing in fourteen bird species by measuring the work done to ventilate anesthetized birds with known volumes and frequencies, and then applying these work values to the volumes and breathing frequencies measured in the same individuals at rest, before anesthesia, in both normoxia and hypoxia. To translate these measured mechanical “work” values to metabolic “cost” values, we needed to assume a metabolic efficiency for the respiratory muscles. We also relate the 6  work of breathing to the mechanical and morphological properties of each respiratory system. The primary goal of this thesis was not only to investigate respiratory morphology, respiratory mechanics, and work of breathing for birds in general, but to consider whether these characteristics vary between bird species as a function of altitude. Recent studies suggest that birds that live or fly at altitude breathe more slowly and deeper than related low altitude species, a breathing pattern that is more effective for gas exchange but one that may also be more expensive given the costs of sternal loading (Scott and Milsom, 2007; Lague et al., submitted). How could a more metabolically expensive breathing pattern be maintained when oxygen is limited by reduced atmospheric pressure?  As Johan Steen (1971) put it, “Of the naturally occurring hypoxic conditions, life at high altitude is the most permanent.” We hypothesized that birds living under high altitude oxygen-limited conditions would exhibit mechanical and morphological changes to the respiratory system that reduce the cost of breathing in general, and support the differences in breathing pattern in birds living at high altitude compared to birds living at low altitude. In the first chapter, we compare three species of geese of similar body size: a low altitude resident, a high altitude transient, and a high altitude resident to investigate how the morphology of the respiratory system differs using computerized tomography (CT) scans. In the second chapter, we compare eleven species of ducks, including four pairs of sister taxa that serve as four phylogenetically independent comparisons of the effect of altitude on avian respiratory mechanics.   7  Definitions The field of pulmonary mechanics has its own language; the following is a short review of commonly measured variables. The respiratory muscles do work to overcome the combination of elastic and resistive forces exerted by the rest of the respiratory system. These forces are determined by the individual mechanical and morphological properties of the chest wall, lungs, airways, and, in birds, the air sacs. The work done by the muscles must be equal and opposite to the forces applied by these other components of the respiratory system, such that the equation of motion for breathing is described by: 𝑃 =  (1𝐶) 𝑉 +  𝑅?̇? +  𝐼?̈? Where P is pressure, C is compliance, R is resistance, I is inertance, and V, V̇, and V̈ are volume, flow, and acceleration, respectively. The three components of this equation reflecting the mechanical properties of the respiratory system are compliance, resistance, and inertance. Inertance accounts for the kinetic energy stored by the acceleration of gases through the airway. However, unlike locomotory muscles, the work done by the respiratory muscles to overcome inertance is vanishingly small. The elastic and flow resistive forces, determined by the coefficients compliance and resistance, account for most of the work done by the respiratory muscles and thus the negligible contribution of inertance and acceleration are ignored.   Compliance  In the equation of movement for breathing, the inverse of compliance (also called elastance) is multiplied by the volume, and this is the elastic (potential) energy component of the equation. Thus, if the system is stiff, compliance is low, elastance is 8  high, and the elastic energy portion of the breath will be high. Compliance can be measured as either static or dynamic compliance.   Static compliance is a measurement of the stiffness of the respiratory system, calculated as the change produced in volume for a given change in pressure under conditions of no flow. Compliance has the units of mL cm H2O-1. Thus an animal with a higher compliance has a greater volume change for a given pressure change, or a less stiff/more compliant system. Here we report static compliance values over the linear, most physiologically relevant portion of the curve, from a pressure of 5 cm H2O to -5 cm H2O from functional residual capacity (FRC).  Dynamic compliance is a measurement of the stiffness and elasticity of the respiratory system as the system is dynamically changing. Dynamic compliance is different from static compliance because it is affected by elastic stiffening of the system with the addition of a flow to the volume change. As the frequency or volume of each breath increases, it requires a greater pressure change to achieve a given volume, and therefore the compliance of the system is reduced. Dynamic compliance is calculated as the slope of the line that connects the two points of zero flow on the pressure-volume loop. When flow is zero, the flow-resistive pressure is zero and therefore the elastic pressure is the only contributor to the total pressure. Thus our measurement of elasticity and stiffness is the change in volume divided by the change in pressure between the two instances of zero flow.    9  Resistance Resistance is a measurement of the frictional heat energy of viscous fluid flow through the airways. The units are cm H2O mL-1 min-1. It is measured as the difference in pressure between two points of isovolume on the pressure-volume loop, divided by the flow (Mead, 1961). Resistance will be very high if the diameter of the airways is very small relative to the flow, and therefore the pressure difference between the air entering the animal and leaving to the atmosphere is very large.   Tau The time constant (tau) is calculated as the product of compliance and resistance. It is a measurement of the time (in units of seconds) it takes for air to passively leave the system following inspiration. It combines both the elastic and flow resistive properties of the respiratory system, but does not take into account muscular work done by birds during normal expiration.   Respiratory system volumes The various volumes that can be measured from the in vivo respiratory system are shown in Figure 1.2. All volumes are measured beginning at functional residual capacity (FRC), which is the volume of air in the respiratory system when the glottis is open to the atmosphere and the respiratory muscles are relaxed. The inspiratory capacity is the potential volume of air that could be added to the respiratory system from FRC, the expiratory reserve volume is the volume of air that could be removed from the system from FRC, and the vital capacity is the sum of the inspiratory capacity and expiratory 10  reserve volume, or the entire volume that could potentially be utilized by the animal. The reserve capacity is the volume of air that cannot be removed from the respiratory system; this can be measured with inert gas washout techniques, but was not measured in this study.   Effective ventilation, efficacy, and optimal breathing The total ventilation (or minute ventilation; V̇) is the product of breathing frequency (fR) and tidal volume (Vt). It includes the entire volume of air that the animal expends energy to move from the environment into and out of the respiratory system. However, not all of that air actually reaches the gas exchange surface due to the presence of a dead space volume. Therefore, the effective ventilation (V̇eff) is the amount of air per unit time that comes into contact with the gas exchange surface. In this thesis, we use the term “effective” specifically to refer to the amount of effective ventilation. We also express the effective ventilation per unit energy, and we term this the “efficacy” of breathing. Optimal breathing (or the optimal combination) is the combination of Vt and fR that minimizes the work of breathing (the least metabolically expensive combination of Vt/fR for a given minute ventilation). 11   Figure 1.1: Flow of air in the avian respiratory system. Inspiratory air flow (black arrows) is controlled through inspiratory aerodynamic valving (IAV). [Figure from Wang et al., 1992].   12   Figure 1.2: Volumes and capacities of the respiratory system. The loop at the center of the figure is the pressure-volume loop of one breath. The solid line represents the volume change over the entire vital capacity.     13  Chapter 2  Respiratory mechanics, morphometrics, and cost of breathing of the bar-headed goose (Anser indicus), barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis), and Andean goose (Chloephaga melanoptera)  Julia M. York1, Miriam Scadeng2, and William K. Milsom1  1University of British Columbia, Department of Zoology, 6270 University Blvd, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z4 2University of California San Diego, Department of Radiology  Introduction Obtaining sufficient oxygen across the respiratory surfaces can become challenging when the demands for oxygen are very high, such as during exercise. Avian flight is the most energetically expensive form of locomotion, and it has been hypothesized that the basis of the enhanced capacity for oxygen transport that supports flight in birds is the evolution of the parabronchial lung air sac system (Maina, 2005). A complete understanding of the respiratory adaptations that might enable cardiorespiratory performance, however, requires knowledge of the volumes of the different components of the respiratory system as well as of their mechanical properties.  Bird lungs lie flush against the dorsal thoracic ribs and back body; they are relatively small and rigid, expanding and contracting very little during normal breath cycles (Jones et al., 1985; Ponganis et al., 2015). The air sacs are extensive, branching from the bronchi in the lungs and expand to fill the body of the bird from the top of the hind limbs to the lower part of the neck and are continuous with the pneumatic spaces of the vertebrae and long bones (Duncker, 1971). They are made of thin, avascular membranes and, if punctured, do not collapse and can heal over time. It is difficult, 14  however, to visualize the highly compartmentalized morphology of the air sacs or measure basic morphometric parameters such as volume because they are immediately ruptured by any invasive procedure to the chest or abdomen.   Previous studies have attempted to use terminal methods to study air sac morphology, such as Zeuthen (1942), who strangled chickens on inspiration, froze them, and filled the respiratory system with paraffin. Many studies used a similar method of filling the respiratory system with resin, silicone, or latex (Akester, 1960; King and Payne, 1962; Duncker, 1972; Duncker, 1977; Dubach, 1981; Jaensch et al., 2002). These fluid filling techniques are generally only able to estimate maximum respiratory volumes, are terminal, and are subject to material shrinkage. Other studies have used inert gas washout techniques to estimate volumes (Dehner, 1946; Schied and Piiper, 1969) but these can only measure ventilated volumes and are subject to error from gas dissolving in the blood. More modern, non-destructive imaging techniques such as computerized tomography (CT) scans can provide morphometric measurements not only of the respiratory system, but of other structures and organs simultaneously, and they also allow the same individual to be measured under multiple conditions (such as at various respiratory volumes). CT scans have been commonly used by veterinarians to study respiratory disease in birds (Orosz and Toal, 1992; Krautwald-Junghanns et al., 1993; Newell et al., 1997; Gumpenberger and Henninger, 2001), and are becoming more popular as a research tool to investigate avian respiratory physiology and morphology (Krautwald-Junghanns et al., 1998; Malka et al., 2009; Petnehazy et al., 2012; Ponganis et al., 2015)  15   In this study, we used CT scans to compare respiratory morphometry of three species of geese: the transient high altitude bar-headed goose (Anser indicus), the high altitude resident Andean goose (Chloephaga melanoptera), and the low altitude resident barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis).   In the wild, bar-headed and barnacle geese migrate in the fall from their northern breeding grounds to southern wintering grounds, and return in the spring—often flying continuously for hours (Hawkes et al., 2012; Butler et al., 1998). Barnacle geese breed in Greenland, Svalbard, the Scandinavian Peninsula, and the Kanin Peninsula of Russia, and spend the winters in the northern United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Germany (Jonker et al., 2013) flying primarily over the ocean and along coastlines at low altitudes.   The bar-headed goose migrates primarily at high altitudes, over the Himalayas between their breeding grounds in northern China and Mongolia (at about 2,300 meters) and their wintering grounds in India (sea level; Hawkes et al., 2012). While a previous anecdotal account (Swan, 1961) of bar-headed geese flying over Makalu (8,485 meters) is frequently cited as their ability to fly over Mount Everest (8,848 meters), more recent research using satellite transmitters suggests that bar-headed geese primarily fly through the passes (generally 5,000 meters) and reach a maximum altitude of about 7,200 meters (Hawkes et al., 2012). This is still an impressive feat, as the oxygen available at these altitudes is about half that of sea level, and the bar-headed goose 16  increases oxygen demand 15 to 20-fold in flight versus rest (Meir et al., unpublished). Andean geese are residents of the Andes in western South America. They do not migrate but spend their entire lives in wetlands at altitudes greater than 3,000 meters (Storz and Moriyama, 2008). Andean geese are not true geese but part of a clade called sheldgeese, more closely related to ducks than true geese (McCracken et al., 2010).   Amongst the physiological traits of both Andean and bar-headed geese that underlie their high altitude success (see Scott et al., 2015 and Dzal et al., 2015 for review) are increased lung vascularity and lung mass relatively to body size (Scott et al., 2011; Maina et al., unpublished), hemoglobin with an increased oxygen affinity (McCracken et al., 2010), and, in bar-headed geese, an ability to increase ventilation to a greater extent than other species, especially by increasing tidal volume (Black and Tenney, 1980; Scott and Milsom, 2007; Lague et al., submitted). As a ventilation strategy, increasing tidal volume is generally more metabolically expensive than increasing breathing frequency (Milsom and Vitalis, 1984; Vitalis and Milsom, 1986), but it is more effective as the effective ventilation is increased.   In the present study, we measured the lung mass, air sac volumes, and pulmonary mechanics of the three species. We hypothesized that bar-headed and Andean geese would have large respiratory systems and would have reduced the metabolic cost of breathing with a higher tidal volume by increasing the compliance and reducing the resistance of the respiratory system relative to barnacle geese.  17  Methods Respiratory mechanics Six birds of each species were used in the respiratory mechanics experiments. Bar-headed and barnacle geese were captive raised at sea level and were all three years of age (first year of sexual maturity) at the time the experiments were conducted. Andean geese were captured and raised in San Pedro de Casta, Perú, at 3,180 meters and were two years old. Mean body masses of bar-headed geese were 2.77 ± 0.14 kg, barnacle geese were 2.38 ± 1.6 kg, and Andean geese were 2.29 ± 0.15 kg (mean ± SE). For the mechanics experiments, bar-headed and barnacle geese were anesthetized with isoflurane (1-5%), and Andean geese were anesthetized with intravenous propofol as described by Mulcahy (2007). Each bird was then intubated and attached to a constant volume ventilator that actively inflated the respiratory system (inhalation) and allowed for passive deflation (exhalation) of the birds respiratory system. For the dynamic measurements, birds were ventilated in the prone position with at least three volumes (50, 75, and 100 mL) at five frequencies (20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 min-1). We limited tracheal pressure to a maximum of 30 cm H2O, and this pressure determined the limit of volume and frequency used for each individual. Flow was measured with a differential pressure transducer and a pneumotachograph that connected the endotracheal tube to the ventilator, and tracheal pressure was measured on the lung side of the pneumotachograph with a pressure transducer (see Figure 2.1A).   18  Flow curves were integrated to produce volume, and pressure-volume loops were generated using LabChart software (ADInstruments). Dynamic compliance was measured as the slope of the line connecting the points of zero flow on the pressure-volume loops (the points of maximum and minimum volume). Work to overcome elastic forces (elastic work) was measured as the area of the triangle made between the two points of zero flow and the x,y-coordinate (0, maximum volume). Work to overcome resistive forces (resistive work) was measured as the area enclosed by the compliance line and the curve of the loop during the inflation phase (see Figure 2.1B). Total work per breath is the sum of these two work components (elastic and resistive). The resistive work done to move the air through the endotracheal tube alone was subtracted from the total resistive work per breath. The minute work (or power) of breathing was calculated by multiplying the total work per breath by the breathing frequency.  