Search for: All records

Synopsis Armor is a multipurpose set of structures that has evolved independently at least 30 times in fishes. In addition to providing protection, armor can manipulate flow, increase camouflage, and be sexually dimorphic. There are potential tradeoffs in armor function: increased impact resistance may come at the cost of maneuvering ability; and ornate armor may offer visual or protective advantages, but could incur excess drag. Pacific spiny lumpsuckers (Eumicrotremus orbis) are covered in rows of odontic, cone-shaped armor whorls, protecting the fish from wave driven impacts and the threat of predation. We are interested in measuring the effects of lumpsucker armor on the hydrodynamic forces on the fish. Bigger lumpsuckers have larger and more complex armor, which may incur a greater hydrodynamic cost. In addition to their protective armor, lumpsuckers have evolved a ventral adhesive disc, allowing them to remain stationary in their environment. We hypothesize a tradeoff between the armor and adhesion: little fish prioritize suction, while big fish prioritize protection. Using micro-CT, we compared armor volume to disc area over lumpsucker development and built 3D models to measure changes in drag over ontogeny. We found that drag and drag coefficients decrease with greater armor coverage and vary consistently with orientation. Adhesive disc area is isometric but safety factor increases with size, allowing larger fish to remain attached in higher flows than smaller fish. 

Abstract Complex prey processing requires the repositioning of food between the teeth, as modulated by a soft tissue appendage like a tongue or lips. In this study, we trace the evolution of lips and ligaments, which are used during prey capture and prey processing in an herbivorous group of fishes. Pacus (Serrasalmidae) are Neotropical freshwater fishes that feed on leaves, fruits, and seeds. These prey are hard or tough, require high forces to fracture, contain abrasive or caustic elements, or deform considerably before failure. Pacus are gape‐limited and do not have the pharyngeal jaws many bony fishes use to dismantle and/or transport prey. Despite their gape limitation, pacus feed on prey larger than their mouths, relying on robust teeth and a hypertrophied lower lip for manipulation and breakdown of food. We used histology to compare the lip morphology across 14 species of pacus and piranhas to better understand this soft tissue. We found that frugivorous pacus have larger, more complex lips which are innervated and folded at their surface, while grazing species have callused, mucus‐covered lips. Unlike mammalian lips or tongues, pacu lips lack any intrinsic skeletal or smooth muscle. This implies that pacu lips lack dexterity; however, we found a novel connection to the primordial ligament which suggests that the lips are actuated by the jaw adductors. We propose that pacus combine hydraulic repositioning of prey inside the buccal cavity with direct oral manipulation, the latter using a combination of a morphologically heterodont dentition and compliant lips for reorienting food. 

Abstract Many vertebrates are armored over all or part of their body. The armor may serve several functional roles including defense, offense, visual display, and signal of experience/capability. Different roles imply different tradeoffs; for example, defensive armor usually trades resistance to attack for maneuverability. The poachers (Agonidae), 47 species of scorpaeniform fishes, are a useful system for understanding the evolution and function of armor due to their variety and extent of armoring. Using publically available CT‐scan data from 27 species in 16 of 21 genera of poachers we compared the armor to axial skeletal in the mid body region. The ratio of average armor density to average skeleton density ranged from 0.77 to 1.17. From a defensive point of view, the total investment in mineralization (volume * average density) is more interesting. There was 10 times the material invested in the armor as in the endoskeleton in some small, smooth plated species, likeAspidophoroides olrikii. At the low end, some visually arresting species likePercis japonica, had ratios as low as 2:1. We categorized the extent and type (impact vs. abrasion) in 34Agonopsis vulsaacross all 35+ plates in the eight rows along the body. The ventral rows show abrasive damage along the entire length of the fish that gets worse with age. Impact damage to head and tail plates gets more severe and occurs at higher rates with age. The observed damage rates and the large investment in mineralization of the armor suggest that it is not just for show, but is a functional defensive structure. We cannot say what the armor is defense against, but the abrasive damage on the ventrum implies their benthic lifestyle involves rubbing on the substrate. The impact damage could result from predatory attacks or from intraspecific combat. 

Abstract Durophagous predators consume hard‐shelled prey such as bivalves, gastropods, and large crustaceans, typically by crushing the mineralized exoskeleton. This is costly from the point of view of the bite forces involved, handling times, and the stresses inflicted on the predator's skeleton. It is not uncommon for durophagous taxa to display an ontogenetic shift from softer to harder prey items, implying that it is relatively difficult for smaller animals to consume shelled prey. Batoid fishes (rays, skates, sawfishes, and guitarfishes) have independently evolved durophagy multiple times, despite the challenges associated with crushing prey harder than their own cartilaginous skeleton.Potamotrygon leopoldiis a durophagous freshwater ray endemic to the Xingu River in Brazil, with a jaw morphology superficially similar to its distant durophagous marine relatives, eagle rays (e.g.,Aetomylaeus, Aetobatus). We used second moment of area as a proxy for the ability to resist bending and analyzed the arrangement of the mineralized skeleton of the jaw ofP. leopoldiover ontogeny using data from computed tomography (CT) scans. The jaws ofP. leopoldido not resist bending nearly as well as other durophagous elasmobranchs, and the jaws are stiffest nearest the joints rather than beneath the dentition. While second moment has similar material distribution over ontogeny, mineralization of the jaws under the teeth increases with age. Neonate rays have low jaw stiffness and poor mineralization, suggesting thatP. leopoldimay not feed on hard‐shelled prey early in life. These differences in the shape, stiffness and mineralization of the jaws ofP. leopoldicompared to its durophagous relatives show there are several solutions to the problem of crushing shelled prey with a compliant skeleton.