Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Data on various features influencing resource acquisition and allocation of energy in Soricidae are reviewed. The relationships between these features are examined at the three functional levels that constrain the energetic design of shrews: the maintenance of homeostasis (rate of metabolism and temperature regulation), the balancing of the energy budget (e.g. the influence of body mass, activity rate, various energy saving mechanisms and home range size), and the allocation of energy towards reproduction (e.g. the influence of litter size). Two major contradictory energetic designs may be recognized: one rather expensive design that is observed in cold and temperate climates with relatively predictable fluctuations in resource availability (e.g. in Sorex and Neomys), and another much less expensive design that is observed mainly in warm or unpredictable environments (e.g. in Crocidura, Suncus and Notiosorex). It is speculated that climate and resource availability impose narrow limits on the evolution of these energetic strategies, mainly because of the small thermal inertia and reduced energetic autonomy of shrews.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michel Genoud (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: