From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

Intriguing article in Nature (25 March 2026):
"Oxygen supply through the tracheolarrComuscle system does not constrain insect gigantism"
E.P. Snelling et al.

They argue that an increase in tracheolar space with body size is so
small (1.8-fold increase over a 10,000-fold increase in body weight)
that diffusive oxygen transport would not constrain maximum body size.

But I have seen only the abstract.
--
Mark Isaak
"Wisdom begins when you discover the difference between 'That
doesn't make sense' and 'I don't understand.'" - Mary Doria Russell

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

On 27/03/2026 21:10, Mark Isaak wrote:

Oxygen supply through the tracheolarrComuscle system does not constrain insect gigantism

According to the abstract the claim is based on paleontology. But there
are other ways to test the claim: test different insects in different atmospheres.

The claim does not meet that the thacheolar-muscle system sets to limit
to the size of insects. It merely means that someting else sets limits
it to even smaller. Possibilities include competition with smaller
insects and other animals as well as visibility to various predators.
--
Mikko
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> wrote:

Intriguing article in Nature (25 March 2026):
"Oxygen supply through the tracheolar?muscle system does not constrain insect gigantism"
E.P. Snelling et al.

They argue that an increase in tracheolar space with body size is so
small (1.8-fold increase over a 10,000-fold increase in body weight)
that diffusive oxygen transport would not constrain maximum body size.

But I have seen only the abstract.

At some point it has to... it is simple math.

--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

On 3/29/26 18:11, Ruben Safir wrote:

Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> wrote:

Intriguing article in Nature (25 March 2026):
"Oxygen supply through the tracheolar?muscle system does not constrain
insect gigantism"
E.P. Snelling et al.

They argue that an increase in tracheolar space with body size is so
small (1.8-fold increase over a 10,000-fold increase in body weight)
that diffusive oxygen transport would not constrain maximum body size.

But I have seen only the abstract.

At some point it has to... it is simple math.

So there are chelicerates and there is mandibulata.

Trilobites were neither chelicerates nor mandibulata?

Wikipedia is growing more and more evil throughout time.

If I type in the words 'Paleozoic Oxygenation Event'
it does not nicely say 'you can edit' and 'this is
how to create the page' but instantly screams 'Auto
de fe'.

So double checking, there were no air breathing land
trilobites?




--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

On 3/29/26 11:46 PM, x wrote:

On 3/29/26 18:11, Ruben Safir wrote:

Mark Isaak <specimenNOSPAM@curioustaxon.omy.net> wrote:

Intriguing article in Nature (25 March 2026):
"Oxygen supply through the tracheolar?muscle system does not constrain
insect gigantism"
E.P. Snelling et al.

They argue that an increase in tracheolar space with body size is so
small (1.8-fold increase over a 10,000-fold increase in body weight)
that diffusive oxygen transport would not constrain maximum body size.

But I have seen only the abstract.

At some point it has to... it is simple math.

So there are chelicerates and there is mandibulata.

Trilobites were neither chelicerates nor mandibulata?

Wikipedia is growing more and more evil throughout time.

If I type in the words 'Paleozoic Oxygenation Event'
it does not nicely say 'you can edit' and 'this is
how to create the page' but instantly screams 'Auto
de fe'.

So double checking, there were no air breathing land
trilobites?

https://www.palaeocast.com/insect-gigantism/
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2