To produce the static pressure-volume curves, the birds were hyperventilated and then disconnected from the ventilator, and a 200 mL glass syringe was used to inflate the respiratory system to a maximum of 30 cm H2O and deflate to a minimum of -30 cm H2O in a step-wise fashion (25 mL per step). This was repeated 2-3 times. Animals were then either recovered or sacrificed and dissected for measurements of lung mass and volume of the trachea (details below). Static compliance was measured as the slope of the static deflation curve at its steepest point (between 5 and -5 cm H2O).   Measurements of dynamic compliance, tau, elastic, and resistive work at each pump frequency were plotted versus tidal volume using Origin® 2016 software. Linear fits 19  were used to place frequency isopleths on these plots, and these lines were used to estimate parameter values at selected combinations of pump volumes and frequencies. The selected combinations were either arbitrarily chosen or measured in the same individuals while resting and awake in normoxia and hypoxia. Levels of normoxia and hypoxia are expressed throughout this thesis as percent O2, this is the PO2 the birds are exposed to as a percent of sea level atmospheric pressure (101.3 kPa). Values were compared using one-way ANOVAs with post-hoc Tukey tests.   For the Andean geese, experiments were conducted in the field at the altitude where the birds were captured and raised. Thus it is possible that we overestimate the compliance and underestimate the work of breathing in the Andean geese due to low atmospheric pressure. To correct for this, comparisons were made at volumes expressed as a percent of the vital capacity that was measured at altitude as the volume change between respiratory pressures of 30 and -30 cm H2O.   Lung masses and tracheal volumes To measure lung mass, three barnacle, three bar-headed, and all six Andean geese were sacrificed with an overdose of either pentobarbital (bar-headed and barnacle geese) or propofol (Andean geese). Their lungs were immediately extracted and weighed. In the Andean geese, tracheal volume was measured from the glottis to the entrance of the primary bronchi into the lungs by slowly filling the dissected trachea with known volumes of water. Thus, this volume is more accurately the volume of the extra-pulmonary airways: the trachea, syrinx, and extra-pulmonary primary bronchi. For 20  simplicity we refer to this volume as the tracheal volume. We used this volume (and the tracheal volumes measured during CT scans) as an estimate of the dead space volume associated with each breath.  CT Scans We used computerized tomography (CT) scanning to further investigate differences in morphology between the three species. We selected two bar-headed and two barnacle geese (one of each sex). For the Andean geese, at this time, we have only collected one scan on a female bird (the scan of the male is still to come). The birds were anesthetized (isoflurane 1-5%), intubated, and whole body scans were performed in the prone position at resting lung volume (glottis open to atmosphere). The birds were then hyperventilated, inflated to a tracheal pressure of 30 cm H2O, and scanned again. Quantitative CT analysis was performed, and images were rendered using Amira 3D software. Values were compared using one-way ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey tests.  Results Respiratory capacities While the body mass of the birds did not differ (Figure 2.2A; F2,19=2.2; p=0.135), the vital capacity of the Andean goose was significantly larger than that of the barnacle goose (Figure 2.2B; F2,15=29.9; p<0.001). This was also the case for inspiratory capacity, but the expiratory reserve volume was larger in the bar-headed goose than in the other two species (significantly larger only in comparison to the barnacle goose; see Table 2.1); extracted lung mass did not differ significantly between the three species 21  (F2,3=3.7; p=0.81). Tracheal volume normalized to vital capacity did not differ between species (Figure 2C; F2,3=4.3; p=0.13).   CT scans Images of CT scans for a representative of each species are shown in Figure 2.3. Body volume scaled with body mass in the birds that were CT scanned (see Table 2.1). Lung volume appeared largest in the Andean goose and smallest in the barnacle geese. The lung volumes changed between FRC and 30 cm H2O pressure by 12% in the Andean and bar-headed geese and by 18% in the barnacle geese. Air sac volumes also appeared largest in the Andean goose and smallest in the barnacle geese and increased by 45-60% for the same pressure change between FRC and maximum inflation in all species (Table 2.1). Statistical comparisons of CT scan data have not been made due to the low sample size.   Static mechanics The static compliance of the total respiratory system was greater in Andean and bar-headed geese compared to barnacle geese (Figure 2.4A; Table 2.2; F2,15=8.1; p=0.004), but these differences were directly related to respiratory system size. When compliance was normalized to vital capacity (percent change in vital capacity for a given change in pulmonary pressure; Figure 2.4B), the static compliance of barnacle geese was actually significantly higher than that of Andean geese (Table 2.2; F2,15=4.4; p=0.03).  22  Dynamic Mechanics As dynamic respiratory mechanics vary as a function of the tidal volume and breathing frequency combination used, we chose to compare the three species both at common tidal volumes and frequencies (Figure 2.5 and 2.6) and at the fR/Vt combination used by each species in vivo under normoxic and hypoxic conditions (Figure 2.7 and 2.8). For the common comparison, we chose a tidal volume of 7% vital capacity and a frequency of 20 breaths per minute (roughly equivalent to resting values) and then also reported how the dynamic values change if either frequency or volume were doubled.   Dynamic compliance was always highest in the Andean geese, even when normalized to vital capacity (Figure 2.5 A and B). Dynamic compliance was also higher in the bar-headed geese compared to the barnacle geese, but when normalized to vital capacity, compliance in the bar-headed and barnacle geese were equal. The time constant, tau, was longest for the barnacle geese and shortest for Andean geese (Figure 2.5 C). These relationships were maintained when ventilation was doubled, regardless of whether it was due to a doubling of breathing frequency or of tidal volume. As expected, increasing ventilation reduced dynamic compliance; however, counter to our expectations, increasing frequency reduced compliance more than increasing tidal volume (Figure 2.5 A and B).  The minute work of breathing for all three breathing strategies is compared in Figure 2.6. Mass-specific minute work did not differ significantly between species except during high frequency breathing when it was lowest for the barnacle geese. Elastic work 23  accounted for the majority of the minute work during low Vt/low fR breathing. The work required to overcome resistive forces increased when fR or Vt doubled in bar-headed and barnacle geese but not in Andean goose (Figure 2.6 B). Effective ventilation at these combinations of Vt and fR was highest for Andean geese and equal for bar-headed and barnacle geese (Figure 2.6 C). The efficacy of ventilation (the air brought to the gas exchange surface per unit energy spent), however, was highest for the barnacle geese and lowest for the bar-headed geese with the low Vt/low fR breathing pattern. During high frequency breathing, efficacy dropped for all three species, to a greater extent for the bar-headed geese than the other two species. During high volume breathing, the Andean goose was the most efficacious (Figure 2.6 D).  When we compared respiratory mechanics values for the combinations of tidal volume and breathing frequency used by each species in vivo, we found that compliance remained highest in Andean geese, especially in hypoxia (5% O2; Figure 2.7 A). Tau was longest for barnacle geese and shortest for Andean geese in normoxia (21% O2 for barnacle and bar-headed geese, 14% O2 for Andean geese). In hypoxia, tau was equal for Andean and bar-headed geese (Figure 2.7 B). In normoxia, all three species expended the same minute work to breathe, but in hypoxia, the minute work did not change for Andean geese (primarily because total ventilation did not change significantly), but was up to 15-fold higher in both barnacle and bar-headed geese (Figure 2.7 C). Bar-headed geese delivered the most O2 to the gas exchange surface per minute in normoxia, and in hypoxia, all three species delivered equal amounts of O2 to the gas exchange surfaces (Figure 2.7 D). Therefore, the efficacy of O2 delivery was 24  highest in bar-headed geese in normoxia, and equal for all the species in hypoxia (Figure 2.7 E).  When minute work of breathing was plotted for a constant minute ventilation, versus the different combinations of frequency and volume that produce that minute ventilation, the curves were roughly u-shaped. Thus, for any given level of minute ventilation, there was an optimal combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency where minute work was lowest. We plotted these curves for each species for the levels of minute ventilation each used in normoxia and hypoxia and then compared these predicted optimal combinations with the actual ranges of breathing frequencies used in vivo (Figure 2.8). We found that barnacle geese always used the predicted optimal combination but that bar-headed geese only used the predicted optimal combination in hypoxia. The Andean geese used a slower, deeper breathing strategy than the predicted optimum in both normoxia and hypoxia. This should increase effective ventilation in both conditions but would come at a metabolic cost.  Discussion We wanted to investigate how the mechanics and morphology of respiratory system in the bar-headed, Andean, and barnacle goose varied and compared to the overall work of breathing in each. Generally, we found that both the static mechanics and the work of breathing under the low Vt/low fR condition were similar for all three species when normalized to the size of the respiratory system. The data also show that it is more costly to increase tidal volume than to increase breathing frequency, particularly for 25  barnacle and bar-headed geese. Interestingly, our calculations suggest that doubling ventilation by either strategy increased the work of breathing more than it increased the amount of oxygen delivered to the gas exchange surface. The overall efficacy of ventilation therefore decreased (Figure 2.6 D). Similar results have been reported during exercise in mammals where the relative cost of breathing can increase from less than 3% to more than 10% of total metabolic rate (Aaron et al., 1992).   The size of the respiratory system was much larger in Andean geese, even though they had the smallest body mass and body volume. The respiratory system accounted for 58% of total body volume at maximum capacity and 35% at functional residual capacity. Andean geese also had the highest dynamic compliance and the lowest value of tau, indicative of a more rapid passive emptying of the system. The former would reduce the work required to overcome elastic forces during inspiration, while the latter would reduce the amount of active force required during expiration. Therefore, our calculations suggest it would be less work for Andean geese to ventilate large volumes and deliver more oxygen to the gas exchange surface per breath. This was reflected in the very high effective ventilation achieved for the same percent change in vital capacity and the increased effectiveness of ventilation during slow, deep breathing.  Based on reported values of Vt and fR for this species in normoxia and hypoxia (Lague et al., submitted), Andean geese increase ventilation only slightly (1.4-fold) from normoxia to hypoxia and, according to our calculations, would not increase the minute work of breathing significantly. Therefore, O2 delivery must have decreased by half in hypoxia. This suggests that these geese must either increase oxygen extraction or decrease oxygen 26  demand in hypoxia. Lague et al. (submitted) report that this species does not supress metabolism but increases oxygen extraction to a large extent (up to 90% extraction). Akester (1960) noted that the actively flying duck and pigeon had 4-fold more parabronchi per unit lung volume than the flightless domestic fowl. If the Andean goose has a higher density of parabronchi and a larger lung it would help explain their ability to extract more oxygen without increasing ventilation. This could also help to explain why bar-headed geese had the highest lung mass, even though their lung volume measured by CT scan was smaller than the Andean goose. It could be that the high number of parabronchi in the Andean goose lung causes the lung to have an overall lower density than the bar-headed goose lung.  The Andean goose did not use the optimal combination of breathing frequency and tidal volume predicted by the u-shaped curves but instead appear to expend energy to use a deeper, slower breathing pattern that should increase oxygen delivery. Unfortunately, our measurements do not allow us to calculate the cost-benefit balance (the O2 delivered for the O2 expended) of this strategy.  The barnacle goose had the smallest respiratory system, accounting for 38% of the total body volume at maximum capacity and 16.5% at functional residual capacity. Despite having the largest static compliance (when normalized to vital capacity), their respiratory system stiffened during dynamic inflation, yielding the lowest dynamic compliance. Thus while the work required to overcome resistive forces was lowest under the low Vt, low fR 27  condition in this species, it was the greatest under the high Vt condition. The net result was that the barnacle goose had the highest breathing efficacy during low Vt/low fR breathing, but this advantage disappeared under the high Vt condition. The time constant was consistently highest for the barnacle goose, meaning they would need to compensate with increased muscle work during expiration to achieve the same breathing frequency as the other two species. Therefore, the work to overcome elastic forces was the majority of the work for barnacle geese during breathing, although we may be underestimating total resistive work due to the subtraction of the resistive work to move the air through the endotracheal tube (and thus the trachea). The barnacle geese always used the optimal combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency predicted by the curves. Based on our calculations, for the barnacle goose to increase ventilation more than 3-fold in hypoxia, the minute work would increase 18-fold. The efficacy of O2 delivery in hypoxia would therefore be extremely low.  The size of the bar-headed goose respiratory system was between that of the Andean and barnacle geese. Their respiratory system accounted for 45% of the total body volume at maximum capacity and 24% at functional residual capacity. Interestingly, they had the largest expiratory reserve volume (capacity to empty the lungs and air sacs from FRC during active expiration). This could be the result of a larger overall FRC or a very low residual volume. The CT data suggests that the FRC of bar-heads is smaller than Andean geese, supporting the latter. A greater capacity to empty the respiratory system for the bar-headed goose is also supported by an increased compliance below FRC (Figure 2.4 A). Our calculations suggest that bar-headed geese deliver more O2 to 28  the gas exchange surface in normoxia than the other two species, due to an effective slow, deep breathing pattern. However, they have a very low O2 delivery efficacy in hypoxia; our estimates indicated they increase minute work 14-fold for a 3-fold increase in ventilation, similar to the barnacle geese. This is consistent with our finding that bar-headed geese only use the optimal combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency in hypoxia when O2 is limited, while in normoxia they expend energy to breathe with a more effective pattern.   Recent studies using mathematical modelling have suggested that efficient unidirectional airflow through the parabronchi requires in phase air sac pressure changes, and that this timing is dependent on the relative compliance of the caudal and cranial air sacs (Urushikubo et al., 2013; Harvey and Ben-Tal, 2016). From this study, we know that compliance in the avian respiratory system is directly related to capacity. Therefore, knowing the relative sizes of the caudal versus cranial air sacs informs our understanding of aerodynamic flow control through the avian respiratory system. If the caudal air sacs are more compliant than the cranial air sacs, the majority of flow through the lung occurs on expiration. Duncker (1972) compiled relative volume data for the air sacs of 8 species from 5 avian families and found that the caudal air sacs (abdominal and posterior thoracic) had a greater combined volume than the combined cranial air sacs (anterior thoracic, clavicular, and cervical). The volumes of the separate air sacs from our data set have not yet been analyzed.  