Comparative morphology of the tongue in free-tailed bats (Chiroptera, Molossidae)

Abstract

Descriptive and comparative studies on tongue of nineteen Molossidae, one Mystacinidae, and four Vespertilionidae bats species were carried out. Analysis was restricted to the external morphology, covering general shape of the tongue and its papillae. Types of papillae and their distribution presented considerable intergeneric variation, considering the strictly insectivorous feeding habits of these bats. Distribution of the data of tongue morphology is analyzed and compared with the phylogenetic schemes proposed previously and comments about evolutionary relationships among taxa were done.

The microstructure of lingual papillae in the Egyptian fruit bat (Rousettus aegyptiacus) as observed by light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy

“…The issue of mobility of the tongue in the Egyptian fruit bat the only Megachiroptera species using echolocation may be considered an important trait because it produces a series of clicks that help to locate objects along its path (Heffner et al, 1999). We could not observe such structures in mucosa on the surface of the tongue like a median sulcus or prominence in the central portion of the tongue as are often present in bats (Kobayashi and Shimamura, 1982;Emura et al, 2001;Gregorin, 2003).…”

“…Earlier anatomical and microscopic observations of bat tongues have primarily focused on insectivorous species from the families of Vespertilionidae, Rhinolophidae, Molossidae, and Hipposiderida as well as on piscivorous species from the Noctilionidae family (Azzali et al, 1991;Pastor et al, 1993;Sharma et al, 1999;Gregorin, 2003, ElizaldeArellano et al, 2004. With regard to fruit-and nectareating bats, the microstructure of the tongue has been investigated in the large flying fox (Pteropus vampyrus), short-nosed fruit bat (Cynopterus brachyotis), and the species belonging to Phyllostomidae (Emura et al, 2001(Emura et al, , 2002Winter and von Helversen, 2003;Kobayashi et al, 2004).…”

Morphological Comparison of the Filiform Papillae of New Zealand White Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) as Domestic Mammals and Egyptian Fruit Bat (Rousettus aegyptiacus) as Wild Mammals Using Scanning Electron Microscopic Specimens

“…While (Pastor et al, 1993) in common European bat reported that there was a prominent of intermolar tubercle, moreover, molossid bats have a prominent mid-dorsal lobe as noted by Gregorin (2003), but Emura et al (2001b), Jackowiak et al (2009), Gregorin and Mqokeli & Downs (2012) reported that, there is no typically intermolar tubercle in all bats, while our study in the Egyptian fruit bat noted that, the characteristic feature of the dorsal surface of the middle part of tongue is the presence of a shallow intermolar tubercle, located close to the posterior half area of the tongue. Our study in New Zealand white rabbit confirmed that, the presence of a lingual prominence is regarded as a characteristic of herbivores and this musclerich prominence with filiform papillae allows herbivores to grind food by crushing it between the tongue and the upper palate, while in the Egyptian fruit bat, the main function of the filiform papillae to help in catching of foods.…”

Morphological study of the lingual papillae in the fruit bat (Rousettus amplexicaudatus) by scanning electron microscopy and light microscopy

“…The number of circumvallate papillae has been reported to vary widely in mammals. Free‐tailed bats (Gregorin, ) and Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Pastor et al, ) have two circumvallate papillae. Larger mammals such as Diceros bicornis (Emura et al, ) have been found to bear up to 60 circumvallate papillae.…”

“…Previous studies have been carried out the surface of the tongue of bats of the family Pteropodidae that eat fruit and nectar, including Cynopterus brachiotis (Emura et al, ), Pteropus vampyrus (Emura et al, ) and Rousettus aegyptiacus (Abumandour & El‐Bakary, ; Emura, Okumura, & Chen, ; Jackowiak et al, ; Taki‐El‐Deen, Sakr, & Shanin, ). In addition, earlier anatomical observation was also done on the tongue of insectivorous species from the families Vespertilionidae, Rhinolophodae, Molossidae and Hipposideridae as well as the Noctilionidae family (Azzali, Gabbi, Grandi, & Bonomini, ; Elizalde‐Arellano, Uria‐Galicia, & Lopez‐Vidal, ; Gregorin, ; Pastor et al, ; Sharma, Vidayadaran, Zulkifli, Mohd Azlan, & Ho, ), However, no recent data have been published on the histology (by scanning electron microscopy) of the tongue of R. amplexicaudatus that lives in Yogyakarta, Java Island, Indonesia.…”