Macroscopic and microscopic analysis of the tongue of the common opossum (Didelphis marsupialis)

Abstract

2012Macroscopic and microscopic analysis of the tongue of the common opossum (Didelphis marsupialis) MICROSCOPY RESEARCH AND TECHNIQUE, HOBOKEN, v. 75, n. 10, pp. 1329-1333 ABSTRACTWe performed a macroscopic and microscopic study of the tongues of common opossums, Didelphis marsupialis, from South America. We studied two males and two females. We collected morphometric data on the tongue with precision calipers. For the light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy analyses, we fixed tissue fragments in 10% formaldehyde and 2.5% glutaraldehyde, respectively. The opossum tongues averaged 5.87 6 0.20 cm in length, 3.27 6 0.15 cm in width at the lingual body, and 3.82 6 0.15 cm in width at the root. The mean thickness of the lingual body was 1.8 6 0.1 cm, and the thickness of the root was 3.82 6 0.15 cm. Sharp filiform papillae were scattered across the entire tongue; conical filiform papillae occurred on the lingual body and tongue tip; fungiform papillae were scattered among the filiform papillae on the lingual body and tongue tip; and there were three vallate papillae at the root of the tongue. We found two strands of papillary projections in the tongue root. Despite the low variability observed in the lingual papillae, the morphological data obtained in this study may be related to the opossum's diverse food habits and the extensive geographic distribution of the species throughout America. Microsc. Res. Tech. 75:1329-1333, 2012

Gross morphology and morphometry of foetal and adult dromedary tongues

“…Although the dromedary is a pseudoruminant, its tongue showed resemblance to those of ruminants; its tongue showed high degree of flexibility and its Torus linguae was well furnished with five large diameter circumvallate papillae along its entire surface typical of ruminants (Frandson et al, 2009). Different morphological structures of the tongues of ruminants including the pseudoruminant, camels, are specialized to fulfil different anatomical and physiological functions, such as swallowing, water uptake, prehension, grooming, 2.72 ± 0.60 3.00 ± 0.55 ns 4.30 ± 0.68*** 4.50 ± 0.45*** 20.00 ± 4.70 ns -Not significant * -Significant (P<0.05) ** -Significant (P<0.005) *** -Significant (P<0.001) suckling, vocal modulation and even adaptations to some environmental conditions (Kilinc et al, 2010;Mancanares et al, 2012). Moreso, the mammalian tongue is known to exhibit various morphological adaptations in different species.…”

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

“…Different morphological structures of the vertebrate tongue are specialized to fulfil different functions, such as swallowing, water uptake, capturing and manipulating food, grooming, vocal modulation and suckling (Kilinc, Erdogan, Kentani, & Kentani, ; Manacarez et al, ; Pastor, Barbosa, de Paz, Garcia, & Ferrero, ). Morphological differences and variations appearing in the tongue are directly associated with dietary specializations and food type, as well as adaptations to various environmental conditions.…”

Estudo histológico e comparativo das papilas linguais dos cervídeos Mazama americana e Mazama gouzoubira por microscopia de luz e eletrônica de varredura

“…Porém as papilas nesta região apresentaram bordas mais arredondadas, tornando-se, por vezes, levemente quadradas, assemelhando-se a dedos, como na língua de Hystrix cristata (Karan et al 2011) e Oryctolagus cuniculus, porém com bifurcações ou trifurcações nesta ultima espécie (Silva 1999 (Zheng & Kobayashi 2006). As papilas fungiformes em ambas as espécies do gênero Mazama, no gado Zavot (Sari et al, 2010), nas cabras Saanen (Kurtul & Atalgin 2008), no Camelus dromedarius (Qayyum et al 1988), no Muntiacus reevesi (Zheng & Kobayashi 2006) e Didelphis marsupialis (Mançanares et al 2012) apresentaram-se distribuídas entre as papilas ϐiliformes, tendo a mesma distribuição do ápice lingual.…”