29  While we hypothesized that the high altitude bar-headed and Andean geese would enhance gas exchange and reduce work of breathing by increasing the size and compliance of the respiratory system relative to low altitude barnacle geese, in this study we are not relating any of our findings to adaptation to altitude, nor are we attempting to correct our statistical comparisons for phylogeny. This is because we only compare three taxa in this study. The barnacle goose genus (Branta) is the sister taxa to the bar-headed goose genus (Anser), while the Andean goose is part of a genus of sheldgeese more closely related to ducks (Chloephaga). Therefore, we cannot determine if any differences measured here are due to phylogeny, adaptive evolution, or simply due to chance. Moreover, in comparing only three species, we are not able to determine the effects of a bimodal condition such as altitude. We present the data here and merely speculate on how morphological and mechanical changes might be beneficial when birds are required by exercise or lack of oxygen to increase oxygen delivery. While our data are consistent with our hypothesis that high altitude species have changed the mechanics of the respiratory system to reduce work of breathing, more data from appropriate species will be required to parse out the effects of altitude versus phylogeny on respiratory mechanics in birds.  Future directions In this study, we compared wild caught, captive raised Andean geese with domesticated, captive raised bar-headed and barnacle geese. Therefore, differences due to plasticity may be confounding the data somewhat. Future studies could compare 30  all three species with individuals raised at sea level, or with individuals that were all captured from the wild. This would allow investigation of the role of plasticity versus genotype, which has already been shown to effect respiratory responses in these species (Lague et al., submitted).  31   Figure 2.1: (A) Schematic of the experimental set-up to measure flow and pressure. A constant volume pump was used for dynamic measurements and a syringe was used for static measurements. Flow was measured using a calibrated differential pressure transducer connected to a pneumotachograph. Tracheal pressure was measured on the lung side of the pneumotachograph connecting the syringe or pump to the intubation tube. (B) A hypothetical pressure-volume loop illustrated with measured variables. Flow moves around the loop in the direction of the arrows for a full breath cycle. Dynamic compliance is the slope of the line from the origin to the point of maximum volume. Elastic work is proportional to the area in blue. Resistive work is proportional to the area in grey.   32   Figure 2.2: Body size and size of the respiratory system of the three species compared. (A) Body mass (B) Vital capacity (C) Tracheal volume normalized to vital capacity. Letters indicate significant differences between species (one-way ANOVA; p<0.05). Black squares indicate means, colored boxes standard error of the mean, and whiskers 95% confidence interval.   33  Table 2.1: Volume and mechanics measurements for three species of geese. Values reported as mean ± standard error. One-way ANOVA was used for statistical comparison where possible. Mechanics values were obtained from the static inflation/deflation curves. In vivo values for tidal volume and breathing frequency were taken from Lague et al. (submitted). Dissection values were obtained from birds post-mortem. CT values were obtained from the CT scans. N.S. indicates non-significant difference, * indicates all three groups differ, BH-BG indicates bar-headed differ from barnacle geese, BH indicates bar-headed goose differs from the other two groups, BG indicates barnacle goose differs from the other two groups.   34  Mechanics values Bar-head Andean  Barnacle Significance n 6 6 6 - Body mass (kg) 2.77 ± 0.1 2.29 ± 0.2 2.38 ± 0.2 N.S. (p=0.135; F=2.2) Inspiratory capacity (mL) 372 ± 22 552 ± 21 293 ± 19 * (p<0.001; F=40.2) Expiratory capacity (mL) 243 ± 18 206 ± 12 159 ± 16 BH-BG (p=0.005; F=7.6) Vital capacity (mL) 615 ± 36 758 ± 27 452 ± 19 * (p<0.001; F=30)      In vivo values         n 6 7 6 - Tidal volume                             (mL BTPS) 56 ± 3 35 ± 3 32 ± 3 BH (p<0.001; F=18.5) Tidal volume                            (mL STPD) 45 ± 2 33 ± 2 25 ± 3 BH (p<0.001; F=14.2) Breathing frequency                (min-1) 15 ± 1 18 ± 1 22 ± 3 N.S. (p=0.075; F=3.1)      Dissection values         n 3 5 3 - Lung mass (g) 27 ± 0.7 24 ± 1 21 ± 2 N.S. (p=0.81; F=3.7) Heart mass (g)  21.7 ± 0.9   Tracheal volume (mL)  11.4 ± 1        CT values         n 2 1 2 - Body volume (cm³) 1756 ± 112 1422 1430 ± 36  Inflated lung volume (mL) 83 ± 7 103 51 ± 1  Resting lung volume (mL) 74 ± 5 92 46 ± 0.2  Inflated air sac volume (mL) 707 ± 1 722 491 ± 19  Resting air sac volume (mL) 348 ± 28 409 190 ± 4  Tracheal volume (mL) 8 ± 0.9 5.6 4.7 ± 0.02  Pneumatic volume long bones (mL) 11 ± 0.3 11 7.5 ± 2  Pneumatic volume spine         (mL) 5 ± 0.3 6.4 3.2 ± 0.2  Bone (cm³) 166 ± 0.3 171 126 ± 0.8  Inflated pulmonary vessel vol (mL) 0.9 ± 0.2  0.6 ± 0.1  Resting pulmonary vessel vol (mL) 1.4 ± 0.3 0.07 0.8 ± 0.1  Fat (cm³) 89 ± 20 153 242 ± 5  35   Figure 2.3: CT scans the respiratory system of each species, inflated to 30 cm H2O. (A) Bar-headed goose (B) Andean goose and (C) barnacle goose. Lungs (red), air sacs (light blue), air spaces in long bones (cyan), and bones (yellow) are shown. Images are taken from the dorsal side of prone birds.    A B C 36   Figure 2.4: Static compliance curves (A) expressed as volume change (mL) for a given pressure change and (B) expressed as percent of vital capacity change (%) for a given pressure change. Curves shown are means ± standard errors.     37  Table 2.2: Static compliance values measured as the slope of the static compliance curve at its steepest point (from curves in Figure 2.5 A and B). Values are expressed as means ± SE. Barnacle goose has significantly lower static compliance than the other two species (indicated by letters; one-way ANOVA; p=0.004; F=8.1). When volume is normalized to vital capacity, barnacle geese have significantly higher compliance than Andean geese, bar-headed geese do not differ from the other two species (p=0.03; F=4.4) Species Static compliance Static compliance   mL cm H2O-1 % of Vital Capacity cm H2O-1 Bar-headed 29.4 ± 1.9 A 4.77 ± 0.2 AB Andean 32.3 ± 1.5 A 4.28 ± 0.2 B Barnacle 23.0 ± 1.5 B 5.07 ± 0.2 A    38   Figure 2.5: Dynamic compliance and tau compared for three different breathing strategies. (A) Dynamic compliance expressed with volume in mL. (B) Dynamic compliance expressed with volume as percent of vital capacity. (C) The time constant (tau). Low Vt/fR is 20 breaths per minute, 7% vital capacity tidal volume, High fR is a 40 breaths per minute, 7% vital capacity tidal volume, and High Vt is 20 breaths per minute, 14% vital capacity tidal volume. Letters indicate significant differences between total work values (one-way ANOVA; p<0.05; post-hoc Tukey test). 39   Figure 2.6: Work required and effectiveness of three the different breathing strategies compared. (A) Minute work of breathing. Light part of each column is the elastic component of work, dark part of each column is the resistive component, and the whole column is total minute work required. (B) Proportion of elastic work (light) and resistive work (dark) associated with each pattern (C) Effective ventilation produced with each breathing pattern. (D) Efficacy of air delivery. Low Vt/fR is 20 breaths per minute, 7% vital capacity tidal volume, High fR is a 40 breaths per minute, 7% vital capacity tidal volume, and High Vt is 20 breaths per minute, 14% vital capacity tidal volume. Letters indicate significant differences between total work values (one-way ANOVA; p<0.05; post-hoc Tukey test).   40   41  Figure 2.7: Respiratory mechanics measurements and calculations for the breathing frequency and tidal volume used by each species in vivo in normoxia and hypoxia. Normoxia is 21% O2 for bar-headed and barnacle and 14% O2 for Andean geese, hypoxia is 5% O2 for all three species. (A) Dynamic compliance, (B) Tau, (C) Minute work, (D) O2 delivered to the gas exchange surface, (E) Efficacy of O2 delivery. Letters indicate significant differences (one-way ANOVA, p<0.05, post-hoc Tukey test).   42   Figure 2.8: Optimal combinations of tidal volume and breathing frequency in vivo. Lines indicate minute work curves for levels of total ventilation each species used in normoxia (light shade; 21% O2 for bar-headed and barnacle geese, 14% O2 for Andean geese) and hypoxia (dark shade; 5% O2). The minute ventilations used by each species are indicated in the key for each plot. Bars show actual frequency used by each species (and hence also tidal volume). Width of each bar is the standard error of the mean. Lower right plot compares actual frequency with the predicted optimal frequency in normoxia (black) and hypoxia (blue). Dashed line indicates where points should fall if birds are using optimal frequency. BH is bar-headed goose, AG is Andean goose, and BG is barnacle goose.  43  Chapter 3 Respiratory mechanics of eleven avian species resident at different altitudes Julia M. York1, Beverly A. Chua1, Catherine M. Ivy2, Luis Alza3, Rebecca Cheek4, Graham R. Scott2, Kevin G. McCracken3, Peter B. Frappell5, Neal J. Dawson2,3, Sabine L. Laguë1, and William K. Milsom1  1Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, 6270 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada 2Department of Biology, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 3K1, Canada 3Department of Biology and Department of Marine Biology and Ecology, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, 33146, USA 4Institute of Arctic Biology and University of Alaska Museum, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, 99775, USA 5Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7001, Australia   Introduction In the previous chapter, we investigated the respiratory mechanics and morphometry of a high altitude exercise champion, the bar-headed goose, as well as a species which has resided at high altitudes for more than a million years, the Andean goose (K.G. McCracken, personal communication). Our findings were consistent with our predictions, but we were not able to speculate on whether the differences we measured were due to the effects of altitude or simply due to phylogeny. In this chapter, we expand our study group to include eleven additional species of waterfowl, five that reside at high altitudes in the Andes and six species found at low altitudes, to directly investigate the effect of altitude on avian respiratory mechanics.   44  For animals living at high altitude, when oxygen is limited, it is not always possible to decrease oxygen demand as metabolically expensive but vital tasks such as predator evasion, hunting or foraging, migration, and reproduction must still be accomplished. Animals must therefore cope by increasing oxygen supply (Hochachka, 1985). Increasing supply usually occurs at multiple levels of the oxygen transport cascade, for example by increasing ventilation, increasing cardiac output, left- or right-shifting the O2-hemoglobin equilibrium curve at the lung or tissue, respectively, or increasing myoglobin content or vascularity at the muscles (see Monge and Leon-Velarde, 1991 for review). The first oxygen transport step, ventilation, is often the first response when oxygen demand outstrips supply (Powell et al., 1998). Increasing ventilation can be accomplished either by increasing the volume of the breath (tidal volume, Vt) or the frequency of respiration (fR) such that: 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 =  𝑓𝑅 ∗  𝑉𝑡 In vertebrates such as fish, which can bring nearly all the “inhaled” respiratory medium into direct contact with the gas exchange surface, increasing fR is an equally effective strategy as increasing Vt. However, for tetrapods, the dead space volume must be taken into account, such that: 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 =  𝑓𝑅 ∗  (𝑉𝑡 –  𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑 𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒) The dead space volume is the volume of respiratory medium that the animal expends energy to move from the environment into the respiratory system, but which never actually contacts the gas exchange surface and so does not increase oxygen loading. In the case of sauropsids, who use active expiration, this volume is not only actively moved into the animal but must also be actively pushed out to prepare for the next 45  breath, thus doubling the cost per unit volume compared to animals using exclusively passive expiration (e.g., mammals at rest). The volume of respiratory medium that is actually brought to the respiratory surface per minute is called the effective ventilation (V̇eff). Because dead space volume is a constant, increasing Vt increases V̇eff more than an equal increase of fR (see Figure 3.1).   However, because the work to overcome elastic forces of the chest wall and expansion of the lung increases exponentially with increasing Vt but linearly with increasing fR, the more effective strategy of increasing Vt is generally more metabolically expensive than increasing fR (Vitalis and Milsom, 1986). We wondered if the deeper, slower breathing pattern measured in the bar-headed goose (Scott and Milsom, 2007) was found in other high altitude species, and whether those species could have altered the mechanical design of their respiratory systems to reduce the metabolic cost of potentially employing this higher tidal volume strategy. We also wondered if the differences in respiratory system size and compliance measured in Chapter 2 would be seen consistently in the high altitude group studied here. Therefore, we compared the mechanics of the respiratory system and the work of breathing in eleven species of waterfowl from two sites (see Table 3.1 for a list). Eight of these were members of sister taxa in which one species or subspecies was found primarily at high altitude and the other at low altitude. This allowed us to make four phylogenetically independent comparisons of the effects of altitude on respiratory mechanics.   46  Among the five highland species, there is variation in the evolutionary time since they split with their lowland sister taxa and radiated to altitude. The highland puna teal and speckled teal are considered to be separate species from their closest relatives, the lowland silver teal (Anas versicolor; not studied here) and the lowland green-winged teal. The highland cinnamon teal and ruddy duck are separate subspecies from their lowland sister taxa, the cinnamon teal being the most recently diverged species (K.G. McCracken, personal communication). The highland yellow-billed pintail is a separate species from its closest relative, the northern pintail, but they diverged more recently than the ruddy ducks. Some gene flow still exists between the highland yellow-billed pintails and yellow-billed pintails found at low altitude sites in South America (McCracken et al., 2009b). In this study, we also include the mallard duck and gadwall, lowland species who have no high altitude sister taxa. All of these species are considered to be dabbling ducks (genus Anas), meaning that they forage primarily while on the surface of the water, except the ruddy ducks, which are stiff-tailed diving ducks and the only representatives in this study of the genus Oxyura (see Table 3.1 and Figure 3.2).  With these four independent comparisons on the effects of altitude on respiratory mechanics and our observations from the previous chapter we wanted to answer four primary questions: (1) Are there morphological or mechanical changes in the respiratory system associated with radiation to altitude? (2) Are there relative benefits of increasing tidal volume over breathing frequency? (3) What is the actual cost of breathing for these 47  birds in vivo? (4) Do these birds use an energetically “optimal” combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency?   Methods Highland species were collected from Lake Titicaca, Puno, Perú, at 3,812 meters altitude. Lowland species were collected from either Summer Lake Wildlife area at 1,260 meters or Malheur National Wildlife Refuge at 1,256 meters in Oregon, USA. Species collected at the high altitude site were the puna teal (Anas puna; n=6), speckled teal (Anas flavirostris; n=6), Andean ruddy duck (Oxyura jamaicensis ferruginea; n=11), yellow-billed pintail (Anas georgica; n=6), and cinnamon teal (Anas cyanoptera orinomus; n=8). Lowland species collected were the American green-winged teal (Anas crecca; n=8), ruddy duck (Oxyura jamaicensis jamaicensis; n=6), northern pintail (Anas acuta; n=6), northern cinnamon teal (Anas cyanoptera septentrionalium; n=8), mallard duck (Anas platyrhynchos; n=6), and gadwall (Anas strepera; n=6). This group contains eight sister taxa: the highland speckled teal and the lowland green-winged teal are sister species as are the highland yellow-billed pintail and the lowland northern pintail. The highland and lowland cinnamon teals and ruddy ducks are subspecies found at different altitudes. See Figure 3.2 for phylogeny (Gonzalez et al., 2009).  Birds were captured at night and held in kennels with access to food and water until the morning. They were then anesthetized with intravenous propofol, intubated, and connected to a constant volume respirator. Birds were hyperventilated until the 48  spontaneous drive to breathe was lost. They were then ventilated sequentially with at least three volumes (11.55, 17.33, 23.11, 28.9, or 34.68 mL) and up to five frequencies at each volume (20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 min-1). Tracheal pressure was not permitted to go above 30 cm H2O. Pressure at the trachea was measured with a pressure transducer calibrated with a glass manometer, and flow was measured with a differential pressure transducer connected to either side of a pneumotachograph positioned between the intubation tube and the respirator. Once dynamic data were collected, the birds were again hyperventilated, disconnected from the respirator, and a 100 mL glass syringe was used to inflate and then deflate the respiratory system in a step-wise manner (10-20 mL per step) from functional residual capacity (FRC; lungs open to atmospheric pressure) to 30 cm H2O, back to FRC, to -30 cm H2O, and then back to FRC again. This was done 2-3 times. At the end of experiments, the endotracheal tubes were ventilated with the same volumes and frequencies. Data were recorded with a WinDaq Data Acquisition system.   