An approach to Comparative Anatomy of the Acetabulum from Amphibians to Primates

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the anatomy, both macroscopic and microscopic, of the soft tissue internal structures of the hip joint in animal species and in three human hips (an adult and two fetuses). We dissected the hip joints of 16 species and compared the anatomical features of the soft tissue from the respective acetabula. In addition, a histological study was made of the specimens studied. In amphibians, we found a meniscus in the acetabulum, which was not observed in any of the other species studied. The isolated round ligament is observed from birds onwards. In the group of mammals analysed, including the human specimens, we found a meniscoid structure in the acetabular hip joint. Furthermore, we found that the meniscoid structure forms an anatomo-functional unit with the round ligament and the transverse ligament of the coxofemoral joint. These discoveries suggest the participation of the soft tissue anatomy in adaptative changes of species.

Articular soft tissue anatomy of the archosaur hip joint: Structural homology and functional implications

“…Meniscus-like structures have also been observed in the caudal acetabulum of amphibians and juvenile mammals (Canillas et al, 2011). Given this wide phylogenetic distribution of fibrous articular pads on the caudal acetabulum, the antitrochanter may be a plesiomorphic tetrapod feature, with subsequent losses in turtles and mammals.…”

Soft tissue influence onex vivomobility in the hip ofIguana: comparison within vivomovement and its bearing on joint motion of fossil sprawling tetrapods

“…1C-F). Moreover, lizard hip joints possess only a minor acetabular lip and lack several soft tissues (menisci, fibroadipose tissue, real transverse ligament) regularly found in mammals and birds (Canillas et al 2011). Unlike in crocodilians and dinosaurs, the squamate femur also has only a relatively thin layer of hyaline articular cartilage on its proximal condyle (Haines, 1969;Holliday et al 2010).…”

A geometric morphometric analysis of acetabular shape of the primate hip joint in relation to locomotor behaviour

“…Because joint morphology must reflect the types of motion permitted (Jungers, 1991;Lycett and von Cramon-Taubadel, 2013), it is reasonable to predict a tight biomechanical relationship between the size and shape of articular surfaces in primate postcranial joints and the most frequently used postures and movements. Despite this prediction, however, only a limited number of studies have analysed the morphological characteristics of the primate acetabulum from an anthropological perspective (Schultz, 1969;MacLatchy and Bossert, 1996;Canillas et al, 2011;Hogervorst et al, 2011;Bonneau, 2013;Hammond et al, 2013a). Although some anthropology-focused authors have analysed and contributed to the research on the morphology and variability of the human acetabulum (Havelock, 1893;Erickson et al, 2000;Rissech et al, 2001;Mafart, 2005;Bonneau et al, 2012), most of the information available has been obtained from studies conducted for medical purposes (Bullough et al, 1973;Müller-Gerbl et al, 1993;Feugier et al, 1997;Witte et al, 1997;Thompson et al, 2000;Gupta et al, 2001;Varodompun et al, 2002;Lavy et al, 2003;Leunig et al, 2003;Zilber et al, 2004;Govsa et al, 2005;Sampson, 2005;Tallroth and Lepist€ o, 2006;Ganz et al, 2008;Vandenbussche et al, 2008;K€ ohnlein et al, 2009;Krebs et al, 2009;Pollard et al, 2010;Nakahara et al, 2011;Zeng et al, 2012).…”