Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:04:51.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Nerve Fibre and Receptor Counts in the Sprat Utriculus and Lateral Line

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

A. C. G. Best
Affiliation:
The Laboratory, Marine Biological Association, Citadel Hill, Plymouth, PL1 2PB
J. A. B. Gray
Affiliation:
Member of the external scientific staff of the Medical Research Council.

Extract

INTRODUCTION

It has long been known that the ears of clupeoid fishes differ from most other fish in that they have a gas-containing bony bulla associated with each ear (for references to early work see Allen, Blaxter & Denton, 1976). The expansion and contraction, with changing pressure, of this gas causes liquid to flow in the ear and lateral line (Gray & Denton, 1979; Denton, Gray & Blaxter, 1979) thus causing displacements (Best & Gray, 1980) and excitation (Denton & Gray, 1980) of the utricular maculae; it also causes excitation of the lateral line neuromasts (unpublished). Only a small fraction of the alternating liquid flow from the bullae passes through the pars inferior of the labyrinth (Gray & Denton, 1979). Furthermore, in larvae, when the utricular structures can be seen to move vigorously with an alternating pressure the saccular otolith is not seen to move (Blaxter, Denton & Gray, 1981).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. M., Blaxter, J. H. S. & Denton, E. J., 1976. The functional anatomy and development of the swimbladder – inner ear – lateral line system in herring and sprat. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 56, 471486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartelmez, G. W. & Noerr, N. L., 1933. The vestibular club endings in Ameiurus. Further evidence on the morphology of the synapse. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 57, 401428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, A. C. G. & Gray, J. A. B., 1980. Morphology of the utricular recess in the sprat. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 60, 703715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, J. H. S., Denton, E. J. & Gray, J. A. B., 1981. The auditory bullae - swimbladder system in late stage herring larvae. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 61, 315326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, J. H. S., Gray, J. A. B. & Denton, E. J., 1981. Sound and startle responses in herring shoals. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 61, 851869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corwin, J. T., 1977. Morphology of the macula neglecta in sharks of the genus Carcharhinus. Journal of Morphology, 152, 341361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cragg, B. G. & Thomas, P. K., 1957. Relation between velocity, diameter and internodes of trout nerve. Journal of Physiology, 136, 606614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, H., 1959. Excitation of auditory receptors. In Handbook of Physiology; section 1, Neuro-physiology (ed. Field, J., Magoun, H. W. and Hall, V. E.), pp. 565584. Washington, D.C.: American Physiological Society.Google Scholar
Davis, H., 1968. Discussion of paper by H. Spoendlin. In Hearing Mechanisms in Vertebrates (ed. de Reuck, A. V. S. and Knight, J.), p. 119. London: Churchill.Google Scholar
Denton, E. J. & Gray, J. A. B., 1979. The analyses of sound by the sprat ear. Nature, London, 282, 406407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denton, E. J. & Gray, J. A. B., 1980. Receptor activity in the utriculus of the sprat. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 60, 717740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denton, E. J., Gray, J. A. B. & Blaxter, J. H. S., 1979. The mechanics of the clupeid acousticolateralis system: frequency responses. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 59, 2747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flock, A., 1964. Structure of the macula utriculi with special reference to directional interplay of sensory responses as revealed by morphological polarization. Journal of Cell Biology, 22, 413431.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gacek, R. R. & Rasmussen, G. L., 1961. Fiber analysis of the statoacoustic nerve of guinea pig, cat and monkey. Anatomical Record, 139, 455463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geisler, C. D., Bergeijk, W. A. Van & Frishkopf, L. S., 1964. The inner ear of the bullfrog. Journal of Morphology, 114, 4358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Granit, R., 1959. Neural activity in the retina. In Handbook of Physiology; section 1, Neuro-physiology (ed. Field, J., Magoun, H. W. and Hall, V. E.), pp. 693712. Washington, D.C.: American Physiological Society.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. B. & Denton, E. J., 1979. The mechanics of the clupeid acoustico-lateralis system: low frequency measurements. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 59, 1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laporte, Y., 1951. Conduction in lateral line nerves of carp. Journal of General Physiology, 35, 343360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstein, O. & Wersäll, J., 1959. A functional interpretation of the electron-microscopic structure of the sensory hairs of the cristae of the elasmobranch Raja clavata in terms of directional sensitivity. Nature, London, 184, 18071808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, A. N. & Platt, C., 1979. The herring ear has a unique receptor pattern. Nature, London, 280, 832833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushton, W. A. H., 1951. A theory of the effects of fibre size in medullated nerve. Journal of Physiology, 115, 101122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spoendlin, H., 1968. Ultrastructure and peripheral innervation of the receptor in relation to the first coding of the acoustic message. In Hearing Mechanisms in Vertebrates (ed. de Reuck, A. V. S. and Knight, J.), pp. 89119. London: Churchill.Google Scholar
Winkelmann, R. K. & Schmitt, R. W., 1957. A simple method for nerve axoplasm. Proceedings of Staff Meetings of the Mayo Clinic, 32, 217.Google ScholarPubMed