Birds were then either allowed to recover and released or sacrificed with an overdose of intravenous propofol (all birds in Peru were sacrificed; three individuals of each species in Oregon were sacrificed in accordance with our collection permits). Lungs, hearts, and tracheas were dissected from sacrificed birds. Lung and heart mass as well as extra-pulmonary airway volumes were measured. The extra-pulmonary airway (hereafter referred to as tracheal) volume was used as a proxy for dead space volume.  49  All experiments were conducted in the field at the altitude where the birds were collected. Thus it is possible that we overestimate the compliance and underestimate the work values in the highland species due to hypobaric conditions at the highland site. To correct for this, comparisons were made at volumes expressed as a percent of the vital capacities measured at each site as the volume change between respiratory pressures of 30 and -30 cm H2O. We also normalized values to vital capacity because we were interested in the differences in the mechanics of the respiratory systems independent of differences in body size.  Static compliance was measured as the steepest slope of the relationship between volume and pressure under conditions of zero flow. We also calculated static compliance as the change in volume expressed as a percent of vital capacity for a given change in pressure.  To analyze dynamic data, flow measurements were integrated to produce volume curves, and volume was plotted against pressure as pressure-volume loops. Dynamic compliance was measured as in Chapter 2. The resistive work to move the air through the endotracheal tube alone was subtracted from total resistive work. Flow resistive and elastic work sum to total work per breath. Tau, the time constant, is calculated by estimating resistance as the difference in pressure between two points of isovolume and dividing by the flow, and the product of resistance and compliance is tau.  50  For measurements of dynamic mechanics, we make comparisons at the same combination of fR/Vt for all species (approximately the average value derived for all species breathing ambient O2), with values of Vt expressed as % vital capacity to directly compare the mechanical properties of individual respiratory systems. In vivo each species will use a different combination of fR/Vt when breathing ambient air and will also increase ventilation with different combinations in hypoxia. Therefore, to compare the mechanics between species in vivo, we estimated compliance and work values at the fR/Vt combination used by each species while breathing 13% and 6% O2. We chose 13% O2 because it was the level of ambient oxygen availability at our high altitude site, and the low altitude species used a very similar combination of fR/Vt when breathing 13% and the ambient level of O2 at the low altitude site: 18% O2 (see Figure 3.11). We chose 6% O2 for hypoxia as it was the lowest common level of oxygen for which data had been collected (Ivy et al., unpublished).  Data were analyzed using LabChart software from ADInstruments and graphs and statistics were generated using Origin® 2016. Compliance, tau, elastic work, and resistive work were plotted versus tidal volume and frequency isopleths were produced as linear fits to this data. The equations of these lines were then used to estimate values of the variables at desired combinations of tidal volume and breathing frequency. T-tests were used to compare sister taxa.    51  Results Respiratory system morphology and static mechanics  The species compared have a wide range of body masses (from roughly 0.3 to 1 kg), which correlated with their vital capacities (Figure 3.3 A, R2= 0.83). The highland ruddy ducks (RD) had a somewhat smaller vital capacity than would be predicted for their body mass, while the vital capacities of yellow-billed pintails (YBP), gadwalls (GW), and mallard ducks (MD) were slightly larger than predicted. There were no significant differences between lung mass of any species when normalized to body mass (Figure 3.3 B; two-way ANOVA; p=0.68). The highland birds all tended to have lower dead space volumes, but there was no significant effect of altitude (two-way ANOVA; p=0.42). Among sister taxa, only the highland yellow-billed pintails had a significantly smaller tracheal volume for their vital capacity than the lowland northern pintails (t-test; p=0.008). It was common for one lung to be larger than the other in any individual bird, but whether it was the right or left lung was inconsistent between individuals, and in some birds both lungs were of a similar size.   Static compliance was expressed in mL cm H2O-1 (Figure 3.4 A) and as the change in volume expressed as a percent of vital capacity (Figure 3.4 B). The slopes of the curves in Figure 3.4 are listed in Table 3.2 and Figure 3.5. Before normalization to vital capacity, three of the highland species were significantly more compliant than their lowland sister taxa (t-tests: speckled teal/green winged teal, p<0.001; ruddy duck/lowland ruddy duck, p=0.04; cinnamon teal/lowland cinnamon teal, p<0.001). This was because they had larger vital capacities. When expressed as change in volume per 52  unit change in pressure (Figure 3.4 A), the slopes of the curves for all species were directly proportional to the size of the respiratory system (Figure 3.6; R2=0.68). When normalized to the size of the respiratory system, there was a non-significant trend for the highland species to be more compliant (Figure 3.5 B), although between sister taxa, only the speckled teal and yellow-billed pintail were still significantly more compliant than the lowland green-winged teal and northern pintail (t-tests: ST/GT p=0.036; YBP/NP p=0.021).   Cost and benefit of increasing tidal volume We compared the work of breathing in each species when breathing at equal tidal volumes (as a percent of vital capacity) and frequencies because the variables of dynamic mechanics are specific to each combination of Vt/fR. Dynamic compliance was higher for all highland sister taxa, except the ruddy ducks who had lower or equal compliance, and this remained true when frequency or volume was doubled (Table 3.3). We found that in general the time constant was reduced when fR or Vt were increased but saw no consistent differences in the time constant between sister taxa. Our calculations suggest that doubling Vt would be more expensive than doubling fR for all species except the highland speckled and cinnamon teals (Figure 3.7). In general, the highland sister taxa did either equal or more work than the lowland groups per minute (Table 3.3). When we compared effective ventilation, only the yellow-billed pintail delivered significantly more air than their lowland sister taxon, the northern pintail, and this was directly related to the relative size of the tracheal volume (Figure 3.3C). We then calculated the level of effective ventilation per unit energy spent (efficacy) and 53  found that the three smallest species (green-winged teal, speckled teal, and lowland cinnamon teal) were the most efficacious. However, the highland species, except the ruddy duck, were generally more efficacious than their lowland sister taxa. The highland ruddy duck, lowland northern pintail, mallard duck, and gadwall were the least efficacious.   Dynamic mechanics and work of breathing in vivo In the previous plots, we compared the species at common combinations of Vt and fR. Here we calculate the dynamic compliance and the time constant for each species from our data using their in vivo breathing pattern (Figure 3.8). Based on these calculations, dynamic compliance (Figure 3.8 A and B) would be reduced in the ruddy duck and cinnamon teal compared to their lowland relatives while breathing 13% O2 but not 6% O2 (t-tests; RD/LRD p<0.001; CT/LCT p=0.003). While breathing 6% O2, only the dynamic compliance of the speckled teal would be significantly less than its lowland sister taxon, the green-winged teal (t-test; p=0.01). In Figure 3.8 C and D, we report the time constant (tau) for the combination of breathing frequency and tidal volume used by each species in vivo based on our measurements. We found no significant differences among sister taxa for tau, except the highland cinnamon teal, which was estimated to have a slightly faster time constant than the lowland cinnamon teal in both 13 and 6% O2 (t-test; p=0.015 and 0.024).  We calculated the minute work (power output) and the volume of oxygen brought to the gas exchange surface per unit minute work using the in vivo measurements of tidal 54  volume and breathing frequency for each species breathing 13 and 6% O2 (Figure 3.9). Not surprisingly, the minute work of breathing was significantly higher and the amount of O2 delivered to the respiratory exchange surfaces tended to be lower when the birds were breathing 6% O2 compared to 13% O2 (Figure 3.9; paired t-test; minute work p<0.001; O2 delivery p=0.28). In general, the highland birds had reduced minute work compared to the lowland taxa but ventilated approximately equal volumes of oxygen per unit work. When breathing 13% O2 (Figure 3.9 A), however, the highland ruddy ducks were estimated to do significantly more work per minute than the lowland ruddy ducks (t-test; p<0.001) yet brought less oxygen to the gas exchange surface for that work (Figure 3.9 C; p<0.001). When breathing 6% O2 (Figure 3.9 B), this relationship switched (p<0.001). The speckled teal and green-winged teal had the opposite pattern to the ruddy ducks (Figure 3.9 D; p=0.008), and when breathing both 13 and 6% O2, the yellow-billed pintail was estimated to be more efficacious than the northern pintail (t-test; p<0.001). In 6% O2, the mallard duck was estimated to have the highest minute work of breathing—approximately 3-fold more than any other species. Per unit energy, the mallard duck was also estimated to bring less oxygen to the gas exchange surface than any other bird.   Do birds use an energetically optimal combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency? As described above, the total work of breathing has two components: the work required to overcome elastic forces (elastic work) and the work required to overcome flow resistive forces (resistive work). For a constant level of minute ventilation, frequency 55  increases and tidal volume decreases, resistive work increases, and elastic work decreases. When summed, the total work curve tends to be u-shaped with the different components (elastic and resistive work) contributing proportionately different amounts at each combination. Usually there is an “optimal” combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency where minute work is minimized. We compared how the resistive and elastic components of work change at a common constant level of minute ventilation (500% vital capacity per minute) in Figure 3.10. While there was high variability, we found no significant differences in the proportion of total work required to overcome elastic forces at 40 bpm (and 12.5% vital capacity) between sister taxa. Nonetheless, the shape of the power curve was greatly affected by the extent to which resistive work increased with increasing frequency; the greater the increase the more u-shaped the curve.    We plotted the change in minute work for the level of minute ventilation used by each species while breathing ambient levels of O2 (18% O2 for lowland species and 13% O2 for highland species), and 6% O2 (Figure 3.11). We found that, in general, birds expend energy to use a higher Vt/slower fR pattern than the predicted optimal combination (Figure 3.12) when breathing ambient levels of O2, but that when oxygen was more limited (in 6% O2) birds generally moved toward a more optimal combination of Vt/fR (Figure 3.12).     56  Discussion Morphological and mechanical variation associated with altitude Our data revealed increases in static and dynamic compliance associated with altitude (Table 3.2 and 3.3). For any given pressure change, there was a greater volume change in the respiratory system of highland species, and this difference was primarily due to reduced stiffness at low respiratory volumes (removing air below FRC). This was consistent with our measurements in bar-headed geese. In a passively expiring mammal, this would have little physiological consequence, but because birds expire actively, increased expiratory compliance should reduce the cost of every breath. We found little difference in tracheal volume or lung mass between the highland and lowland sister taxa. Of the three species for which no sister taxa were studied, the highland puna teal had a small tracheal volume for its body mass, while the lowland mallard duck and gadwall had small lungs and large tracheal volumes for their body mass. For the latter two species, this may have limited their potential to radiate to altitude and explain the lack of highland sister taxa. Overall vital capacity scaled directly with body mass in our species, and we found no effect of evolutionary time at altitude on either vital capacity or lung mass.   Costs and benefits of deep versus rapid breathing Consistent with the previous chapter, we found increasing tidal volume to be a more expensive strategy than increasing breathing frequency in most species. The exceptions were the Andean goose and two highland species in this study, the speckled and cinnamon teals. Interestingly, these two species have spent the most and least 57  evolutionary time at altitude, respectively (the Andean goose has been at altitude even longer than the speckled teal), suggesting this is not associated with high altitude adaptation, although it would certainly be beneficial when increasing ventilation at altitude. This change could be due to the increase in compliance, decrease in resistance, or a combination of the two that was estimated in these two species.   The benefit of increasing tidal volume over breathing frequency in terms of greater oxygen delivery to the gas exchange surface is directly related to the proportion of dead space volume in the respiratory system. The greater the dead space volume, the more advantageous using a higher tidal volume strategy would potentially be. If the dead space volume is relatively small, then the advantage of increasing Vt versus fR will be reduced. In this study, we used tracheal (extra-pulmonary airway) volume as an estimate of dead space volume. Only the highland yellow-billed pintails had a reduced tracheal volume compared to their lowland sister taxon, the northern pintail. This gave rise to greater effective ventilation and an increase in the O2 delivery efficacy compared to the northern pintails in vivo. For the other sister taxa, relative tracheal volume was not different, and therefore neither was the effective ventilation.   The species with the highest efficacy were the smallest birds, regardless of altitude. This size effect may be related to homeostatic constraints such as the need to thermoregulate with high surface area to volume ratios or maintain higher mass specific metabolic rates with high heart rates and levels of ventilation at rest. The least efficacious species, the mallard duck, highland ruddy duck, gadwall, and northern 58  pintail, had stiff respiratory systems and either a high airway resistance (ruddy duck), or fairly large tracheal volumes (mallard duck, gadwall, and northern pintail).   Cost of breathing in vivo Our data indicate that when breathing 6% O2, the highland taxa were generally estimated to have expended less or equal energy to breathe per unit time and delivered an approximately equal amount of oxygen to the gas exchange surface per unit energy spent. This implies that some highland taxa may be delivering less oxygen to the system overall and may be employing other strategies to cope with hypoxia—such as decreasing O2 demand or increasing O2 extraction. It is important to note that the least efficacious species were those that have no highland sister taxa—the gadwall and mallard duck. The mallard duck in particular was estimated to have brought very little oxygen to the gas exchange surface per unit of energy spent, a finding further supporting the suggestion that respiratory limitations may explain why these lineages have not radiated to altitude.   When do birds breathe optimally? As already described, for a constant level of minute ventilation, as the breathing frequency and work to overcome resistive forces increase, the tidal volume and work to overcome elastic forces will decrease. When summed, the total minute work curve tends to be u-shaped. Thus there is an “optimal” combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency where total minute work is minimized. We expected that birds would always use this optimal combination. We found that only two species, the 59  speckled teal and lowland ruddy duck, were estimated to always (in normoxia and hypoxia) use the optimal combination. In normoxia, all other species expended energy to use a slower, deeper breathing strategy than the optimum. In hypoxia, when oxygen was limited, birds shifted closer to the optimal combination of fR/Vt. If they didn’t use the optimum, they were estimated to always use a slower, deeper strategy, which would increase effective ventilation per breath; birds never expended energy to use a more rapid, shallow breathing strategy than the optimum. These findings are consistent with our observation that barnacle geese always use the optimal combination, but that bar-headed and Andean geese expend energy to use a more effective breathing pattern. Future studies could calculate the increased cost versus the increased O2 delivery of the ‘less than optimal’ strategy   It is important to note that our predictions of the optimal combination of fR/Vt are somewhat skewed due to our subtraction of the resistive work created by the intubation tube. By subtracting this value, we do not take into account the resistive work of moving the air through the trachea, and thus we underestimate the contribution of resistive work to total work. This will reduce the estimated total work of breathing, especially at high frequencies, and may explain why some of the curves in Figure 3.11 are not u-shaped at all, but continue to decrease with increasing breathing frequency. Given this, our predicted optimal combinations may, in reality, be somewhat closer to the deeper, slower combinations used by the birds.    