Evolution of Muscle Activity Patterns Driving Motions of the Jaw and Hyoid during Chewing in Gnathostomes

Konow, Nicolai; Herrel, Anthony; Ross, Callum F.; Williams, Susan H.; German, Rebecca Z.; Sanford, Christopher P.; Gintof, Chris

doi:10.1093/icb/icr040

Cited by 21 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, electromyographic analyses (e.g. van der Leeuw et al, 2001;Herrel et al, 2008;Konow et al, 2011) seem required to fully unravel the role of the neck muscles during tooth-digging. Because of the complexity of the cervical system, the role of each of the fourteen neck muscles during tooth-digging remains unclear (Bekele, 1983b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kinematics of chisel-tooth digging by African mole-rats

Wassenbergh

Heindryckx

Adriaens

2017

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mole-rats are known to use their protruding, chisel-like incisors to dig underground networks of tunnels, but it remains unknown how these incisors are used to break and displace the soil. Theoretically, different excavation strategies can be used. Mole-rats could either use their head depressor muscles to power scooping motions of the upper incisors (by nose-down head rotations) or the lower incisors (by nose-up head rotations), or their jaw adductors to grab and break the soil after penetrating both sets of incisors into the ground, or a combination of these mechanisms. To identify how chisel-tooth digging works, a kinematic analysis of this behaviour was performed based on high-speed videos of 19 individuals from the African mole-rat species placed inside transparent tubes in a laboratory setting. Our analysis showed that the soil is penetrated by both the upper and lower incisors at a relatively high gape angle, generally with the head rotated nose-up. Initially, the upper incisors remain approximately stationary to function as an anchor to allow an upward movement of the lower incisors to grab the soil. Next, a quick, nose-down rotation of the head further detaches the soil and drops the soil below the head. Consequently, both jaw adduction and head depression are jointly used to power tooth-digging in The same mechanism, but with longer digging cycles, and soil being thrown down at smaller gape sizes, was used when digging in harder soil.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kinematics of chisel-tooth digging by African mole-rats

Wassenbergh

Heindryckx

Adriaens

2017

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Modulation of feeding behavior by recombination of modular neuromotor components may have the advantage of allowing an animal to adjust its behavior in response to changing circumstances (Deban et al, 2001;Konow et al, 2011), without the need for a fundamental change in motor program. Accordingly, analogs to the feeding behavior of the Alpine newt can be found in other vertebrate groups that undergo aquatic-terrestrial transitions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Masters of change: seasonal plasticity in the prey-capture behavior of the Alpine newtIchthyosaura alpestris(Salamandridae)

Heiss

Aerts

Wassenbergh

2013

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYTransitions between aquatic and terrestrial environments are significant steps in vertebrate evolution. These transitions require major changes in many biological functions, including food uptake and transport. The Alpine newt, Ichthyosaura alpestris, is known to show a 'multiphasic lifestyle' where the adult shifts from a terrestrial to an aquatic lifestyle and then back to a terrestrial lifestyle every year as a result of its breeding activity. These transitions correspond to dramatic changes in morphology, physiology and behavior, resulting in distinct aquatic and terrestrial morphotypes. We hypothesized that these shifts go along with changes in prey-capture mechanics to maintain a sufficiently high performance in both environments. We analyzed the preycapture kinematics in the four possible modes: aquatic strikes in the aquatic phase, terrestrial strikes in the terrestrial phase, aquatic strikes in the terrestrial phase and terrestrial strikes in the aquatic phase. A multivariate comparison detected significant kinematic differences between the phase-specific feeding modes. In both the aquatic and the terrestrial phase, I. alpestris uses a suction-feeding mechanism for capturing prey in water. By contrast, I. alpestris uses a jaw-based grasping mechanism with a kinematic profile similar to the aquatic modes for terrestrial prey-capture in its aquatic phase but an elaborate lingual-based prehension mechanism to capture terrestrial prey in the terrestrial phase. These results exhibit a so-far unknown amount of behavioral plasticity in prey-capture behavior that is tuned to the seasonal demands of performance, and exemplify functional mechanisms behind aquatic-terrestrial transitions in vertebrates.

show abstract

“…This realization underscores the ubiquity of prey processing across the jaw-bearing vertebrates (Gintof et al 2010;Konow et al 2011). Our study revealed that neoteleost prey processing is not necessarily governed by a pharyngeal jaw apparatus.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…A wide variety of prey-processing behaviours are governed by three different feeding mechanisms in aquatic feeding vertebrates (Table 1): the anterior-most mandibular or oral jaw apparatus governs chewing, which likely is a generalized gnathostome trait (Lauder 1981;Gintof et al 2010;Konow et al 2011). Some basal teleosts, including salmonids (Salmoniformes) and bony-tongues (Osteoglossomorpha) have a tongue-bite apparatus, used in raking prey-processing behaviours Lauder 1989, 1990; Konow and Sanford 2008a, b;Konow et al 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prey processing in the Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens)

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied prey processing in the Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens), involving slow, easily observed head-bobbing movements, which were compared with prey processing in other aquatic feeding vertebrates. We hypothesized that head-bobbing is a unique prey-processing behaviour, which alternatively could be structurally and functionally analogous with raking in basal teleosts, or with pharyngognathy in neoteleosts. Modulation of head-bobbing was elicited by prey with different motility and toughness. Head-bobbing involved sustained mouth occlusion and pronounced cranial elevation, similar to raking. However, the hyoid and pectoral girdle were protracted, and not retracted as in both raking and pharyngognathy. High-speed videofluoroscopy of hyoid movements confirmed that head-bobbing differs from other known aquatic prey-processing behaviours. Nevertheless, head-bobbing and other prey-processing behaviours converge on a recurrent functional theme in the trophic ecology of aquatic feeding vertebrates; the use of intraoral and oropharyngeal dentition surfaces to immobilize, reduce and process relatively large, tough or motile prey. Prey processing outside the pharyngeal region has not been described for neoteleosts previously, but morphological evidence suggests that relatives of Betta might use similar processing behaviours. Thus, our results suggest that pharyngognathy did not out-compete ancestral prey-processing mechanisms completely during the evolution of neoteleosts.

show abstract

Evolution of Muscle Activity Patterns Driving Motions of the Jaw and Hyoid during Chewing in Gnathostomes

Cited by 21 publications

References 75 publications

Kinematics of chisel-tooth digging by African mole-rats

Kinematics of chisel-tooth digging by African mole-rats

Masters of change: seasonal plasticity in the prey-capture behavior of the Alpine newtIchthyosaura alpestris(Salamandridae)

Prey processing in the Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About