Morphological study by scanning electron microscopy of the lingual papillae in the common european bat (Pipistrellus pipistrellus)

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

“…These differences resulted in various adaptations in the number and the morphology of the filiform papillae as noted in different study as in; six species of longnosed bats (Greenbaum & Phillips, 1974), Japanese longfingered bat (Kobayashi & Shimamura, 1982), European common bat (Pastor et al, 1993), lesser dog-faced fruit bat (Emura et al, 2001a), large flying fox (Emura et al, 2002b) and Japanese common pipistrelle (Emura et al, 2009), in which this clear in our study in the Egyptian fruit bat. The previous studies on the distribution and structure of the mechanical papillae on the dorsal surface of the mammalian tongue constitute general traits typical for individual taxonomic units, such as orders or families, as well as traits characteristic of a particular species (Iwasaki; Abumandour & El-Bakary).…”

“…But there were four subtypes as noted in our study in New Zealand white rabbits and in frugivorous bats (Masuko et al; Trzcielinska-Lorych et al; Mqokeli & Downs) and ferret (Takemura et al, 2009). While three subtypes as noted in; bats (Jackowiak et al, 2009;Pastor et al, 1993), rat (Ojima et al, 1996), mice (Toprak, 2006), and rabbit (Nonaka et al), moreover there are two subtypes as in; bat (Park & Lee), Porcupine (Karan et al, 2011) and (Jackowiak, 2006) in European mole. There is only one types as noted in camel by (Qayyum et al, 1988).…”

“…However, three types of lingual papillae; one mechanical (filiform) and two gustatory (fungiform and circumvallate) as noted in; bats (Pastor et al, 1993;Emura et al, 2001b;Park & Lee, 2009;Masuko et al, 2007), however, there were two types only of papillae (filiform and fungiform) in hematophagous bats (Masuko et al).…”

“…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.…”

“…The reasons for this morphological diversity are generally the result of different strategies for capturing and manipulating food, grooming, or vocal modulation. The tongue is a taste organ in the buccal cavity and with its species-specific lingual papillae on the dorsal surface plays an important role in food intake, digestion in many mammals (Iwasaki, 2002;Kobayashi & Shimamura, 1982;Abumandour & El-Bakary, 2013;Pastor et al, 1993).…”