60  Those ruddy ducks! The highland ruddy duck did not fit with the high compliance, low resistance trend seen in the other highland species. This could be for several reasons. The ruddy ducks were our only diving species in this study, and their respiratory mechanics and morphology may be under different constraints than the dabbling ducks. Birds dive upon inhalation, and avian divers may require a stiff chest wall to prevent barotrauma due to excess compression. Anecdotally, the highland ruddy ducks were simple to catch, as they were not able to dive more than once. This is in contrast to the lowland ruddy ducks that were very difficult to catch, as they were able to dive repeatedly. This is likely due to an inability of the highland ruddy ducks to replenish O2 stores rapidly, but this has not been investigated. The lack of consistency with the pattern seen in other birds may also be due to phylogeny; all other species in this study are in the genus Anas, while ruddy ducks are members of the genus Oxyura, the stiff-tailed diving ducks. They are more closely related to geese than to other duck species (see Figure 3.2; Gonzalez et al., 2009). Also, evolutionarily, the common ancestor of the high and lowland ruddy duck subspecies originated at high altitudes and the low altitude subspecies radiated down, the opposite pattern from that seen in the other sister taxa studied here (McCracken and Sorenson, 2005). The non-conforming pattern in respiratory mechanics seen in the ruddy ducks is likely due to a combination of these factors.   Chapter conclusions We set out to address whether there are morphological or mechanical changes in the avian respiratory system associated with high altitude and if any metabolic benefits to 61  these changes reduce the cost of breathing in vivo. We found little difference in tracheal volume or lung mass between the highland and lowland sister taxa but estimated that highland species had more compliant respiratory systems. Despite this, the work and efficacy of ventilation were similar between highland and lowland taxa. This could reflect exaptation (preadaptation) of the dabbling lowland sister taxa to highland hypoxia. This would be consistent with the hypothesis that allopatric speciation occurred between these high and low altitude taxa due to the lack of wetland habitat at intermediate altitudes (McCracken et al., 2009a). Additionally, the low breathing efficacy of mallard ducks and gadwalls may help explain their inability to expand their altitudinal niche.   Consistent with Chapter 2, we estimated that the ducks were more likely to use an optimal combination of tidal volume and frequency when oxygen is limited. If they did not use the optimal predicted combination, they always breathed slower and deeper rather than more rapidly and shallowly. In theory, this would increase the effective ventilation for a given level of minute ventilation. According to our calculations, for the highland speckled and cinnamon teals, increasing Vt over fR would be also be energetically favorable.   We describe these species as being either highland or lowland, and, while some of them are indeed restricted to a certain altitudinal range, birds are highly mobile and using these dichotomous labels may be somewhat misleading. As previously mentioned, while northern pintails are mainly restricted to low altitude wetlands in North America (below 2,500 m), yellow-billed pintails are found at both high and low altitude in 62  South America, and while the individuals we collected for this study were at high altitude, there is still high gene flow among the population as a whole (McCracken et al., 2009b). The Eurasian subspecies of the American green-winged teal (Anas crecca crecca) has been reported to fly over the Himalayas at 5,600 meters (Groebbels, 1932). Mallard ducks, as another example, are considered a lowland species that never radiated to altitude as they are usually not seen above 2,000 meters and have no highland sister taxa, but there are anecdotal reports of mallards nesting at 3,300 meters and one incidence of a mallard (identified by one primary feather) colliding with an airplane at 6,400 meters (A. Rush, personal communication; Manville, 1963). The avian respiratory system is already highly specialized for flight, the most energetically costly form of locomotion, and this may allow birds to move between altitudes with minimal further modification. This may also help explain the lack of consistent differences such as those seen among the geese. However, given more evolutionary time, perhaps further modification would be seen, similar to that of the Andean goose.   Future directions Although we investigated the effect of altitude here, the data presented for the ruddy duck may suggest that waterfowl respiratory mechanics are more constrained by life history strategy (i.e. dabbling, flying, or diving) than by habitat. The highly specialized avian respiratory system may lend itself to maintaining oxygen delivery at altitude, so it would be interesting to investigate how altitude affects the respiratory mechanics of mammalian taxa, such as deer mice or bats that inhabit a wide altitudinal range.  63   Figure 3.1: Change in effective ventilation for an equal-fold change in tidal volume (solid line) or breathing frequency (dotted line).     64  Table 3.1: Species compared in this study and respiratory mechanics values. We found no significant effect of altitude on any of the variables presented (two-way ANOVA, p>0.05).65    Abbrev. Body mass Vital capacity Vital capacity Inspiratory capacity Expiratory capacity Whole heart Right ventricle Left ventricle Total lung Trachea  Species   g mL mL kg-1 mL kg-1 mL kg-1 g kg-1 g kg-1 g kg-1 g kg-1 mL              Highland Puna teal                                            Anas puna PT 396 ± 15  157 ± 4 399 ± 14 246 ± 12 154 ± 10 9.4 ± 0.6 1.5 ± 0.2 6.1 ± 0.4 16.7 ± 0.9 1.9 ± 0.3 Speckled teal                              Anas flavirostris ST 378 ± 9 132 ± 3  350 ± 8 224 ± 9 126 ± 10 12.9 ± 0.6 2.3 ± 0.2 7.7 ± 0.3 16.3 ± 1.6 1.3 ± 0.3 Ruddy duck                             Oxyura jamaicensis ferruginea RD 773 ± 51 193 ± 6 260 ± 19 194 ± 12 67 ± 10 9.5 ± 0.5 1.3 ± 0.1 5.8 ± 0.4 16.1 ± 1.3 1.6 ± 0.1 Yellow-billed pintail                 Anas georgica YBP 618 ± 20 234 ± 6 373 ± 7 236 ± 8 137 ± 4 10.4 ± 0.6 2.0 ± 0.1 6.2 ± 0.5 14.6 ± 1.3 2.8 ± 0.4 Cinnamon teal                             Anas cyanoptera orinomus CT 440 ± 13 159 ± 4 360 ± 13 240 ± 13 121 ± 8 11 ± 0.6 1.9 ± 0.2 6.6 ± 0.4 14.4 ± 1.2 2.6 ± 0.3              Lowland Green-winged teal                      Anas crecca GT 283 ± 10 94 ± 3 331 ± 18 206 ± 8 125 ± 14 12.3 ± 2 2.9 ± 0.4 9.0 ± 2 17.1 ± 1.5 1.3 ± 0.3 Lowland ruddy duck             Oxyura jamaicensis jamaicensis LRD 476 ± 32 153 ± 7  329 ± 28 217 ± 16 112 ± 17 9.7 ± 0.9 2.1 ± 0.5 7.3 ± 0.5 18.1 ± 1.3 1.4 ± 0.2 Northern pintail                            Anas acuta NP 857 ± 12 249 ± 10 291 ± 12 183 ± 9 108 ± 7 10.7 ± 0.1 2.2 ± 0.3 8.0 ± 0.3 13.8 ± 1.9 4.9 ± 0.2 Lowland cinnamon teal             Anas cyanoptera septentrionalium LCT 300 ± 13 104 ± 4 350 ± 21 218 ± 14 132 ± 16 9.2 ± 0.4 1.9 ± 0.3 6.8 ± 0.2 16.7 ± 2.4 1.8 ± 0.2 Mallard duck                                Anas platyrhynchos MD 932 ± 21 330 ± 19 359 ± 23 248 ± 20 111 ± 5 7.4 ± 0.4 1.3 ± 0.3 5.9 ± 0.2 13.5 ± 1.7 6.0 ± 0.1 Gadwall                                               Anas strepera GW 766 ± 40 284 ± 10 372 ± 16 226 ± 16 147 ± 11 10.5 ± 3 2.1 ± 0.6 8.1 ± 2 13.8 ± 0.6 5.4 ± 0.4   66    Figure 3.2: Phylogeny of the species compared in this study. [Adapted from Gonzalez et al., 2009].   67   Figure 3.3: (A) Vital capacity versus body mass (B) Lung mass normalized by body mass (C) Tracheal volume normalized to vital capacity. Blue bars are highland species, grey bars are lowland species. Colors below bars identify sister taxa. ** indicates significant difference between sister taxa (t-test; p<0.01). Highland species are in blue, lowland species are in grey.    68   Figure 3.4: Static compliance curves of the intact respiratory system. (A) Static compliance measured as the change in volume for a given change in pressure, along the line of zero flow. High altitude species are in blue, low altitude species are in black. (B) Static compliance measured as the change in percent of vital capacity with for a given change in pressure    69  Table 3.2: Static compliance measured as the slope of the static compliance curves in Figure 3.2. Values are means +/- standard error. * indicates significant difference between sister taxa (*=p<0.05; ***=p<0.001).  Species Altitude Static Compliance Static Compliance     mL cm H2O-1 % Vital Capacity cm H2O-1 Puna teal Highland 8.70 ± 0.23 5.56 ± 0.13 Speckled teal Highland      7.09 ± 0.24 ***    5.47 ± 0.22 * Ruddy duck Highland    9.71 ± 0.74 * 4.75 ± 0.25 Yellow-billed pintail Highland 12.9 ± 0.60    5.51 ± 0.26 * Cinnamon teal Highland      8.48 ± 0.30 ***    5.36 ± 0.22 * Green-winged teal Lowland 4.41 ± 0.31 4.68 ± 0.24 Lowland ruddy duck Lowland 6.97 ± 0.69 4.49 ± 0.24 Northern pintail Lowland 11.8 ± 0.83 4.72 ± 0.15 Lowland cinnamon teal Lowland 4.87 ± 0.32 4.69 ± 0.25 Mallard Lowland 14.3 ± 1.27 4.34 ± 0.23 Gadwall Lowland 11.5 ± 0.68 4.02 ± 0.12    70   Figure 3.5: Static compliance measured as the slope of the static compliance curves for highland species (blue) and lowland species (grey). Sister taxa are identified by colors along the x-axis. (A) Static compliance measured as change in volume for a given change in pressure, or the slope of the curve in Figure 4 A. (B) Static compliance as change in volume expressed in percent vital capacity for a given change in pressure, or the slope of the curve in Figure 4 B. Mean (black squares), standard error (colored boxes), and 95% confidence interval (whiskers) are plotted. * indicates significant difference between sister taxa (*=p<0.05; ***=p<0.001).   71   Figure 3.6: Static compliance (expressed as mL per cm H2O) versus vital capacity (mL). (A) Species are colored by sister taxa. (B) Species are colored by altitude (blue high altitude; grey low altitude). Slope and intercepts expressed as mean +/- standard error.   72   Figure 3.7: Difference between cost to increase tidal volume and cost to increase breathing frequency. Increasing tidal volume is a more expensive strategy for all birds except speckled teal and highland cinnamon teal (ST and CT). Blue bars are highland species, grey bars are lowland species.   73  Table 3.3: Respiratory mechanics measurements for three breathing strategies compared. Comparing the costs and benefits of doubling tidal volume or breathing frequency. The first column for every variable is representative of the average Vt/fR for all the species at rest (7.3% VC/20 bpm). In the second column fR is doubled, and in the third column Vt is doubled. Values are mean ± SE. * beneath the values indicate significant differences between sister taxa (*=p<0.05; **=p<0.01; ***=p<0.001).  74    Compliance (% VC cm H2O-1)  Tau (seconds)  Minute work (Joules min-1 kg-1)  Vt (% VC) 7.3 7.3 14.6  7.3 7.3 14.6  7.3 7.3 14.6  fR (min-1) 20 40 20   20 40 20  20 40 20              Highland Puna teal 4.39 ± 0.04 2.92 ± 0.04 3.36 ± 0.04 1.15 ± 0.01 0.90 ± 0.01 1.05 ± 0.01  0.14 ± 0.02 0.44 ± 0.02 0.63 ± 0.14 Speckled teal 5.16 ± 0.15 *** 2.61 ± 0.09 *** 3.29 ± 0.12 ***  1.99 ± 0.18  * 0.97 ± 0.02  * 1.29 ± 0.03 **  0.10 ± 0.07 0.61 ± 0.08 *** 0.50 ± 0.16 Ruddy duck  2.90 ± 0.04 *** 2.31 ± 0.11 2.64 ± 0.13  1.54 ± 0.04 0.98 ± 0.07 1.51 ± 0.11  *  0.17 ± 0.01 *** 0.56 ± 0.01 0.88 ± 0.02 *** Yellow-billed pintail 5.93 ± 0.16 *** 3.29 ± 0.06 4.52 ± 0.08 ***  1.25 ± 0.12 0.81 ± 0.10 1.08 ± 0.14  0.13 ± 0.01 0.57 ± 0.01 ** 0.79 ± 0.03 ** Cinnamon teal 4.79 ± 0.14 *** 2.80 ± 0.04 *** 3.50 ± 0.05 ***  1.29 ± 0.16 0.71 ± 0.05 *** 1.19 ± 0.08  0.12 ± 0.01 0.36 ± 0.02 0.33 ± 0.07              Lowland Green-winged teal 3.03 ± 0.03 2.31 ± 0.01 2.40 ± 0.01  1.53 ± 0.03 1.02 ± 0.01 1.20 ± 0.01  0.20 ± 0.01 0.26 ± 0.01 0.45 ± 0.02 Ruddy duck 3.57 ± 0.08 2.23 ± 0.01 2.59 ± 0.01  1.44 ± 0.04 1.14 ± 0.01 1.18 ± 0.01  0.11 ± 0.01 0.55 ± 0.01 0.67 ± 0.03 Northern pintail 3.41 ± 0.01 3.20 ± 0.16 2.63 ± 0.13  1.14 ± 0.02 0.83 ± 0.03 1.03 ± 0.04  0.14 ± 0.01 0.49 ± 0.02 0.62 ± 0.05 Cinnamon teal 3.51 ± 0.06 2.06 ± 0.09 2.62 ± 0.11  1.55 ± 0.04 0.94 ± 0.01 1.20 ± 0.01  0.14 ± 0.01 0.35 ± 0.02 0.44 ± 0.11 Mallard 3.90 ± 0.09 3.67 ± 0.17 3.57 ± 0.17  1.06 ± 0.03 0.73 ± 0.08 1.10 ± 0.12  0.17 ± 0.01 0.64 ± 0.02 0.95 ± 0.05 Gadwall 4.48 ± 0.08 3.51 ± 0.19 3.60 ± 0.19  1.14 ± 0.04 0.78 ± 0.03 1.19 ± 0.04  0.16 ± 0.06 0.65 ± 0.02 1.07 ± 0.07     75    V̇eff (mL min-1 kg-1)  Efficacy (L Joule-1 kg-1)  Vt (% VC) 7.3 7.3 14.6  7.3 7.3 14.6  fR (min-1) 20 40 20   20 40 20          Highland Puna teal 486 ± 21 972 ± 42 1068 ± 37 8.87 ± 0.39 5.64 ± 0.25 4.27 ± 0.15 Speckled teal 439 ± 14 878 ± 28 948 ± 18  11.9 ± 0.38 *** 3.82 ± 0.12 5.04 ± 0.09 ** Ruddy duck  327 ± 30  653 ± 60 695 ± 67  2.50 ± 0.23 *** 1.51 ± 0.14 *** 1.02 ± 0.10 ***  Yellow-billed pintail   451 ± 13   ***    902 ± 27   ***    994 ± 21 ***  5.67 ± 0.17 *** 2.57 ± 0.08 *** 2.04 ± 0.04 *** Cinnamon teal 421 ± 22 842 ± 44 951 ± 37  8.02 ± 0.42 5.39 ± 0.28 ** 6.58 ± 0.26          Lowland Green-winged teal 385 ± 25 771 ± 50 863 ± 51  6.79 ± 0.44 10.7 ± 0.68 6.75 ± 0.40 Ruddy duck 412 ± 38 824 ± 75 880 ± 79  7.97 ± 0.73 3.15 ± 0.29 2.76 ± 0.25 Northern pintail 309 ± 17 618 ± 35 733 ± 36  2.63 ± 0.15 1.48 ± 0.08 1.39 ± 0.07 Cinnamon teal 382 ± 28 764 ± 55 887 ± 58  9.20 ± 0.66 7.27 ± 0.53 6.73 ± 0.44 Mallard 392 ± 32 784 ± 64 914 ± 65  2.53 ± 0.21 1.31 ± 0.11 1.03 ± 0.07 Gadwall 399 ± 19 799 ± 38 937 ± 42  3.26 ± 0.16 1.61 ± 0.08 1.15 ± 0.05  76   Figure 3.8: Dynamic compliance (A and B) and time constant (Tau; C and D) measurements for the actual combination of tidal volume and breathing frequency used by each species breathing 13% O2 (A and C) and 6% O2 (B and D). Blue bars are highland taxa, and grey bars are lowland taxa. Sister taxa are identified by colors below bars. * show significant differences (*=p<0.05; **=p<0.01; ***=p<0.001) between sister taxa.   77   Figure 3.9: Minute work of breathing per kg (A and B) and volume of oxygen brought to the gas exchange surface per joule (C and D) while breathing 13% O2 (A and C) and 6% O2 (B and D). Blue bars are highland taxa, and grey bars are lowland taxa. Sister taxa are identified by colors below bars.* indicate significant differences between sister taxa (t-test; **=p<0.01; ***=p<0.001).   78     79  Figure 3.10: Relationship of total minute work, minute elastic work, and minute resistive work for one level of minute ventilation (500% VC per minute). Change in elastic (gold), resistive (blue), and total (black) work at a constant minute ventilation of 500% vital capacity per minute. The final panel plots the proportion of elastic (gold) and resistive (blue) work at a frequency of 40 breaths per minute and 12.5% vital capacity.   80     81  Figure 3.11: Work of breathing (power output) at combinations of breathing frequency and tidal volume for minute ventilations measured in vivo in 18% O2 (black), 13% O2 (red), and 6% O2 (teal). Lines indicate work for the minute ventilation use by each species at that O2 level (see individual plots for values). Bars with arrows above indicate mean ± standard error of breathing frequencies measured in awake, unanesthetized, resting birds. *Note that the mallard duck graph uses a different scale.   82   Figure 3.12: Measured breathing frequency versus predicted optimal breathing frequency. The optimal frequency is predicted by the curves in Figure 11. Black line (x=y) indicates where points should fall if birds were using the optimal combination of breathing frequency and tidal volume. Points that fall below this line indicate that birds are expending energy to use a higher tidal volume, points above the line show birds that expend energy to use a higher breathing frequency.   83  Chapter 4 Discussion Sternal recumbency During the measurements of respiratory mechanics and CT scans, birds were placed in sternal recumbency (prone position). Sternal recumbency may restrict the rocking movement of the sternum that is used to expand the pleural cavity during normal breathing. However, Malka and colleagues (2009) found that sternal recumbency was the position that resulted in the greatest air sac and lung volumes measured by CT scan in red-tailed hawks. This was probably due to pleural cavity compression by the flight muscles and intestinal displacement when the birds were placed in dorsal recumbency or on their side (Petnehazy et al., 2012). King and Payne (1964) found a reduction in tidal volume when both conscious and anesthetized chickens were placed in dorsal recumbency as compared to erect posture (sternal recumbency was not measured). The in vivo respiratory and metabolic values we use here were measured in birds resting in sternal recumbency. We therefore chose to complete experiments while the birds rested on their sternums; however, this may have caused an underestimation of work of breathing due to the lack of gravitational pull on the mass of the flight muscle attached to the sternum. Indeed, Tickle and colleagues (2010) noted that barnacle geese often sat down when carrying a sternal load, which is unusual for a bird in a stressful environment, and was not seen to the same extent in birds carrying loads on their backs or legs. They hypothesized that birds sat down to change their breathing strategy from sternal rotation to a more energetically favorable costal expansion. In a later study they found that standing was 25% more metabolically expensive than sitting 84  in sternal recumbency (Tickle et al., 2012). If this is the case, in this study we primarily measure the work of the costal expansion breathing strategy, and the cost of breathing during standing, running, or flight would be expected to be higher.   