Mechanisms for eliminating monoterpenes of sagebrush by specialist and generalist rabbits.

Pygmy rabbits (Brachylagus idahoensis) are one of only three vertebrates that subsist virtually exclusively on sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), which contains high levels of monoterpenes that can be toxic. We examined the mechanisms used by specialist pygmy rabbits to eliminate 1,8-cineole, a monoterpene of sagebrush, and compared them with those of cottontail rabbits (Sylvilagus nuttalli), a generalist herbivore. Rabbits were offered food pellets with increasing concentrations of cineole, and we measured voluntary intake and excretion of cineole metabolites in feces and urine. We expected pygmy rabbits to consume more, but excrete cineole more rapidly by using less-energetically expensive methods of detoxification than cottontails. Pygmy rabbits consumed 3-5 times more cineole than cottontails relative to their metabolic body mass, and excreted up to 2 times more cineole metabolites in their urine than did cottontails. Urinary metabolites excreted by pygmy rabbits were 20 % more highly-oxidized and 6 times less-conjugated than those of cottontails. Twenty percent of all cineole metabolites recovered from pygmy rabbits were in feces, whereas cottontails did not excrete fecal metabolites. When compared to other mammals that consume cineole, pygmy rabbits voluntarily consumed more, and excreted more cineole metabolites in feces, but they excreted less oxidized and more conjugated cineole metabolites in urine. Pygmy rabbits seem to have a greater capacity to minimize systemic exposure to cineole than do cottontails, and other cineole-consumers, by minimizing absorption and maximizing detoxification of ingested cineole. However, mechanisms that lower systemic exposure to cineole may come with a higher energetic cost in pygmy rabbits than in other mammalian herbivores.

The impact of protein quality on stable nitrogen isotope ratio discrimination and assimilated diet estimation.

Accurately predicting isotopic discrimination is central to estimating assimilated diets of wild animals when using stable isotopes. Current mixing models assume that the stable N isotope ratio (delta(15)N) discrimination (Delta(15)N) for each food in a mixed diet is constant and independent of other foods being consumed. Thus, the discrimination value for the mixed diet is the combined, weighted average for each food when consumed as the sole diet. However, if protein quality is a major determinant of Delta(15)N, discrimination values for mixed diets may be higher or lower than the weighted average and will reflect the protein quality of the entire diet and not that of the individual foods. This potential difference occurs because the protein quality of a mixed diet depends on whether, and to what extent, the profiles and amounts of essential amino acids in the individual foods are complementary or non-complementary to each other in meeting the animal's requirement. We tested these ideas by determining the Delta(15)N of several common foods (corn, wheat, alfalfa, soybean, and fish meal) with known amino acid profiles when fed singly and in combination to laboratory rats. Discrimination values for the mixed diets often differed from the weighted averages for the individual foods and depended on the degree of complementation. Delta(15)N for mixed diets ranged from 1.1 per thousand lower than the weighted average for foods with complementary amino acid profiles to 0.4 per thousand higher for foods with non-complementary amino acid profiles. These differences led to underestimates as high as 44% and overestimates as high as 36% of the relative proportions of fish meal and soybean meal N, respectively, in the assimilated mixed diets. We conclude that using isotopes to estimate assimilated diets is more complex than often appreciated and will require developing more biologically based, time-sensitive models.

The effect of dietary protein quality on nitrogen isotope discrimination in mammals and birds.

We tested the competing hypotheses that (1) nitrogen discrimination in mammals and birds increases with dietary nitrogen concentration or decreasing C:N ratios and, therefore, discrimination will increase with trophic level as carnivores ingest more protein than herbivores and omnivores or (2) nitrogen discrimination increases as dietary protein quality decreases and, therefore, discrimination will decrease with trophic level as carnivores ingest higher quality protein than do herbivores. Discrimination factors were summarized for five major diet groupings and 21 different species of birds and mammals. Discrimination did not differ between mammals and birds and decreased as protein quality (expressed as biological value) increased with trophic level (i.e., herbivores to carnivores). Relationships between discrimination factors and dietary nitrogen concentration or C:N ratios were either the opposite of what was hypothesized or non-significant. Dietary protein quality accounted for 72% of the variation in discrimination factors across diet groupings. We concluded that protein quality established the baseline for discrimination between dietary groupings, while other variables, such as dietary protein intake relative to animal requirements, created within-group variation. We caution about the care needed in developing studies to understand variation in discrimination and subsequently applying those discrimination factors to estimate assimilated diets of wild animals.

Dietary protein content alters energy expenditure and composition of the mass gain in grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis).

Many fruits contain high levels of available energy but very low levels of protein and other nutrients. The discrepancy between available energy and protein creates a physiological paradox for many animals consuming high-fruit diets, as they will be protein deficient if they eat to meet their minimum energy requirement. We fed young grizzly bears both high-energy pelleted and fruit diets containing from 1.6% to 15.4% protein to examine the role of diet-induced thermogenesis and fat synthesis in dealing with high-energy-low-protein diets. Digestible energy intake at mass maintenance increased 2.1 times, and composition of the gain changed from primarily lean mass to entirely fat when the protein content of the diet decreased from 15.4% to 1.6%. Daily fat gain was up to three times higher in bears fed low-protein diets ad lib., compared with bears consuming the higher-protein diet and gaining mass at the same rate. Thus, bears eating fruit can either consume other foods to increase dietary protein content and reduce energy expenditure, intake, and potentially foraging time or overeat high-fruit diets and use diet-induced thermogenesis and fat synthesis to deal with their skewed energy-to-protein ratio. These are not discrete options but a continuum that creates numerous solutions for balancing energy expenditure, intake, foraging time, fat accumulation, and ultimately fitness, depending on food availability, foraging efficiency, bear size, and body condition.