Reply to Rico-Guevara and Rubega: Nectar loading in hummingbirds
Our article (1) provided a rationale for the vast volume of biological data (20 species of birds, bats, and insects) on optimal nectar concentrations measured in a laboratory setting. The comment of Rico-Guevara and Rubega (2) bears on our footnote, where the relative importance of nectar transport...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | en_US |
| Published: |
National Academy of Sciences (U.S.)
2013
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/76723 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7936-7256 |
| Summary: | Our article (1) provided a rationale for the vast volume of biological data (20 species of birds, bats, and insects) on optimal nectar concentrations measured in a laboratory setting. The comment of Rico-Guevara and Rubega (2) bears on our footnote, where the relative importance of nectar transport via trapping and capillary rise in the specific case of hummingbird feeding is briefly touched on. The point of their comment is evidently to contest the fact that hummingbirds use capillary suction, so as to defend their claim to the contrary (3). |
|---|