QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online August 31, 2004
Journal of Experimental Biology 207, 3463-3476 (2004)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2004
doi: 10.1242/jeb.01140

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Maruska, K. P. Articles by Tricas, T. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Maruska, K. P. Articles by Tricas, T. C. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Test of the mechanotactile hypothesis: neuromast morphology and response dynamics of mechanosensory lateral line primary afferents in the stingray

Karen P. Maruska^* and Timothy C. Tricas

Department of Zoology and Hawai'i Institute of Marine Biology, University of Hawai'i at Manoa, 2538 The Mall, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA

^* Author for correspondence (e-mail: maruska{at}hawaii.edu)

Accepted 14 June 2004

The mechanotactile hypothesis proposes that ventral non-pored lateral line canals in the stingray function to facilitate localization of prey that contact the skin during benthic feeding. This study used comparative neurophysiological and morphological techniques to test whether ventral non-pored canals encode the velocity of skin movements, and show other adaptations that may enhance detection of tactile stimuli from their prey. Resting discharge rate of lateral line primary afferent neurons was lower among units from ventral than dorsal canal groups. The ventral non-pored canals had a higher proportion of silent units (31%) than either ventral (3%) or dorsal (13%) pored canals, thus may have an enhanced potential for detection of phasic contact with prey. Primary afferents from pored canals showed response characteristics consistent with acceleration detectors, with best frequencies of 20–30 Hz. In contrast, units from non-pored canals responded to tactile skin depression velocities of 30–630 µm s^–1 from 1–20 Hz, and encoded the velocity of canal fluid induced by skin movement with best frequencies of 10 Hz. Sensitivity of non-pored canals to direct skin depression velocity was 2–10 times greater than to hydrodynamic dipole stimulation near the skin. No morphological specialization of hair cell orientation was found among pored and non-pored canals. These low frequency, tactile response properties support the hypothesis that the stingray's non-pored ventral lateral line functions as a mechanotactile receptor subsystem used to guide small benthic invertebrates to the ventrally positioned mouth.

Key words: canal, elasmobranch, frequency response, hair cell, neuromast, lateral line, stingray, Dasyatis sabina

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. K. Jordan, S. M. Kajiura, and M. S. Gordon Functional consequences of structural differences in stingray sensory systems. Part I: mechanosensory lateral line canals J. Exp. Biol., October 1, 2009; 212(19): 3037 - 3043. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. M. Casper and D. A. Mann Dipole hearing measurements in elasmobranch fishes J. Exp. Biol., January 1, 2007; 210(1): 75 - 81. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]