![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
With the resolution of the uncited source, does anyone see a reason that the banner at the top of the page for additional citations should not be removed? -- Cwelsh3 ( talk) 01:22, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
I am considering deleting the sentence detailing how a respiratory quotient greater than 1 could indicate a state of preparing for hibernation, as I was not able to find the source for it anywhere, although if anyone has that source I would happily look it over.-- Cwelsh3 ( talk) 19:42, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
The change introduced by 19:08, 13 March 2009 128.143.65.71 is dubious. What is meant by "eliminated CO2"? Respiration doesn't "eliminate" any CO2.
In the article, the following is said, "A mixed diet of fat and carbohydrate results in an average value between these numbers. An RQ may rise above 1.0 for an organism burning carbohydrate to produce or "lay down" fat (for example, a bear preparing for hibernation)." However, the laying down of body fat would occur only due to an excessive consumption and absorption of calories. The calories consumed can come from either protein, fat or carbohydrate, and it doesn't matter; an excess of calories results in fat gain. What is this section of the article really trying to say? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.68.247 ( talk) 06:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I propose merging Respiratory exchange ratio into Respiratory ratio. I think the content in Respiratory exchange ratio can easily be explained in the context of Respiratory ratio, and a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Respiratory ratio. Jeaucques Quœure ( talk) 16:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
With the resolution of the uncited source, does anyone see a reason that the banner at the top of the page for additional citations should not be removed? -- Cwelsh3 ( talk) 01:22, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
I am considering deleting the sentence detailing how a respiratory quotient greater than 1 could indicate a state of preparing for hibernation, as I was not able to find the source for it anywhere, although if anyone has that source I would happily look it over.-- Cwelsh3 ( talk) 19:42, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
The change introduced by 19:08, 13 March 2009 128.143.65.71 is dubious. What is meant by "eliminated CO2"? Respiration doesn't "eliminate" any CO2.
In the article, the following is said, "A mixed diet of fat and carbohydrate results in an average value between these numbers. An RQ may rise above 1.0 for an organism burning carbohydrate to produce or "lay down" fat (for example, a bear preparing for hibernation)." However, the laying down of body fat would occur only due to an excessive consumption and absorption of calories. The calories consumed can come from either protein, fat or carbohydrate, and it doesn't matter; an excess of calories results in fat gain. What is this section of the article really trying to say? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.143.68.247 ( talk) 06:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I propose merging Respiratory exchange ratio into Respiratory ratio. I think the content in Respiratory exchange ratio can easily be explained in the context of Respiratory ratio, and a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Respiratory ratio. Jeaucques Quœure ( talk) 16:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)