Subtracting endotracheal tube resistance In these studies, birds were intubated in order to be ventilated without interference from spontaneous respiration. At the end of the studies, all endotracheal tubes were ventilated with the same volumes and frequencies as the birds, resistive work was calculated from pressure-volume loops, and the resistive work to move the air through the endotracheal tube alone was subtracted from the total resistive work. We chose to subtract this value because it artificially inflates the resistive work of breathing as the endotracheal tube is by necessity narrower than the trachea of the bird. Obviously, we are therefore underestimating the resistive work of breathing because we have not taken into account the resistive work of the trachea. Typically, the resistive work to move air through the endotracheal tube was approximately 3% of total resistive work, and it ranged from 1% at lower frequencies to 10% at higher frequencies. For the low frequencies used by the birds at rest, therefore, the error due to the subtraction of the endotracheal tube resistive work can be expected to be less than 1%. However, at high frequencies, such as those used by the mallard duck in hypoxia, the resistive work (and consequently the total work) could be underestimated by up to 10%, and this should be taken into account in the interpretation of these data.    85  Lung volume estimates In these studies we estimated lung volume by dissection but chose not to present the data. Our lung volume estimates in this study were approximately half of similar values in the literature (see Maina, 2002 for a review), due to a difference in methods. Commonly in the 1980’s and early 1990’s, morphometrics of the lungs (including lung volume) were measured by first fixing the lung in situ with glutaraldehyde under a pressure head of 25 cm H2O (Maina and King, 1982; Powell and Mazzone, 1983; Maina, 1984; Maina, 1987; Timmwood, et al., 1987; Vidyadaran et al., 1988; Maina and King, 1989; Vidyadaran et al., 1990). The lungs were then dissected from the bird and the volume measured by the fluid immersion method described by Scherle (1970). The lungs were therefore fixed at or near maximum capacity, which could increase their volume by up to 18%. In this study, lungs were dissected without first being fixed, and volume was estimated by the same method. The large discrepancy between our values and the values measured in the fixed lungs may seem counterintuitive as avian lungs are generally thought of as “rigid” and expand and contract very little during breathing. However, in situ the lungs are attached to the surrounding tissues by fascia, and the process of extraction removes the attachments and pushes air and blood out of the tissue. King (1966) noted, “The avian lung contracts appreciably on being removed from the coelom.” This contraction of unfixed lungs, as well as the high pressure protocol for fixed lungs, explains the significant drop in mass specific lung volume we measured. We discuss it here simply to note that future investigations should be made aware of the possibility of tissue contraction and the inability to control for the amount of blood and air that leaves the lung upon dissection. Lung volumes should be measured for fixed 86  lungs or lungs in situ using non-invasive methods such as CT scans. Our values for lung mass are in rough agreement with those of Scott and colleagues (2011). Lung masses of birds seem to scale with body mass and are consistently 1% of total body mass (see Table 4.1; Lasiewski and Calder, 1971).   Avian respiratory morphometry Although it has been the focus of much study and attention, major questions in our understanding of the avian respiratory system remain unsettled. Primarily, how exactly is airflow directed past the lungs to the caudal air sacs on inspiration and then from the caudal air sacs to the lungs on expiration? As Krogh (1941) said, “A study of the distribution of inspired air between lungs and the separate air sacs presents very formidable experimental difficulties, and from the literature anything but a clear and consistent picture can be obtained.” Since 1941, significant progress has been made but the mechanisms of airflow control are not yet fully understood.   The current hypothesis is that airflow is directed primarily by aerodynamic means through differential resistance of the airways, the relative angles of the airways, and the relative compliance of the air sacs (Cieri and Farmer, 2016; Harvey and Ben-Tal, 2016). Unidirectional airflow through the lung can be accomplished passively simply due to the anatomy of the avian respiratory system. This has been supported by studies showing that airflow through the lung is unidirectional even when birds are mechanically ventilated after death (Scheid and Piiper, 1971) as well as studies modelling passive airflow (Maina et al., 2009; Harvey and Ben-Tal, 2016). However, anatomical 87  constrictions thought to achieve this passive control, such as the segmentum accelerans, are not found in all avian taxa (e.g. Maina and Nathaniel, 2001). It appears that to achieve the high efficiency of aerodynamic valving actually measured in birds, some active control from the smooth muscle surrounding the airways may be required (Urushikubo et al., 2013). The smooth muscle could help to control relative resistance of the various bronchi and ostia. The smooth muscle found around the bronchi is known to contract in response to CO2 changes in some areas and to spontaneous vagal input in other areas (Barnas et al., 1978; Wang et al., 1992). Clearly, more investigation is needed into the role of the smooth muscle and how it might change under certain conditions. For example, in panting ostriches, air sac ventilation is very vigorous, but no respiratory alkalosis develops (Schmidt-Nielsen et al., 1969). This could be due to a shunting of blood away from the lung, but Jones (1982) found no significant redistribution of blood in the lung during panting. Therefore, ostriches must be shunting air away from gas exchange surfaces during panting, a finding that has yet to be explained (Maina et al., 2009).   The primary factor in determining the relative compliances of the air sacs is the relative size. We compare air sac volumes collected from the literature in Table 4.1. Obviously, volume varies depending on the pressure in the coelom, so we have compiled values for both functional residual capacity (FRC) and maximum inflation. Caudal air sacs are consistently larger than cranial air sacs, although Ponganis and colleagues (2015) found that caudal air sacs are smaller than cranial air sacs at functional residual capacity in Adelie and King penguins. This indicates than the compliance of the caudal 88  air sacs is much higher than that of the cranial air sacs, as there is a greater volume change for a given pressure change. According to Harvey and Ben-Tal (2016), this would cause the majority of air to pass through the parabronchi on expiration and increase the efficiency of unidirectional airflow. More studies investigating relative air sac size at functional residual capacity and maximum inflation are needed to understand whether this is consistently the case in the avian respiratory system.   Dubach (1981) hypothesized that active birds have a smaller air sac to lung ratio than less active birds. In avian taxa, air sac to lung volume ratio ranges from 3.71 to 21.2 at FRC, and from 2.62-15.7 at maximum capacity. In the species for which we have both FRC and maximal inflation data, the ratio approximately doubles from FRC to maximum capacity. We do find some support for the air sac to lung volume hypothesis. The smallest values are seen in active birds such as the ostrich, pigeon, and hummingbird, while species such as the domestic chicken have values approximately 3 to 5-fold larger.   Tracheal volumes Hinds and Calder (1971) complied tracheal volumes from 52 avian species across 24 families and found they scaled allometrically according to the equation: 𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 =  3.724 × 𝐵𝑜𝑑𝑦 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 1.090  Where tracheal volume is expressed in milliliters and body mass is expressed in kilograms. The tracheal volumes reported here are nearly all larger than predicted by the allometric equation—an average of 53% larger than predicted. This is primarily due 89  to the presence of large bullae on the syrinx of the males of several species studied here. The size of the trachea is a trade-off between minimizing ventilatory dead space and minimizing resistance to airflow. As mentioned previously, birds have longer tracheas than mammals of similar body masses (2.7-fold longer), but they have compensated for the increased resistance of long tracheas by increasing the radius 1.29-fold as compared to mammals (Hinds and Calder, 1971). The resistance in a tube is proportional to the radius raised to the fourth power, so any increase in tracheal radius greatly reduces resistance to airflow. Indeed, mammals and birds are hypothesized to have approximately equal tracheal resistance due to this compensation. However, because of the wider, longer trachea, birds are estimated to have 4.53-fold larger tracheal dead space volumes than similarly sized mammals, and, because they exhale actively, the dead space volume “costs” twice as much for a bird. Therefore, it is interesting to note than the majority of ducks studied here have increased this dead space volume even further, presumably due to sexual selection. A notable exception is the highland ruddy duck, whose tracheal dead space was 43% smaller than predicted by the allometric equation. The males of this species do not have syringeal bullae, and perhaps the constraints of a rapid recovery from diving have favored a small dead space volume at the cost of a high resistance, although as previously described these birds are not generally able to recover rapidly from dives. Another important observation from our data was that the tracheal volumes estimated by the CT scans were smaller than those predicted by the allometric equation, and, for Andean geese, the tracheal volume estimated by CT scan was approximately half that of the tracheal volumes measured during dissection. Unfortunately, we do not have 90  dissected tracheal volumes for the other two species, but future studies should verify the accuracy of the small volumes estimated with CT scans.  Avian respiratory mechanics We predicted that highland species would have higher compliance than lowland species, and we generally found this to be true, especially when compliance was normalized to body mass or to the size of the respiratory system. As expected, the compliance values we measured were higher than those reported in the literature for mammals and lower than the compliance values reported for non-avian sauropsids and turtles (see Table 4.2). The work of breathing we estimated was similar to those reported for mammals, but 2-3 orders of magnitude higher than those of non-avian sauropsids. Non-avian sauropsids have simple, sac-like lungs, which explain their high compliance and low work of breathing estimates. Mammals have complex lungs that are difficult to inflate, and therefore their compliance is generally low, and the work of breathing high. Birds seem to have fairly high compliance, as well as high work of breathing, and this is probably due to the high resistance to airflow in the avian respiratory system from the numerous small airways as compared to the mammalian respiratory system.  Cost of breathing In these studies, we were able to estimate the work of breathing associated with the actual breathing strategies used by the individual birds in normoxia and hypoxia. Failure to do this has caused problems during previous attempts to measure cost of breathing 91  in birds (Markley and Carrier, 2010). This is because manipulation of the breathing strategy can cause homeostatic imbalance, such as blood pH change, that requires active compensation by the bird making metabolic rate estimates unreliable. By temporally separating the measurements of ventilatory and metabolic responses in the awake bird and the work done to achieve those responses in the anesthetized bird we eliminate error from artificial manipulation. In addition, our work measurements can be applied to any past or future values of breathing frequency and tidal volume that might be measured in these birds.   This method also has disadvantages. The “work” of breathing we measure is only the work that must be done to actively inflate the relaxed respiratory system. When awake, birds both inspire and expire actively, therefore our measured work values should be doubled to estimate the work of a complete breath. Additionally, skeletal muscle in general is not 100% efficient, in fact, respiratory skeletal muscle is closer to 10% efficient: to apply one joule of work to the system, the muscle must do 10 joules of work (Otis et al., 1950). We therefore multiplied our work estimates by 20 to account for inspiration, expiration, and muscle efficiency. This was the same correction used by Lee and Milsom (2016) to estimate theoretical cost of breathing in red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans). To convert these corrected “work” values to metabolic “cost” values we calculated basal metabolic rate (BMR) by plugging the V̇O2 and V̇CO2 measured in each individual bird into the equation given by Romijn and Lokhorst (1966) for the metabolic catabolism of birds:  𝑘𝐽 =  16.19 × (𝐿 𝑂2)  +  5.00 × (𝐿 𝐶𝑂2) 92   Our estimated cost of breathing with these corrections can be compared for all fourteen species in Table 4.3. In normoxia, our estimates of cost of breathing range from 0.38% BMR in the bar-headed goose and lowland ruddy duck to 1.14% BMR in the mallard, and average 0.72% BMR. In hypoxia, the mallard is still highest using 15.7% of BMR simply to breathe. The Andean goose, which changed ventilation very little in hypoxia, has the lowest cost of breathing at 0.90%. The average cost of breathing in hypoxia is 3.5% BMR. These values are low, but within the general range reported in the literature of 1-10% BMR in vertebrates (Otis, 1950; Steffensen and Lomholt, 1983; Aaron et al., 1992; Skovgaard et al., 2016; Lee and Milsom, 2016). They are in agreement with the other two studies that estimate cost of breathing in birds: a rough 2% BMR by Ellerby and colleagues (2005) based on blood flow redistribution, and minimum of 1.43% running metabolism estimated by unidirectional artificial ventilation by Markley and Carrier (2010). Both of these studies were done on the guinea fowl (Numida meleagris). Thus, this thesis presents the first cost of breathing data measured from the avian order Anseriformes and the first estimate of cost of breathing in birds using this method.   93  Table 4.1: Air sac and lung volume measurements from the literature and this study. Values are expressed as mean ± SE. Cranial air sacs include cervical, clavicular, and craniothoracic air sacs. Caudal airs sacs include caudothoracic air sacs and abdominal air sacs. Pneumatic spaces are for the vertebrae only.   