The inner ear morphology and hearing abilities of the Paddlefish (Polyodon spathula) and the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens)

Lovell, J. M.; Findlay, Malcolm; Moate, Roy; Nedwell, J.R.; Pegg, Mark A.

doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2005.07.018

Cited by 44 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Holocephali (Retzius, 1881;de Burlet, 1934), lungfishes (Retzius, 1881;Platt et al, 2004), and non-actinopterygian teleosts (Popper, 1978;Popper and Northcutt, 1983;Mathiesen and Popper, 1987;Lovell et al, 2005) saccule and lagena form one pouch, whereas in the coelacanth Latimeria (Fritzsch, 1987(Fritzsch, , 2003, elasmobranchs (e.g., Retzius, 1881;Ladich and Popper, 2004), and teleosts (e.g., Ladich and Popper, 2004;Popper and Schilt, 2008) these otolith end organs form two interconnected sacs. The saccule is often the largest of the three otolith end organs ( Figures 1A-B, 2B-E), with teleost orders including Gobiiformes (Figure 2C; e.g., Retzius, 1881;Popper, 1981), Ophidiiformes (e.g., Parmentier et al, 2001Parmentier et al, , 2002Kéver et al, 2014), and Batrachoidiformes (e.g., Cohen and Winn, 1967) representing members with one of the largest saccules compared to the tiny utricle and lagena.…”

Section: Diversity In Gross Inner Ear Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In cartilaginous fishes (Figures 9A-B), sarcopterygians ( Figure 9C; Platt, 1994;Platt et al, 2004), non-teleost actinopterygians (Figures 9D-H; Popper, 1978;Popper and Northcutt, 1983;Mathiesen and Popper, 1987;Lovell et al, 2005), and teleosts (Figures 10A-H; for an overview see Platt and Popper, 1981b), the macula lagenae is crescent or half-moon FIGURE 6 | Overview of the diversity of macula shape and the orientation patterns of ciliary bundles on the macula sacculi in non-teleost fishes. The macula sacculi in non-teleost fishes shows two main orientation groups of ciliary bundles which are brought into a horizontal orientation by upwards curving of the anterior macula portion (B-H) except in rays (A).…”

Section: Macula Lagenaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rectangle in C indicates the striola region of the macula sacculi. Illustrations modified from Barber and Emerson (1980), Lovell et al (2005Lovell et al ( , 2007, Mathiesen and Popper (1987), Platt et al (2004), Popper (1978), and Popper and Northcutt (1983). a, anterior;d, dorsal. shaped and contains two main orientation groups.…”

Section: Macula Lagenaementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Arrows around the saccular and lagenar striola regions in (C) and around the macula in (E) indicate the orientation of ciliary bundles in regions with low densities of sensory hair cells. Illustrations modified from Popper (1978), Barber and Emerson (1980), Popper and Northcutt (1983), Mathiesen and Popper (1987), Platt et al (2004), and Lovell et al (2005. a, anterior; d, dorsal.…”

Section: Macula Neglectamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Diversity in Fish Auditory Systems: One of the Riddles of Sensory Biology

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An astonishing diversity of inner ears and accessory hearing structures (AHS) that can enhance hearing has evolved in fishes. Inner ears mainly differ in the size of the otolith end organs, the shape and orientation of the sensory epithelia, and the orientation patterns of ciliary bundles of sensory hair cells. Despite our profound morphological knowledge of inner ear variation, two main questions remain widely unanswered. (i) What selective forces and/or constraints led to the evolution of this inner ear diversity? (ii) How is the morphological variability linked to hearing abilities? Improved hearing is mainly based on the ability of many fish species to transmit oscillations of swim bladder walls or other gas-filled bladders to the inner ears. Swim bladders may be linked to the inner ears via a chain of ossicles (in otophysans), anterior extensions (e.g., some cichlids, squirrelfishes), or the gas bladders may touch the inner ears directly (labyrinth fishes). Studies on catfishes and cichlids demonstrate that larger swim bladders and more pronounced linkages to the inner ears positively affect both auditory sensitivities and the detectable frequency range, but lack of a connection does not exclude hearing enhancement. This diversity of auditory structures and hearing abilities is one of the main riddles in fish bioacoustics research. Hearing enhancement might have evolved to facilitate intraspecific acoustic communication. A comparison of sound-producing species, however, indicates that acoustic communication is widespread in taxa lacking AHS. Eco-acoustical constraints are a more likely explanation for the diversity in fish hearing sensitivities. Low ambient noise levels may have facilitated the evolution of AHS, enabling fish to detect low-level abiotic noise and sounds from con-and heterosopecifics, including predators and prey. Aquatic habitats differ in ambient noise regimes, and preliminary data indicate that hearing sensitivities of fishes vary accordingly.

show abstract

Section: Diversity In Gross Inner Ear Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Macula Lagenaementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Macula Lagenaementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Macula Neglectamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Diversity in Fish Auditory Systems: One of the Riddles of Sensory Biology

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, there is evidence that the lagena in otophysans, which is not directly connected to the swim bladder, only detects sounds to a few hundred Hz, and recent evidence suggests that the lagena in otophysans contributes to sound source localization for low-frequency sounds (Meyer et al, 2004). While research on sturgeon hearing is just beginning, auditory brainstem response (ABR) recordings indicate responses up to 500 Hz (Lovell et al, 2005), while preliminary results by Meyer et al (2005) using electrophysiological recordings from eighth nerve afferents showed phase locking up to 800 Hz. While the earliest literature suggested that the utricle is strictly a vestibular end organ (see Popper and Fay, 1999), there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that the utricle, at least in some species, is also involved in hearing (Popper and Tavolga, 1981;Lu et al, 2004).…”

Section: Differences In Hair Cell Myosin VI Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myosin VI and VIIa distribution among inner ear epithelia in diverse fishes

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unconventional myosins are critical motor proteins in the vertebrate inner ear. Mutations in any one of at least six different myosins can lead to human hereditary deafness, but the precise functions of these proteins in the ear are unknown. This study uses a comparative approach to better understand the role of myosins VI and VIIa in vertebrate ears by examining protein distribution for these two myosins in the ears of evolutionarily diverse fishes and the aquatic clawed toad Xenopus laevis. Both myosins are expressed in the inner ears of all species examined in this study. Myo7a localizes to hair cells, particularly the actin-rich hair bundle, in all species studied. Myo6 also localizes to hair cells, but its distribution differs between species and end organs. Myo6 is found in hair bundles of most fish and frog epithelia examined here but not in anterior and posterior utricular hair bundles of American shad. These results show that myo7a distribution is highly conserved in diverse vertebrates and suggest functional conservation as well. The finding of myo6 in fish and Xenopus hair bundles, however, suggests a novel role for this protein in anamniotic hair cells. The lack of myo6 in specific American shad utricular hair bundles indicates a unique quality of these cells among fishes, perhaps relating to ultrasound detection capability that is found in this species.

show abstract