Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T15:21:04.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tegumental glands in the paragnaths of Palaemon serratus (Crustacea: Natantia)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

C. G. Alexander
C. G. Alexander
Affiliation:
Department of Marine Biology, James Cook University of North Queensland, Townsville, Queensland 4811, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The three lobed paragnath of Palaemon serratus (Pennant) contains numerous rosette-type tegumental glands often arranged in clusters of up to ten glands. Each gland is made up of around ten cells most of which stain deeply with toluidine blue and whose contents have a reticulate appearance in electron micrographs. One, or occasionally two, cells stain faintly and have a fine granular appearance in electron micrographs. The central region of each gland contains the main drainage duct together with feeder canals from the vesicular storage areas. The actively secreting region of each cell is peripheral and typified by abundant rough endoplasmic reticulum and Golgi apparatus. There are nerves adjacent to the glands and their contents are probably discharged in response to a food stimulus. The structure and possible function of the glands are discussed in relation to those of other species The secretions could act as a lubricant and as a binding agent to aid in the ingestion of particulate food. There is no evidence for any direct digestive function.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 69 , Issue 1 , February 1989 , pp. 53 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1989

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

REFERENCES

Aiken, D.E. & Waddy, S.L., 1982. Cement gland development, ovary maturation, and reproductive cycles in the American lobster, Homarus americanus. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 2, 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, C.G., 1988. The paragnaths of some intertidal crustaceans. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 68, 581–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, C.G. & Hindley, J.P.R., 1985. The mechanism of food ingestion by the banana prawn Penaeus merguiensis. Marine Behaviour and Physiology, 12, 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arsenault, A.L., Clatenberg, R.E. & Aiken, D.E., 1979. The morphology and secretory transport mechanism of the tegumental glands of the lobster (Homarus americanus) as related to the moult cycle. Journal of Submicroscopical Cytology, 11, 193–207.Google Scholar
Barker, D., 1962. A study of Thermosbaena mirabilis (Malacostraca, Peracarida) and its reproduction. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 103, 261–286.Google Scholar
Borradaile, L.A., 1917. On the structure and function of the mouthparts of the palaemonid prawns. Proceedings of the Zoological Society, 1917, 31–71.Google Scholar
Cannon, H.G., 1922. On the labral glands of a cladoceran (Simocephalus vetulus) with a description of its mode of feeding. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 66, 213–234.Google Scholar
Cannon, H.G., 1933. On the feeding mechanism of the Branchiopoda. (with an appendix on the mouthparts of the Branchiopoda by H.G. Cannon and F.M.C. Leak). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (B), 222, 267–352.Google Scholar
Cheung, T.S., 1966. The development of egg membranes and egg attachment in the shore crab, Carcinus maenas, and some related decapods. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 46, 373–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dall, W., 1965. The physiology of a shrimp Metapenaeus mastersii. III. Composition and structure of the integument. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 16, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughtie, D.G. & Rao, K.R., 1982. Rosette glands in the gills of the grass shrimp Palaemonetes pugio I. Comparative morphology, cyclical activity and innervation. Journal of Morphology, 171, 41–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elofsson, R., Myhrberg, H., Aramant, R., Lindvall, O. & Falk, B., 1978. Catecholaminergic salivary glands in Gammarus pulex (Crustacea: Amphipoda). An electron microscopic and microspectrofluorimetric study. Journal of infrastructure Research, 64, 14–22.Google Scholar
Foster, C.A. & Howse, H.D., 1978. A morphological study on the gills of the brown shrimp, Penaeus aztecus. Tissue and Cell, 10, 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fryer, G., 1963. The functional morphology and feeding mechanism of the chydorid cladoceran Eurycerus lamellatus (O.F. Müller). Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 65, 335–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fryer, G., 1965. Studies on the functional morphology and feeding mechanism of Monodella argentarii Stella (Crustacea: Thermosbaenacea). Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 66, 49–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fryer, G., 1983. Functional ontogenic changes in Branchinecta ferox (Milne-Edwards) (Crustacea: Anostraca). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (B), 303, 229–343.Google Scholar
Gharagozlou-Van, Ginneken I.D., 1977. Contribution a 1'etude infrastructurale des glandes labrales de quelques Harpacticoides (Crustaces Copepodes). Archives de Biologie, 88, 79–100.Google Scholar
Gorvett, H., 1946. The tegumental glands in the land Isopoda. A.The rosette glands. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 87, 209–235.Google Scholar
Johnson, B. & Talbot, P., 1987. Ultrastructural analysis of the pleopod tegumental glands in male and female lobsters, Homarus americanus. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 7, 288–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krishnan, G., 1951. Phenolic tanning and pigmentation of the cuticle in Carcinus maenas. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 92, 333–342.Google Scholar
Kumari, C., Hanumantha, Rao K. & Shyamasundari, K., 1983. Histology and histochemistry of the tegumental glands in Ligia exotica Roux (Crustacea: Isopoda). Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences (Animal Science), 92, 207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, D. & Yonge, CM., 1935. The function of the tegumental glands in the statocyst of Homarus vulgaris. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 20, 333–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundblad, O., 1920. Vergleichende studien iiber die Nahrungssanfrahme einiger scwedischen Phyllopoden, nebst biologiscen Bemerkungen. Archiv for Zoologi, 13(16), 116 pp.Google Scholar
Oshel, P.E., 1985. Paraffin carving: a preparative technique for scanning electron microscopy of crustaceans. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 5, 327–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajendranath, K., Hanumantha, Rao K. & Shyamasundari, K., 1984. Presence of cephalic mucous glands in Alpheus edwardsii Audouin. Current Science, 53, 54–56.Google Scholar
Shyamasundari, K., 1979. Studies on the alimentary canal of amphipods. Histochemistry of cephalic mucous glands in Talorchestia martensii (Weber) (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Zeitschrift fur Mikroskopisch-Anatomische Forschung, 93, 417–424.Google ScholarPubMed
Stevenson, J.R., 1961. Polyphenol oxidase in the tegumental glands in relation to the moulting cycle of the isopod crustacean Armadillidium vulgare. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass., 121, 554–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, J.R. & Schneider, R.P., 1962. Tyrosinase activity of organs containing tegumental glands in the crayfish. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 150, 17–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yonge, CM. 1932. On the nature and permeability of chitin. I. The chitin lining the foregut of decapod Crustacea and the function of the tegumental glands. Proceedings of the Royal Society (B), 111, 298–329.Google Scholar
Yonge, CM. 1937. The nature and significance of the membranes surrounding the developing eggs of Homarus vulgaris and other Decapoda. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (ser. A), 107, 499–517.Google Scholar