Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review
  • Published:

Some mathematical and technical issues in the measurement and interpretation of open-circuit indirect calorimetry in small animals

International Journal of Obesity volume 30, pages 1322–1331 (2006)Cite this article

Abstract

Indirect calorimetry is increasingly used to investigate why compounds or genetic manipulations affect body weight or composition in small animals. This review introduces the principles of indirect (primarily open-circuit) calorimetry and explains some common misunderstandings. It is not widely understood that in open-circuit systems in which carbon dioxide (CO2) is not removed from the air leaving the respiratory chamber, measurement of airflow out of the chamber and its oxygen (O2) content paradoxically allows a more reliable estimate of energy expenditure (EE) than of O2 consumption. If the CO2 content of the exiting air is also measured, both O2 consumption and CO2 production, and hence respiratory quotient (RQ), can be calculated. Respiratory quotient coupled with nitrogen excretion allows the calculation of the relative combustion of the macronutrients only if measurements are over a period where interconversions of macronutrients that alter their pool sizes can be ignored. Changes in rates of O2 consumption and CO2 production are not instantly reflected in changes in the concentrations of O2 and CO2 in the air leaving the respiratory chamber. Consequently, unless air-flow is high and chamber size is small, or rates of change of O2 and CO2 concentrations are included in the calculations, maxima and minima are underestimated and will appear later than their real times. It is widely appreciated that bigger animals with more body tissue will expend more energy than smaller animals. A major issue is how to compare animals correcting for such differences in body size. Comparison of the EE or O2 consumption per gram body weight of lean and obese animals is misleading because tissues vary in their energy requirements or in how they influence EE in other ways. Moreover, the contribution of fat to EE is lower than that of lean tissue. Use of metabolic mass for normalisation, based on interspecific scaling exponents (0.75 or 0.66), is similarly flawed. It is best to use analysis of covariance to determine the relationship of EE to body mass or fat-free mass within each group, and then test whether this relationship differs between groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Weir JB . New methods for calculating metabolic rate with special reference to protein metabolism. J Physiol 1949; 109: 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Even PC, Mokhtarian A, Pele A . Practical aspects of indirect calorimetry in laboratory animals. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1994; 18: 435–447.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jequier E, Felber JP . Indirect calorimetry. Baillieres Clin Endocrinol Metab 1987; 1: 911–935.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ferrannini E . The theoretical bases of indirect calorimetry: a review. Metabolism 1988; 37: 287–301.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ravussin E, Lillioja S, Anderson TE, Christin L, Bogardus C . Determinants of 24-h energy expenditure in man. Methods and results using a respiratory chamber. J Clin Invest 1986; 78: 1568–1578.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Simonson DC, DeFronzo RA . Indirect calorimetry: methodological and interpretative problems. Am J Physiol 1990; 258: E399–E412.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. McArdle WD, Katch FI, Katch VL . Exercise Physiology: Energy Nutrition and Human Performance. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Baltimore, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Slonim NB, Bender NR . Environmental Physiology. CV Mosby Co.: St Louis, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Koteja P . Measuring energy expenditure metabolism with open-flow respirometric systems: which design to choose. Funct Ecol 1996; 10: 675–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Speakman JR . The cost of living: field metabolic rates of small mammals. Adv Ecol Res 2000; 30: 177–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Stocker C, O'Dowd J, Morton NM, Wargent E, Sennitt MV, Hislop D et al. Modulation of susceptibility to weight gain and insulin resistance in low birthweight rats by treatment of their mothers with leptin during pregnancy and lactation. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2004; 28: 129–136.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Stock MJ . Gluttony and thermogenesis revisited. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1999; 23: 1105–1117.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Jackson DM, Trayhurn P, Speakman JR . Associations between energetics and over-winter survival in the short-tailed field vole Microtus agrestis. J Anim Ecol 2001; 70: 633–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rubner M . Uber den Einfluss der Körpergrosse auf Stöff- und Kraftwechsel. Z Fur Biol 1883; 19: 535–562.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Himms-Hagen J . On raising energy expenditure in ob/ob mice. Science 1997; 276: 1132–1133.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kleiber M . Body size and metabolism. Hilgardia 1932; 6: 315–353.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ . The fourth dimension of life: fractal geometry and allometric scaling of organisms. Science 1999; 284: 1677–1679.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. White CR, Seymour RS . Mammalian basal metabolic rate is proportional to body mass2/3. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100: 4046–4049.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kozlowski J, Konarzewski M . Is West, Brown and Enquist's model of allometric scaling mathematically correct and biologically relevant? Funct Ecol 2004; 18: 283–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kozlowski J, Konarzewski M, Gawelczyk AT . Cell size as a link between noncoding DNA and metabolic rate scaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003; 100: 14080–14085.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Weibel ER, Hoppeler H . Exercise-induced maximal metabolic rate scales with muscle aerobic capacity. J Exp Biol 2005; 208: 1635–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Elia M . Organ and tissue contributions to metabolic rate. In: Kinney JM,Tucker HN (eds). Energy Metabolism: Tissue Determinants and Cellular Corollaries. Raven: New York, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Speakman JR . Body Composition Analysis in Animals: A Handbook of Non-Destructive Methods. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2001.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Selman C, Lumsden S, Bunger L, Hill WG, Speakman JR . Resting metabolic rate and morphology in mice (Mus musculus) selected for high and low food intake. J Exp Biol 2001; 204: 777–784.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Speakman JR, Johnson MS . Relationships between resting metabolic rate and morphology in lactating mice: what tissues are the major contributors to resting metabolism?. In: Heldmaier G, Klingenspor M (eds). Life in the Cold. Springer: Berlin, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Garrow JS, Webster J . Are pre-obese people energy thrifty? Lancet 1985; 1: 670–671.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Nelson KM, Weinsier RL, Long CL, Schutz Y . Prediction of resting energy expenditure from fat-free mass and fat mass. Am J Clin Nutr 1992; 56: 848–856.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Bitz C, Toubro S, Larsen TM, Harder H, Rennie KL, Jebb SA et al. Increased 24-h energy expenditure in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2004; 27: 2416–2421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wang Z, Heshka S, Gallagher D, Boozer CN, Kotler DP, Heymsfield SB . Resting energy expenditure-fat-free mass relationship: new insights provided by body composition modeling. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2000; 279: E539–E545.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Heymsfield SB, Gallagher D, Kotler DP, Wang Z, Allison DB, Heshka S . Body-size dependence of resting energy expenditure can be attributed to nonenergetic homogeneity of fat-free mass. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2002; 282: E132–E138.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Packard GC, Boardman TJ . The misuse of ratios, indices, and percentages in ecophysiological research. Physiol Zool 1988; 61: 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Packard GC, Boardman TJ . The use of percentages and size-specific indices to normalise physiological data for variation in body size: wasted time wasted effort? Comp Biochem Physiol A 1999; 122: 37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. White CR . Allometric analysis beyond heterogeneous regression slopes: use of the Johnson–Neyman technique in comparative biology. Physiol Biochem Zool 2003; 76: 1509–1518.

    Google Scholar 

  34. MacLean PS, Higgins JA, Johnson GC, Fleming-Elder BK, Donahoo WT, Melanson EL et al. Enhanced metabolic efficiency contributes to weight regain after weight loss in obesity-prone rats. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 2004; 287: R1306–R1315.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Meyer CW, Klingenspor M, Rozman J, Heldmaier G . Gene or size: metabolic rate and body temperature in obese growth hormone-deficient dwarf mice. Obes Res 2004; 12: 1509–1518.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Prentice AM, Black AE, Coward WA, Davies HL, Goldberg GR, Murgatroyd PR et al. High levels of energy expenditure in obese women. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 1986; 292: 983–987.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Jebb SA . The nutrition society medical lecture. Obesity: from molecules to man. Proc Nutr Soc 1999; 58: 1–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Arch JR . Lessons in obesity from transgenic animals. J Endocrinol Invest 2002; 25: 867–875.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the support of Mike Cawthorne, who first introduced JA to indirect calorimetry and provided advice on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clore Laboratory, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, UK

    J R S Arch, D Hislop & S J Y Wang

  2. Aberdeen Centre for Energy Regulation and Obesity, School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK

    J R Speakman

Authors
  1. J R S Arch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D Hislop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S J Y Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J R Speakman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J R S Arch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arch, J., Hislop, D., Wang, S. et al. Some mathematical and technical issues in the measurement and interpretation of open-circuit indirect calorimetry in small animals. Int J Obes 30, 1322–1331 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijo.0803280

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijo.0803280

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links