AThis study BKrautwald-Junghanns et al, 1998 CDubach, 1981 DVictorow, 1909 ECampana, 1875 FZeuthen, 1942 GKing and Payne, 1958 HKing and Payne, 1962 ISchmidt-Nielsen et al, 1969 JPonganis et al., 2015 * Volumes expressed as % of trunk volume, not total body volume 94    Mb Vb Lung mass Lung vol Lung mass Lung vol Total air sac vol Air sac vol Air sac to lung Cranial air sacs vol Caudal air sac vol Caudal to cranial Tracheal vol Pneumatic spaces MethodCitation  Species g mL g mL % Mb % Vb mL % Vb Vol ratio mL mL Vol ratio mL mL   FRC Estimates Amazons and grey parrots Amazona and Psittacus 356.6 ± 50   10.23 ± 1.74  4.62%* 37 ± 10.4 16.7%* 3.7      CTB Adelie penguins           Pygoscelis adeliae 4,630 ± 456 4,400 ± 1000  115 ± 8  2.61% 306 ± 100 6.95% 2.7 194.5 111.3 0.57 12 ± 3.2  CTJ King penguins             Aptenodytes patagonicus 13,430 ± 425 13,250 ± 650  252 ± 20  1.90% 536 ± 50 4.05% 2.1 271.8 263.8 0.97 50 ± 13.3  CTJ Emperor penguins Aptenodytes forsteri 21,460 ± 845 21,000 ± 2000  353 ± 24  1.68% 1,528 ± 200 7.28% 4.3 607.3 921 1.52 72 ± 7.1  CTJ Torrent duck           Merganetta armatta 425 ± 11.6  4.97 ± 0.37 5.74 ± 0.76 1.35%        1.23 ± 0.11  Fluid immersionunpub Bar-headed goose          Anser indicus 2,770 ± 100 1,756 ± 112 27 ± 2 74 ± 5 0.98% 4.21% 348 ± 28 ###### 4.7    8 ± 0.9 5 ± 0.3 CTA Andean goose       Chloephaga melanoptera 2,290 ± 200 1,422 24 ± 1.1 92 1.07% 6.47% 409 ###### 4.4    5.6 6.4 CTA Barnacle goose               Branta leucopsis 2,380 ± 200 1,430 ± 36 21 ± 3 46 ± 0.2 0.88% 3.22% 190 ± 4 ###### 4.1    4.7 ± 0.02 3.2 ± 0.2 CTA    95     Mb Vb Lung mass Lung vol Lung mass Lung vol Total air sac vol Air sac vol Air sac to lung Cranial air sacs vol Caudal air sac vol Caudal to cranial Tracheal vol Pneumatic spaces MethodCitation  Species g mL g mL % Mb % Vb mL % Vb Vol ratio mL mL Vol ratio mL mL   Maximal inflation estimates House sparrow               Passer domesticus 23.56 ± 1.82 34.05 ± 1.81 0.27 ± 0.08 0.8 ± 0.1 1.14% 2.35% 5.76 ± 0.9 16.90% 7.2 2.15 ± 0.29 3.61 ± 0.72 1.68 0.08 ± 0.01 0.08 ± 0.02 Silicone castC Budgerigar            Melopasittacus undulatus 38.16 ± 5 46.08 ± 5.66 0.31 ± 0.04 1.11 ± 0.16 0.85% 2.40% 5.0 ± 1.31 10.85% 4.5 2.45 ± 0.66 2.55 ± 0.74 1.04 0.10 ± 0.02 0.17 ± 0.09 Silicone castC Violet-eared hummingbird Colibri coruscans 7.28 ± 1.16 9.29 ± 0.88 0.1 0.27 ± 0.05 1.37% 2.91% 1.59 ± 0.43 17.12% 5.9 0.53 ± 0.15 1.06 ± 0.29 2 0.05 ± 0.01 0.08 ± 0.03 Silicone castC Rock pigeon                  Columba livia    15   49-60  3.2 16 33-44 2-2.75   Wax castD Domestic chicken           Gallus gallus domesticus  1,600   21.9   287.8  13.1 83.4 204.4 2.45   Cocoa butter injectionE Domestic chicken           Gallus gallus domesticus    6   94  15.7 26 68 2.62   Wax castF Domestic chicken           Gallus gallus domesticus    24   358  14.9 86 272 3.16   Latex castG Domestic chicken           Gallus gallus domesticus 3,300   52.5   342  6.5 170 172 1.01   Resin castH Ostrich                             Struthio camelus 1 x10⁵   3,000   7,870  2.6 1,450 3,420 2.36   Gelatin castsI Adelie penguins           Pygoscelis adeliae 4,630 ± 456 5,750 ± 1000  120 ± 7  2.09% 1,243 ± 136 21.62% 10.4 441 802 1.82   CTJ King penguins             Aptenodytes patagonicus 13,430 ± 425 18,800 ± 1000  310 ± 15  1.65% 4,950 ± 304 26.33% 16.0 1,666 3,283 1.97   CTJ Emperor penguins Aptenodytes forsteri 21,460 ± 845 28,000 ± 2500  425 ± 40  1.52% 7,462 ± 88 26.65% 17.6 3,005 4,457 1.48   CTJ Bar-headed goose          Anser indicus 2,770 ± 100 1,777 ± 114 27 ± 2 83 ± 7 0.98% 4.67% 707 ± 1 39.79% 8.5    8 ± 0.9 5 ± 0.3 CTA Andean goose       Chloephaga melanoptera 2,290 ± 200 1,422 24.5 ± 1 103 1.07% 7.24% 722 50.77% 7.0    5.6 6.4 CTA Barnacle goose               Branta leucopsis 2,380 ± 200 1,448 ± 32 21 ± 3 51 ± 1 0.88% 3.52% 491 ± 19 33.91% 9.6    4.7 ± 0.02 3.2 ± 0.2 CTA 96  Table 4.2: Respiratory mechanics comparison table. *Work values are estimates of breathing at rest in normoxia. Species Mb Total respiratory capacity Vital capacity Tracheal vol Static Compliance Static Compliance Minute elastic work* Minute total work* Citation  g mL mL mL mL cm H2O-1 mL cm H2O-1 kg-1 J min-1 kg-1 J min-1 kg-1  Birds                   Mallard                                           Anas platyrhynchos  249.4       Dehner, 1946 Mallard                                                Anas platyrhynchos 932 ± 21  330 ± 19 6 ± 0.1 14.3 ± 1.27 15.3 ± 1.4  0.189 ± 0.022 This study Black duck                                              Anas rubripes  236.7       Dehner, 1946 Greater scaup                                  Nyroca marila  198.3       Dehner, 1946 Red-head                                         Nyroca americana  201.1       Dehner, 1946 Rock pigeon                        Columba livia     76.52  6.76 x10-4  Perry and Duncker, 1980 Bar-headed goose                    Anser indicus 2770 ± 100 798 ± 9 615 ± 36  29.4 ± 1.9 10.6 ± 0.7  0.0537 ± 0.0033 This study Andean goose                Chloephaga melanoptera 2290 ± 200 831 758 ± 27  32.3 ± 1.5 14.1 ± 0.7  0.0662 ± 0.002 This study Barnacle goose                               Branta leucopsis 2380 ± 200 547 ± 20 452 ± 19  23.0 ± 1.5 9.66 ± 0.6  0.0708 ± 0.0064 This study Puna teal                                            Anas puna 396± 15  157 ± 4 1.9 ± 0.3 8.70 ± 0.23 22 ± 0.6  0.1149 ± 0.01 This study Speckled teal                                     Anas flavirostris 278± 9  132 ± 3 1.3 ± 0.3 7.09 ± 0.24 28 ± 0.9  0.182 ± 0.01 This study Ruddy duck (highland)                 Oxyura jamaicensis ferruginea 772 ± 51  193 ± 6 1.6 ± 0.1 9.71 ± 0.74 12.6 ± 1  0.155 ± 0.01 This study Yellow-billed pintail                          Anas georgica 628± 20  234 ± 6 2.8 ± 0.4 12.9 ± 0.60 20.5 ± 1  0.137 ± 0.01 This study Cinnamon teal (highland)                Anas cyanoptera orinomus 440± 13  159 ± 4 2.6 ± 0.3 8.48 ± 0.30 19.3 ± 0.7  0.182 ± 0.003 This study Green-winged teal                              Anas crecca 283± 10  94 ± 3 1.3 ± 0.3 4.41 ± 0.31 15.6 ± 1.1  0.237 ± 0.01 This study Ruddy duck (lowland)             Oxyura jamaicensis jamaicensis 476 ± 32  153 ± 7 1.4 ± 0.2 6.97 ± 0.69 14.6 ± 1.5  0.0803 ± 0.01 This study Northern pintail                                               Anas acuta 867± 12  249 ± 10 4.9 ± 0.2 11.8 ± 0.83 13.6 ± 1  0.0936 ± 0.01 This study Cinnamon teal (lowland)                Anas cyanoptera septentrionalium 300 ± 13  104 ± 4 1.8 ± 0.2 4.87 ± 0.32 16.2 ± 1.1  0.257 ± 0.01 This study Gadwall                                                  Anas strepera 766 ± 40  284 ± 10 5.4 ± 0.4 11.5 ± 0.68 15 ± 0.9  0.131 ± 0.01 This study   97  Species Mb Total respiratory capacity Vital capacity Tracheal vol Static Compliance Static Compliance Minute elastic work* Minute total work* Citation  g mL mL mL mL cm H2O-1 mL cm H2O-1 kg-1 J min-1 kg-1 J min-1 kg-1  Non-avian sauropsids and turtles                   Green lizard                                Lacerta viridis 29    1.74 60 5.15 x10-5  Perry and Duncker, 1978 Monitor lizard                            Varanus exanthematicus 249    88.76 356.5 1.456 x10-4  Perry and Duncker, 1978 Monitor lizard                                Varanus gouldii 249      4.036 x10-5  Perry and Duncker, 1978 Turtle                                Pseudemys scripta 275    72.25 262.7 2.344 x10-4  Jackson, 1971           Mammals                   Rat                                            Rattus norwegicus 403    1.29 3.2 0.0403  Perry and Duncker, 1980 Rat                                            Rattus norwegicus 423 ± 16    1.56 ± 0.2 3.69   Bennett and Tenney, 1982 Rat                                            Rattus norwegicus 250    0.3 1.2 0.118  Crosfill and Widdicombe, 1961 Dog                                            Canis lupus familiaris 26000    156.2 ± 60 6.01   Bennett and Tenney, 1982 Rabbit                                            Oryctolagus cuniculus 2520 ± 46    8.58 ± 1 3.4   Bennett and Tenney, 1982 Mouse                                                      Mus musculus 26 ±0.6    0.097 ± 0.02 3.73   Bennett and Tenney, 1982 Cat                                                        Felis catus 2980± 398    28.9 ± 2.62 9.7   Bennett and Tenney, 1982 Cat                                                        Felis catus 4700± 500    20.4 ± 5 4.34 ± 1   Kochi et al., 1988    98  Table 4.3: Cost of breathing estimates for all fourteen species studied. Measured work of breathing was multiplied by 20 to correct for active expiration and muscle efficiency (see text). BMR (basal metabolic rate) was calculated from the equation given by Romijn and Lokhorst, 1966. 99   Normoxia              Hypoxia      18% O2      13% O2      6% O2      BMR Work of breathing Cost of breathing  BMR Work of breathing Cost of breathing  BMR Work of breathing Cost of breathing Species J min-1 kg-1 J min-1 kg-1 % BMR  J min-1 kg-1 J min-1 kg-1 % BMR  J min-1 kg-1 J min-1 kg-1 % BMR Puna teal     361 0.11 0.64%  307 0.245 1.60% Speckled teal     373 0.18 0.98%  395 0.503 2.56% Ruddy duck     304 0.15 1.02%  284 0.346 2.44% Yellow-billed pintail     334 0.14 0.82%  336 0.357 2.12% Cinnamon teal     352 0.18 1.04%  350 0.267 1.52% Green-winged teal 466 0.23 0.96%  534 0.24 0.88%  467 0.374 1.60% Lowland ruddy duck 323 0.07 0.42%  431 0.08 0.38%  525 1.135 4.32% Northern pintail 279 0.07 0.52%  346 0.09 0.54%  300 0.312 2.08% Lowland cinnamon teal 452 0.20 0.88%  531 0.26 0.96%  480 0.653 2.72% Mallard 282 0.13 0.90%  334 0.19 1.14%  373 2.925 15.68% Gadwall 432 0.13 0.58%  477 0.13 0.54%  414 0.414 2.00%              21% O2      14% O2      5% O2     Bar-headed goose 276 0.054 0.38%      430 0.815 3.80% Andean goose     195 0.066 0.68%  262 0.118 0.90% Barnacle goose 183 0.071 0.78%      286 0.832 5.82% 100  References  Aaron, E.A., Seow, K.C., Johnson, B.D., and Dempsey, J.A. (1992). Oxygen cost of exercise hyperpnea: implications for performance. Journal of Applied Physiology. 72 (5): 1818-1825.  Akester, A.R. (1960). The comparative anatomy of the respiratory pathways in the domestic fowl (Gallus domesticus), pigeon (Columba livia), and domestic duck (Anas platyrhyncha). Journal of Anatomy. 94 (4): 487-505.  Barnas, G.M., Mather, F.B., and Fedde, M.R. (1978). Response of avian intrapulmonary smooth muscle to changes in carbon dioxide concentration. Poultry Science. 57: 1400-1407.  Baumel, J.J., Wilson, J.A., and Bergren, D.R. (1990). The ventilatory movements of the avian pelvis and tail: function of the muscles of the tail region of the pigeon (Columba livia). Journal of Experimental Biology. 151: 263-277.  Bennett, F.M. and Tenney, S.M. (1982). Comparative mechanics of mammalian respiratory system. Respiration Physiology. 49: 131-140.  Bernhard, W., Gebert, A., Vieten, G., Rau, G.A., Hohlfeld, J.M., Postle, A.D., and Freihorst, J. (2001). Pulmonary surfactant in birds: coping with surface tension in a tubular lung. American Journal of Physiology: Regulatory, Integrative, and Comparative Physiology. 281: R327-R337.  Bensen, R.B.J., Bulter, R.J., Carrano, M.T., and O’Connor, P.M. (2012). Air-filled postcranial bones in theropod dinosaurs: physiological implications and the ‘reptile’-bird transition. Biological Reviews. 87: 168-193.   Black, C.P. and Tenney, S.M. (1980). Oxygen-transport during progressive hypoxia in high-altitude and sea-level waterfowl. Respiration Physiology. 39: 217-239.  Brainerd, E.L. and Owerkowicz, T. (2006). Functional morphology and evolution of aspiration breathing in tetrapods. Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology. 154: 73-88.   Butler, P.J., Woakes, A.J., and Bishop, C.M. (1998). Behavior and physiology of Svalbard barnacle geese Branta leucopsis during their autumn migration. Journal of Avian Biology. 29: 536-545.  Campana, A. (1875). Anatomie de l’appareil pneumatique-pulmonaire, etc., chez le poulet. Paris: Masson.  Cieri, R.L. and Farmer, C.G. (2016). Unidirectional pulmonary airflow in vertebrates: a review of structure, function, and evolution. Journal of Comparative Physiology B. DOI: 10.1007/s00360-016-0983-3. 101   Codd, J.R. (2010). Uncinate processes in birds: morphology, physiology and function. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A. 156: 303-308.  Codd, J.R., Boggs, D.F., Perry, S.F., and Carrier, D.R. (2005). Activity of three muscles associated with the uncinate processes of the giant Canada goose Branta canadensis maximus. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 208: 849-857.  Claessens, L.P.A.M. (2009). The skeletal kinematics of lung ventilation in three basal bird taxa (emu, tinamou, and guinea fowl). Journal of Experimental Zoology. 311A: 586-599.  Claessens, L.P.A.M., O’Connor, P.M., and Unwin, D.M. (2009). Respiratory evolution facilitated the origin of pterosaur flight and aerial giantism. PLoS ONE. 4 (2): e4497.  Crosfill, M.L. and Widdicombe, J.G. (1961). Physical characteristics of the chest and lungs and the work of breathing in different mammalian species. Journal of Physiology. 158: 1-14.  Dehner, E. (1946). An apparatus for determining the respiratory volume of large aquatic birds. Science. 103 (2667): 171-172.  Dial, K.P., Goslow, G.E. Jr., and Jenkinds, F.A. Jr. (1991). The functional anatomy of the shoulder in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Journal of Morphology. 207: 327-344.   Dubach, M. (1981). Quantitative analysis of the respiratory system of the house sparrow, budgerigar and violet-eared hummingbird. Respiration Physiology. 46: 43-60.  Duncker, H.R. (1971). The lung air sac system of birds: a contribution to the functional anatomy of the respiratory apparatus. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.  Duncker, H.R. (1972). Structure of avian lungs. Respiration Physiology. 14: 44-63.  Duncker, H.R. (1977). Development of the avian respiratory and circulatory systems. In: Respiratory Function in Birds, Adult and Embryonic. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer-Verlag. pp 260-273.  Dzal, Y.A., Jenkins, S.E., Lague, S., Reichert, M., York, J.M., and Pamenter, M.E. (2015). Oxygen in demand: how oxygen has shaped vertebrate physiology. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular and Integrative Physiology. 186: 4-26.   Ellerby, D.J., Henry, H.T., Carr, J.A., Buchanan, C.I., and Marsh, R.L. (2005). Blood flow in guinea fowl Numida meleagris as an indicator of energy expenditure by individual muscles during walking and running. Journal of Physiology. 564 (2): 631-648. 102   Greenewalt, C.H. (1962). Dimensional relationships for flying animals. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections. 144 (2): 1-46.  Groebbels, F. (1932). Der vogel: bau, funktion, lebenserscheinung, einpassung. Berlin: Gebrüder Borntraeger. pp. 181.  Gonzalez, J., Düttman, H., and Wink, M. (2009). Phylogenetic relationships based on two mitochondrial genes and hybridization patterns in Anatidae. Journal of Zoology. 279: 310-318.  Gumpenberger, M. and Henninger, W. (2001). The use of computed tomography in avian and reptile medicine. Seminars in Avian and Exotic Pet Medicine. 10 (4): 174-180.  Harvey, E.P. and Ben-Tal, A. (2016). Robust unidirectional airflow through avian lungs: new insights from a piecewise linear mathematical model. PLoS Computational Biology. 12 (2). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004637.  Hawkes, L.A., Balachandran, S., Batbayar, N., Butler, P.J., Chua, B., Douglas, D.C., Frappell, P.B., Hou, Y., Milsom, W.K., Newman, S.H., Prosser, D.J., Sathiyaselvam, P., Scott, G.R., Takekawa, J.Y., Natsagdorj, T., Wikelski, M., Witt, M.J., Yan, B., and Bishop, C.M. (2012). The paradox of extreme high-altitude migration in bar-headed geese Anser indicus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 280 (1750). DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.2114  Hillenius, W.J. and Ruben, J.A. (2004). The evolution of endothermy in terrestrial vertebrates: Who? When? Why? Physiological and Biochemical Zoology: Ecological and Evolutionary Approaches. 77 (6): 1019-1042.   Hochachka, P.W. (1985). Exercise limitation at high altitude: the metabolic problem and search for its solution. In Circulation, Respiration, and Metabolism (ed. G.R. Berlin). 240-249. Germany: Springer-Verlag.  Hinds, D.S. and Calder, W.A. (1971). Tracheal dead space in the respiration of birds. Evolution. 25 (2): 429-440.  Jackson, D.C. (1971). The effect of temperature on ventilation in the turtle, Pseudemys scripta elegans. Respiration Physiology. 12: 131-140.  Jaensch, S.M., Cullen, L., and Raidal, S.R. (2002). Air sac functional anatomy of the sulphur-crested cockatoo (Cacatua galerita) during isoflurane anesthesia. Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery. 16 (1): 2-9.  Jenkin, S.E.M. and Milsom, W.K. (2014). Expiration: breathings other face. In Progress in Brain Research: Breathing, emotion and evolution. (eds. Holstege, G., Beers, C.M., and Subramanian, H.H.) Amsterdam: Elsevier. Vol 212: 131-147. 103   Jones, J.H. (1982). Pulmonary blood flow distribution in panting ostriches. Journal of Applied Physiology: Respiratory, Environmental, and Exercise Physiology. 53 (6): 1411-1417.  Jones, J.H., Effmann, E.L., Schmidt-Nielsen, K. (1985). Lung volume changes during respiration in ducks. Respiration Physiology. 59: 15-25.   Jonker, R.M., Kraus, R.H.S., Zhang, Q., van Hooft, P., Larsson, K., van der Jeugd, H.P., Kurvers, R.H.J.M., van Wieren, S.E., Loonen, M.J.J.E., Crooijmans, R.P.M.A, Ydenberg, R.C., Groenen, M.A.M., and Prins, H.H.T. (2013). Genetic consequences of breaking migratory traditions in barnacle geese Branta leucopsis. Molecular Ecology. 22: 5855-5947.   King, A.S. (1966). Structural and functional aspects of the avian lungs and air sacs. In: International Review of General and Experimental Zoology. (eds. Felts, W.J. and Harrison, R.J.) New York, London: Academic Press.  King. A.S. and Payne, D.C. (1958). The volumes of the lungs and air sacs in Gallus domesticus. Journal of Anatomy. 92: 656.  King, A.S. and Payne, D.C. (1962). The maximum capacities of the lungs and air sacs of Gallus domesticus. Journal of Anatomy. 96 (4): 495-508.  King, A.S. and Payne, D.C. (1964). Normal breathing and the effects of posture in Gallus domesticus. Journal of Physiology. 174: 340-347.  Klein, W. and Codd, J.R. (2010). Breathing and locomotion: comparative anatomy, morphology and function. Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology. 173S: S26-S32.  Kochi, T., Okubo, S., Zin, W.A., and Milic-Emili, J. (1988). Flow and volume dependence of pulmonary mechanics in anesthetized cats. Journal of Applied Physiology. 64 (1): 441-450.  Krautwald-Junghanns, M.E., Schumacher, F., Tellhelm, B. (1993). Evaluation of the lower respiratory tract in psittacines using radiology and computer tomography. Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound. 34 (3): 382-390.  Krautwald-Junghanns, M.E., Valerius, K.P., Duncker, H.R., and Sohn, H.G. (1998). CT-assisted versus silicone rubber cast morphometry of the lower respiratory tract in healthy amazons (genus Amazona) and grey parrots (genus Psittacus). Research in Veterinary Science. 65: 17-22.  Krogh, A. (1941). The comparative physiology of respiratory mechanics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.   104  Lasiewski, R.C. and Calder, W.A. (1971). A preliminary allometric analysis of respiratory variables in resting birds. Respiration Physiology. 11: 152-166.  Lee, S.Y. and Milsom, W.K. (2016). The metabolic cost of breathing in red-eared sliders: an attempt to resolve an old controversy. Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology. 224: 114-124.  Maina, J.N. (1984). Morphometrics of the avian lung: the structural design of the passerine lung. Respiration Physiology. 55: 291-307.  Maina, J.N. (1987). Morphometrics of the avian lung: the structural design of the charadriiform lung. Respiration Physiology. 68: 99-119.   Maina, J.N. (2002). Some recent advances on the study and understanding of the functional design of the avian lung: morphological and morphometric perspectives. Biology Reviews. 77: 97-152.  Maina, J.N. (2005). The lung-air sac system of birds: development, structure, and  function. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.  Maina, J.N. (2015). Structural and biomechanical properties of the exchange tissue of the avian lung. The Anatomical Record. 298: 1673-1688.  Maina, J.N. and King, A.S. (1982). Morphometrics of the avian lung: the wild mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) and greylag goose (Anser anser). Respiration Physiology. 50: 299-310.  Maina, J.N. and King, A.S. (1989). The lung of the emu, Dromaius novaehollandiae: a microscopic and morphometric study. Journal of Anatomy. 163: 67-73.  Maina, J.N. and Nathaniel, C. (2001). A qualitative and quantitative study of the lung of an ostrich, Struthio camelus. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 204: 2313-2330.  Maina, J.N., Singh, P., and Moss, E.A. (2009). Inspiratory aerodynamic valving occurs in the ostrich, Struthio camelus lung: a computational fluid dynamics study under resting unsteady state inhalation. Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology. 169: 262-270.  Malka, S., Hawkins, M.G., Jones, J.H., Pascoe, P.J., Kass, P.H., and Wisner, E.R. (2009). Effect of body position on respiratory system volumes in anesthetized red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) as measured via computed tomography. American Journal of Veterinary Research. 70 (9): 1155-1160.   Manville, R.H. (1963). Altitude record for a mallard. The Wilson Bulletin. 75 (1): 92.   105  Markley, J.S. and Carrier, D.R. (2010). The cost of ventilation in birds measured via unidirectional artificial ventilation. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A. 155: 146-153.  McCracken, K.G., Barger, C.P., Bulgarella, M., Johnson, K.P., Kuhner, M.K., Moore, A.V., Peters, J.L., Trucco, J., Valqui, T.H., Winker, K., and Wilson, R.E. (2009a). Signatures of high-altitude adaptation in the major hemoglobin of five species of Andean dabbling ducks. The American Naturalist. 174 (5): 631-650.  McCracken, K.G., Barger, C.P., and Sorenson, M.D. (2010). Phylogenetic and structural analysis of the HbA (αA/βA) and HbD (αD/βA) hemoglobin genes in two high-altitude waterfowl from the Himalayas and the Andes: bar-headed goose (Anser indicus) and Andean goose (Chloephaga melanoptera). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 56: 649-658.  McCracken, K.G., Bulgarella, M., Johnson, K.P., Kuhner, M.K., Trucco, J., Valqui, T.H., Wilson, R.E., and Peters, J.L. (2009b). Gene flow in the face of countervailing selection: adaptation to high-altitude hypoxia in the βA hemoglobin subunit of yellow-billed pintails in the Andes. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 26 (4): 815-827.  McCracken, K.G. and Sorenson, M.D. (2005). Is homoplasy or lineage sorting the source of incongruent mtDNA and nuclear gene trees in the stiff-tailed ducks (Nomonyx-Oxyura)? Systematic Biology. 54 (1): 35-55.  Mead, J. (1961). Mechanical properties of the lungs. Physiological Reviews. 41 (2): 281-330.   Milsom, W.K. and Vitalis, T.Z. (1984). Pulmonary mechanics and the work of breathing in the lizard, Gekko gecko. Journal of Experimental Biology. 113: 187-202.  Monge, C. and Leon-Velarde, F. (1991). Physiological adaptation to high altitude: oxygen transport in birds and mammals. Physiological Reviews. 71 (4): 1135-1172.  Mulcahy, D.M. (2007). Free-living waterfowl and shorebirds. In: Zoo Animal and Wildlife Immobilization and Anesthesia. (eds. West, G., Heard, D., and Caulkett, N.) 2: 299-324.  Newell, S.M., Roberts, G.D., and Bennett, R.A. (1997). Imaging techniques for avian lower respiratory diseases. Seminars in Avian and Exotic Pet Medicine. 6 (4): 180-186.  O’Connor, P.M. (2006). Postcranial pneumaticity: an evaluation of soft-tissue influences on the postcranial skeleton and the reconstruction of pulmonary anatomy in archosaurs. Journal of Morphology. 267: 1199-1226.   Orosz, S.E. and Toal, R.L. (1992). Tomographic anatomy of the golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine. 23 (1): 39-46.   106  Otis, A.B., Fenn, W.O., and Hermann, R. (1950). Mechanics of breathing in man. Journal of Applied Physiology. 2: 592-607.  Perry, S.F. (1990). Recent advances and trends in the comparative morphometry of vertebrate gas exchange organs. In Advances in Comparative and Environmental Physiology. (ed. Boutilier, R.G.) Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. Vol 6: 45-65.  Perry, S.F. (1998). Lungs: comparative anatomy, functional morphology, and evolution. In Biology of the Reptilia. (eds. Gans, C. and Gaunt, A.S.) Ithaca: Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptilians. Vol 19: 1-92.  Perry, S.F. and Duncker, H.R. (1978). Lung architecture, volume and static mechanics in five species of lizards. Respiration Physiology. 34: 61-81.  Perry, S.F. and Duncker, H.R. (1980). Interrelationship of static mechanical factors and anatomical structure in lung evolution. Journal of Comparative Physiology. 138: 321-334.  Perry, S.F. and Sander, M. (2004). Reconstructing the evolution of the respiratory apparatus in tetrapods. Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology. 144: 125-139.  Petnehazy, O., Benczik, J., Takacs, I., Petrasi, Z., Suto, Z., Horn, P., and Repa, I. (2012). Computed tomographical (CT) anatomy of the thoracoabdominal cavity of the male turkey. (Meleagris gallopavo). Journal of Veterinary Medicine C: Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia. 41: 12-20.  Ponganis, P.J., St Leger, J., and Scadeng, M. (2015). Penguin lungs and air sacs: implications for baroprotection, oxygen stores and buoyancy. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 218: 720-730.   Portugal, S.J., Thorpe, S.K.S., Green, J.A., Myatt, J.P., and Butler, P.J. (2009). Testing the use/disuse hypothesis: pectoral and leg muscle changes in captive barnacle geese Branta leucopsis during wing moult. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 212: 2403-2410.  Powell, F.L. and Mazzone, R.W. (1983). Morphometrics of rapid frozen goose lungs. Respiration Physiology. 51: 319-332.  Powell, F.L., Milsom, W.K., and Mitchell, G.S. (1998). Time domains of the hypoxic ventilatory response. Respiration Physiology. 112: 123-134.  Romijn, C. and Lokhorst, W. (1966). Heat regulation and energy metabolism in the domestic fowl. In: Physiology of the Domestic Fowl. (eds. Horton-Smith, C. and Amoroso, E.C.) Edinburgh, London: Oliver & Boyd Ltd.  107  Sander, P.M., Christian, A., Clauss, M., Fechner, R., Gee, C.T., Griebeler, E.M., Gunga, H.C., Hummel, J., Mallison, H., Perry, S.F., Preuschoft, H., Rauhut, O.W.M., Remes, K., Tütken, T., Wings, O., Witzel, U. (2011). Biology of the sauropod dinosaurs: the evolution of gigantism. Biological Reviews. 86: 117-155.  Scheid, P. and Piiper, J. (1969). Volume, ventilation, and compliance of the respiratory system in the domestic fowl. Respiration Physiology. 6: 298-308.  Scheid, P. and Piiper, J. (1971). Direct measurement of the pathway of respired gas in duck lungs. Respiration Physiology. 11: 308-314.  Scherle, W. (1970). A simple method for volumetry of organs in quantitative stereology. Mikroscopie. 26: 57-60.  Schmidt-Nielsen, K., Kanwisher, J., Lasiewski, R.C., Cohn, J.E. (1969). Temperature regulation and respiration in the ostrich. The Condor. 71 (4): 341-352.  Scott, G.R. and Milsom, W.K. (2007). Control of breathing and adaptation to high altitude in the bar-headed goose. American Journal of Physiology: Regulatory, Integrative, and Comparative Physiology. 293: R379-R391.  Scott, G.R., Hawkes, L.A., Frappell, P.B., Butler, P.J., Bishop, C.M., and Milsom, W.K. (2015). How bar-headed geese fly over the Himalayas. Physiology. 30: 107-115.  Scott, G.R., Schulte, P.M., Egginton, S., Scott, A.L.M., Richards, J.G., and Milsom, W.K. (2011). Molecular evolution of cytochrome c oxidase underlies high-altitude adaptation in the bar-headed goose. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 28: 351-363.   Sereno, P.C. (1999). The evolution of dinosaurs. Science. 284 (5423): 2137-2147.  Skovgaard, N., Crossley, D.A., and Wang, T. (2016). Low cost of pulmonary ventilation in American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) stimulated with doxpram. Journal of Experimental Biology. 219: 933-936.   Steen, J.B. (1971). Comparative Physiology of Respiratory Mechanisms. London, New York: Academic Press.   Steffensen, J.F. and Lomholt, J.P. (1983). Energetic cost of active branchial ventilation in the sharksucker, Echeneis naucrates. Journal of Experimental Biology. 103: 185-192.  Storz, J.F. and Moriyama, H. (2008). Mechanisms of hemoglobin adaptation to high altitude hypoxia. High Altitude Medicine and Biology. 9 (2): 148-157.  Swan, L.W. (1961). The ecology of the high Himalayas. Scientific American. 205: 68-78.  108  Tickle, P.G., Nudds, R.L., and Codd, J.R. (2012). Barnacle geese achieve significant energy savings by changing posture. PLoS One. 7 (10): e46950.  Tickle, P.G., Richardson, M.F., and Codd, J.R. (2010). Load carrying during locomotion in the barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis): the effect of load placement and size. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A. 156: 309-317.  Timmwood, K.I., Hyde, D.M., and Plopper, C.G. (1987). Lung growth of the turkey, Meleagris gallopavo: morphologic and morphometric description. The American Journal of Anatomy. 178: 144-157.  Urushikubo, A., Nakamura, M., and Hirahara, H. (2013). Effects of air sac compliances on flow in the parabronchi: computational fluid dynamics using an anatomically simplified model of an avian respiratory system. Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering. 6: 483-492.   Victorow, C. (1909). Die kühlende wirkung der luftsäacke bei vögeln. Archiv für die gesammte Physiologie des Menschen und der Thiere. 126: 300.  Vidyadaran, M.K., King, A.S., and Kassim, H. (1988). Quantitative studies of the lung of the domestic fowl (Gallus gallus var. domesticus). Pertanika. 11 (2): 229-238.  Vidyadaran, M.K., King, A.S., and Kassim, H. (1990). Quantitative comparisons of lung structure of adult domestic fowl and red jungle fowl, with reference to broiler ascites. Avian Pathology. 19 (1): 51-58.  Vitalis, T.A. and Milsom, W.K. (1986). Pulmonary mechanics and the work of breathing in the semi-aquatic turtle Pseudemys scripta. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 125: 137-155.   Wang, N., Banzett, R.B., Nations, C.S., and Jenkins, F.A. (1992). An aerodynamic valve in the avian primary bronchus. The Journal of Experimental Zoology. 262: 441-445.   Watson, R.R., Fu, Z., and West, J.B. (2007). Morphometry of the extremely thin pulmonary blood-gas barrier in the chicken lung. American Journal of Physiology: Lung, Cellular, and Molecular Physiology. 292: L769-L777.  Wedel, M.J. (2003). The evolution of vertebral pneumaticity in sauropod dinosaurs. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 23 (2): 344-357.  Wedel, M.J. (2006). Origin of postcranial skeletal pneumaticity in dinosaurs. Integrative Zoology. 2: 80-85.   Wedel, M.J. (2009). Evidence for bird-like air sacs in saurischian dinosaurs. Journal of Experimental Zoology. 311A: 611-628.  109  Zeuthen, E. (1942). The ventilation of the respiratory tract in birds. Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. 17 (1): 1-50.    110  Appendix Table 5.1: Equations for frequency isopleth lines used to generate data. Note that elastic work is expressed as log10(elastic work).   111    Compliance  Tau   Log (Elastic work)  Resistive work   mL cm H2O-1  seconds   Joules   Joules  Species Freq Slope Intercept  Slope Intercept  Slope Intercept  Slope Intercept Puna teal 20 -0.14088 5.4186  -0.0132 1.24145  0.08567 -3.30864  0.000422 -0.00241 30 -0.22314 5.25868  -0.0431 1.3483  0.11532 -3.57393  0.000671 -0.00372 40 -0.21137 4.46678  -0.0413 1.19125  0.12534 -3.5419  0.000974 -0.00516 50 -0.16059 3.34279  -0.0516 1.21639  0.12716 -3.39819  0.0011 -0.00435 60 -0.15882 2.89905  -0.0487 1.03967  0.14594 -3.48033  0.0012 -0.00374              Speckled teal 20 -0.25558 7.02079  -0.0962 2.69017  0.09567 -3.62765  0.000392 -0.00219 30 -0.18189 4.70644  -0.0488 1.47918  0.10301 -3.54716  0.000372 -0.00074 40 -0.13748 3.61482  -0.046 1.3011  0.09528 -3.34426  0.000301 0.0013 50 -0.09241 2.67448  -0.0398 1.13024  0.0991 -3.30296  0.000516 0.000563 60 -0.08918 2.29918  -0.0427 1.04757  0.10001 -3.18192  0.000519 0.00182              Ruddy duck (highland) 20 -0.03659 3.17204  -0.0449 1.8595  0.1205 -3.37661  0.000911 -0.0033 30 -0.10101 3.74843  -0.0354 1.39383  0.12516 -3.37969  0.00142 -0.00604 40 -0.06624 2.78955  -0.0359 1.27898  0.1227 -3.2485  0.0019 -0.00751 50 -0.08222 2.62436  -0.0323 1.09125  0.10994 -3.07804  0.0017 -0.0047 60 -0.09479 2.56817  -0.0264 0.9179  0.12659 -3.22544  0.0015 -0.00361              Yellow-billed pintail 20 -0.19367 7.34621  -0.0134 1.38518  0.1269 -3.55208  0.000379 -0.00115 30 -0.19391 5.41647  -0.0008 0.869  0.13943 -3.4998  0.000961 -0.00386 40 -0.25811 5.17671  0.00322 0.68819  0.15206 -3.48219  0.00125 -0.0046 50 -0.28031 4.813  -0.037 1.03048  0.16519 -3.48311  0.0017 -0.00598 60 -0.27066 4.06368  -0.0298 0.85126  0.18746 -3.53038  0.00204 -0.00673              Cinnamon teal (highland) 20 -0.176 6.07228  -0.0483 1.9004  0.11891 -4.193  0.000217 0.000564 30 -0.09335 3.85885  -0.0328 1.3173  0.10282 -3.42399  0.00064 -0.00358 40 -0.13518 3.78623  -0.0359 1.20556  0.11261 -3.44285  0.000978 -0.00563 50 -0.1561 3.55338  -0.0406 1.18712  0.12806 -3.50829  0.000764 -0.00264 60 -0.1614 3.20883  -0.0323 0.99597  0.13215 -3.4319  0.00104 -0.00387              Green-winged teal 20 -0.08636 3.66463  -0.0046 1.57524  0.05718 -3.19342  0.000116 0.000315 30 -0.08618 3.15194  -0.0493 1.596  0.07419 -3.40704  0.000257 -0.00076 40 -0.10426 3.07119  -0.0278 1.18682  0.0925 -3.56108  0.000578 -0.00372 50 -0.05999 2.02437  -0.0505 1.26139  0.07917 -3.21392  0.000417 0.000142 60 -0.03155 1.45774  -0.0484 1.11779  0.06701 -2.98753                 Lowland ruddy duck 20 -0.13407 4.54491  -0.0356 1.69509  0.09015 -3.32055  0.000775 -0.00525 30 -0.10823 3.30096  -0.0402 1.48895  0.10544 -3.35968  0.00128 -0.00707 40 -0.13934 3.24693  -0.0594 1.57322  0.12127 -3.41213  0.00167 -0.00863 50 -0.10842 2.55283  -0.0493 1.31386  0.11656 -3.28398  0.00249 -0.01345 60 -0.14215 2.54226  -0.0735 1.42141  0.13594 -3.32945  0.00241 -0.01052              Northern pintail 20 0.02813 4.19927  -0.0227 1.41165  0.09708 -3.13595  0.000699 -0.00298 30 -0.10759 4.88717  -0.0123 1.02636  0.14131 -3.42291  0.000989 -0.00352 40 -0.2347 4.91717  -0.0284 1.01913  0.15354 -3.43217  0.00153 -0.00558 50 -0.29027 4.66899  -0.0464 1.09919  0.18765 -3.58578  0.00191 -0.00653 60 -0.34139 4.68514  -0.0448 0.97013  0.19389 -3.52639  0.00257 -0.00889              Lowland cinnamon teal 20 -0.12245 4.40648  -0.0153 1.25255  0.06029 -3.19468  0.000195 -0.00111 30 -0.10462 3.43797  -0.0043 1.02203  0.08116 -3.45881  0.000272 -0.00083 40 -0.09118 2.73044  -0.0165 0.95115  0.09384 -3.48706  0.000483 -0.00248 50 -0.09029 2.4177  -0.029 0.95148  0.09736 -3.41752  0.000549 -0.00162 60 -0.04088 1.58265  -0.0565 1.08345  0.08798 -3.21149  0.000879 -0.00406              Mallard 20 0.15811 4.23218  0.00471 1.02858  0.11795 -3.16781  0.000791 -0.00296 30 -0.04533 4.72927  -0.0089 0.87202  0.13158 -3.18147  0.00157 -0.00672 40 -0.32329 6.0298  -0.0457 1.06034  0.17792 -3.40605  0.00229 -0.0096 50 -0.2822 4.92293  -0.0631 1.12095  0.18339 -3.34631  0.00289 -0.01129 60 -0.27826 4.41005  -0.0637 1.01917  0.18465 -3.28613  0.00319 -0.0115              Gadwall 20 0.02246 5.38243  0.00682 1.09305  0.12766 -3.33979  0.000719 -0.00304 30 -0.12242 5.3849  0.00684 0.82912  0.15209 -3.46048  0.00109 -0.00383 40 -0.28042 5.55778  0.0016 0.77051  0.17757 -3.53474  0.00192 -0.00738 50 -0.42774 6.064  -0.0468 1.03025  0.19966 -3.5783  0.00221 -0.00765 60 -0.41336 5.27063  -0.0546 0.99916  0.22288 -3.63347                                                        112    Compliance  Tau  Log(Elastic work)  Resistive work   mL cm H2O-1  seconds  Joules  Joules Species Freq Slope Intercept  Slope Intercept  Slope Intercept  Slope Intercept Bar-headed goose 20 -0.04068 18.42  -0.0025 1.461  0.0104 -2.53  0.00049 -0.02003 30 -0.10184 19.86  -0.0063 1.472  0.01427 -2.72  0.00065 -0.02182 40 -0.12022 17.8  -0.0086 1.449  0.01706 -2.77  0.00097 -0.03481 50 -0.08987 13.34  -0.0081 1.272  0.01582 -2.54  0.00108 -0.0336 60 -0.15023 16.12  -0.0098 1.274  0.01943 -2.72  0.00104 -0.02637              Andean goose 20 0.04974 18.5  0.00467 0.67971  0.00983 -2.64671  0.000188 -0.00635 30 -0.01783 21.5  0.00111 0.88418  0.01144 -2.70401  0.00038 -0.01494 40 -0.06157 21.45  -0.0017 1  0.01276 -2.72614  0.000594 -0.0237 50 -0.0604 18.51  -0.0013 0.8559  0.01418 -2.74101  0.000708 -0.02558 60 -0.08523 18.9  -0.0037 1.00205  0.01433 -2.65043  0.000878 -0.03045              Barnacle goose 20 -0.02664 12.9  -0.0023 1.79892  0.01374 -2.64603  0.000806 -0.02879 30 -0.07809 13.2  -0.0078 1.77684  0.01748 -2.73557  0.0012 -0.03999 40 -0.06671 10.3  -0.0096 1.67794  0.01873 -2.66092  0.00171 -0.05712 50 -0.06701 8.7  -0.0102 1.48377  0.01765 -2.42713  0.0015 -0.02755 60             

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.24.1-0307458/manifest

Comment

Related Items