Search for: All records

Synopsis Fish perform many complex manipulation behaviors without hands or flexible muscular tongues, instead relying on more than 20 movable skeletal elements in their highly kinetic skulls. How fish use their skulls to accomplish these behaviors, however, remains unclear. Most previous mechanical models have represented the fish skull using one or more planar four-bar linkages, which have just a single degree of freedom (DoF). In contrast, truncated-cone hydrodynamic models have assumed up to five DoFs. In this study, we introduce and validate a 3D mechanical linkage model of a fish skull that incorporates the pectoral girdle and mandibular and hyoid arches. We validate this model using an in vivo motion dataset of suction feeding in channel catfish and then use this model to quantify the DoFs in the fish skull, to categorize the motion patterns of the cranial linkage during feeding, and to evaluate the association between these patterns and food motion. We find that the channel catfish skull functions as a 17-link, five-loop parallel mechanism. Despite having 19 potential DoFs, we find that seven DoFs are sufficient to describe most of the motion of the cranial linkage, consistent with the fish skull functioning as a multi-DoF, manipulation system. Channel catfish use this linkage to generate three different motion patterns (rostrocaudal wave, caudorostral wave, and compressive wave), each with its own associated food velocity profile. These results suggest that biomechanical manipulation systems must have a minimum number of DoFs to effectively control objects, whether in water or air. 

Synopsis In ray-finned fishes, the sternohyoideus (SH) is among the largest muscles in the head region and, based on its size, can potentially contribute to the overall power required for suction feeding. However, the function of the SH varies interspecifically. In largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and several clariid catfishes, the SH functions similarly to a stiff ligament. In these species, the SH remains isometric and transmitts power from the hypaxial musculature to the hyoid apparatus during suction feeding. Alternatively, the SH can shorten and contribute muscle power during suction feeding, a condition observed in the bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus) and one clariid catfish. An emerging hypothesis centers on SH muscle size as a predictor of function: in fishes with a large SH, the SH shortens during suction feeding, whereas in fish with a smaller SH, the muscle may remain isometric. Here, we studied striped surfperch (Embiotoca lateralis), a species in which the SH is relatively large at 8.8% of axial muscle mass compared with 4.0% for L. macrochirus and 1.7% for M. salmoides, to determine whether the SH shortens during suction feeding and is, therefore, bifunctional—both transmitting and generating power—or remains isometric and only transmits power. We measured skeletal kinematics of the neurocranium, urohyal, and cleithrum with Video Reconstruction of Moving Morphology, along with muscle strain and shortening velocity in the SH and epaxial muscles, using a new method of 3D external marker tracking. We found mean SH shortening during suction feeding strikes (n = 22 strikes from four individual E. lateralis) was 7.2 ± 0.55% (±SEM) of initial muscle length. Mean peak speed of shortening was 4.9 ± 0.65 lengths s−1, and maximum shortening speed occurred right around peak gape when peak power is generated in suction feeding. The cleithrum of E. lateralis retracts and depresses but the urohyal retracts and depresses even more, a strong indicator of a bifunctional SH capable of not only generating its own power but also transmitting hypaxial power to the hyoid. While power production in E. lateralis is still likely dominated by the axial musculature, since even the relatively large SH of E. lateralis is only 8.8% of axial muscle mass, the SH may contribute a meaningful amount of power given its continual shortening just prior to peak gape across all strikes. These results support the finding from other groups of fishes that a large SH muscle, relative to axial muscle mass, is likely to both generate and transmit power during suction feeding. 

Synopsis In frogs and salamanders, movements of the eyeballs in association with an open palate have often been proposed to play a functional role in lung breathing. In this “palatal buccal pump,” the eyeballs are elevated during the lowering of the buccal floor to suck air in through the nares, and the eyeballs are lowered during elevation of the buccal floor to help press air into the lungs. Here, we used X-Ray Reconstruction of Moving Morphology to investigate eye movements during lung breathing and feeding in bullfrogs and axolotls. Our data do not show eye movements that would be in accordance with the palatal buccal pump. On the contrary, there is a small passive elevation of the eyeballs when the buccal floor is raised. Inward drawing of the eyeballs occurs only during body motion and for prey transport in bullfrogs, but this was not observed in axolotls. Each eye movement in bullfrogs has a vertical, a mediolateral, and an anteroposterior component. Considering the surprisingly weak posterior motion component of the eyeballs, their main role in prey transport might be fixing the prey by pressing it against the buccal floor. The retraction of the buccal floor would then contribute to the posterior push of the prey. Because our study provides no evidence for a palatal buccal pump in frogs and salamanders, there is also no experimental support for the idea of a palatal buccal pump in extinct temnospondyl amphibians, in contrast to earlier suggestions. 

Synopsis Most predatory ray-finned fishes swallow their food whole, which can pose a significant challenge, given that prey items can be half as large as the predators themselves. How do fish transport captured food from the mouth to the stomach? Prior work indicates that, in general, fish use the pharyngeal jaws to manipulate food into the esophagus, where peristalsis is thought to take over. We used X-Ray Reconstruction of Moving Morphology to track prey transport in channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus). By reconstructing the 3D motions of both the food and the catfish, we were able to track how the catfish move food through the head and into the stomach. Food enters the oral cavity at high velocities as a continuation of suction and stops in the approximate location of the branchial basket before moving in a much slower, more complex path toward the esophagus. This slow phase coincides with little motion in the head and no substantial mouth opening or hyoid depression. Once the prey is in the esophagus, however, its transport is surprisingly tightly correlated with gulping motions (hyoid depression, girdle retraction, hypaxial shortening, and mouth opening) of the head. Although the transport mechanism itself remains unknown, to our knowledge, this is the first description of synchrony between cranial expansion and esophageal transport in a fish. Our results provide direct evidence of prey transport within the esophagus and suggest that peristalsis may not be the sole mechanism of esophageal transport in catfish.