The Comparative Anatomy and Physiology op the Nose and Paranasal Sinuses

Negus, Sir Victor; Straatsma, C. R.

doi:10.1097/00006534-196004000-00011

Cited by 94 publications

(214 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

198

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For 16 out of the 150 species investigated here, we have found histological studies describing the olfactory epithelia and their areas (table 1; Lauruschkus 1942;Allison & Warwick 1949;Negus 1958;Gurtovoi 1966;Mulvaney & Heist 1970;Kolb 1971Kolb , 1975Adams 1972;Bhatnagar & Kallen 1975;Gü ntherschulze 1979;Sö llner & Kraft 1980;Sigmund & Sedláček 1985). By relating the areas of the epithelia to the corresponding ethmoid areas determined in our study, we test the hypothesis that the olfactory organ is a functional whole with rather constant geometric relations (figure 2).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Scaling of mammalian ethmoid bones can predict olfactory organ size and performance

Pihlström

Hemilä

Forsman³

et al. 2005

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relation between size and performance is central for understanding the evolution of sensory systems, and much interest has been focused on mammalian eyes and ears. However, we know very little about olfactory organ size (OOS), as data for a representative set of mammals are lacking. Here, we present a cranial endocast method for estimating OOS by measuring an easily accessible part of the system, the perforated part of the ethmoid bone, through which the primary olfactory axons reach the olfactory bulb. In 16 species, for which relevant data are available, the area of the perforated ethmoid bone is directly proportional to the area of the olfactory epithelium. Thus, the ethmoid bone is a useful indicator enabling us to analyse 150 species, and describe the distribution of OOS within the class Mammalia. In the future, a method using skull material may be applied to fossil skulls. In relation to skull size, humans, apes and monkeys have small olfactory organs, while prosimians have OOSs typical for mammals of their size. Large ungulates have impressive olfactory organs. Relating anatomy to published thresholds, we find that sensitivity increases with increasing absolute organ size.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Scaling of mammalian ethmoid bones can predict olfactory organ size and performance

Pihlström

Hemilä

Forsman³

et al. 2005

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These features include a narrow, dorsal conduit for olfactory airflow, an enlarged cavity (the olfactory recess) at the back of the nasal airway and a clear separation of the olfactory region of the nose from the respiratory region [1][2][3][4]. All of these features impact the way air moves through the nasal cavity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How much does nasal cavity morphology matter? Patterns and rates of olfactory airflow in phyllostomid bats

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The morphology of the nasal cavity in mammals with a good sense of smell includes features that are thought to improve olfactory airflow, such as a dorsal conduit that delivers odours quickly to the olfactory mucosa, an enlarged olfactory recess at the back of the airway, and a clear separation of the olfactory and respiratory regions of the nose. The link between these features and having a good sense of smell has been established by functional examinations of a handful of distantly related mammalian species. In this paper, we provide the first detailed examination of olfactory airflow in a group of closely related species that nevertheless vary in their sense of smell. We study six species of phyllostomid bats that have different airway morphologies and foraging ecologies, which have been linked to differences in olfactory ability or reliance. We hypothesize that differences in morphology correlate with differences in the patterns and rates of airflow, which in turn are consistent with dietary differences. To compare species, we make qualitative and quantitative comparisons of the patterns and rates of airflow through the olfactory region during both inhalation and exhalation across the six species. Contrary to our expectations, we find no clear differences among species in either the patterns of airflow through the airway or in rates of flow through the olfactory region. By and large, olfactory airflow seems to be conserved across species, suggesting that morphological differences appear to be driven by other mechanical demands on the snout, such as breathing and feeding. Olfactory ability may depend on other aspects of the system, such as the neurobiological processing of odours that work within the existing morphology imposed by other functional demands on the nasal cavity.

show abstract

“…Generally, this study revealed that snout length is a misleading proxy for olfactory capabilities in primates, because the anterior portion of the snout disproportionately bears nonolfactory mucosa, as in many other mammals (Negus, 1958). The present study is intended to provide a more detailed analysis of olfactory mucosa distribution in the nasal fossa of Microcebus, and to place these anatomical findings into a comparative and functional context.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Distribution of Olfactory and Nonolfactory Surface Area in the Nasal Fossa of Microcebus murinus: Implications for Microcomputed Tomography and Airflow Studies

Smith

Eiting

Rossie

2011

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nasal fossa of most mammals exemplifies extreme skeletal complexity. Thin scrolls of bone (turbinals) that both elaborate surface area (SA) and subdivide nasal space are used as morphological proxies for olfactory and respiratory physiology. The present study offers additional details on the nasal fossa of the adult mouse lemur (Microcebus murinus), previously described by Smith and Rossie (Smith and Rossie [2008]; Anatomical Record 291:895-915). Additional, intervening histological sections of the specimen were used to map and quantify the distribution of olfactory and nonolfactory mucosa on the smaller turbinal of the frontal recess (FR; frontoturbinal) and those that occur between ethmoturbinals (ETs; interturbinals). A second adult Microcebus specimen, available as a dried skull, was scanned using microcomputed tomography (microCT) and reconstructed to infer the position of these turbinals within the nasal airway. Overall, turbinal bones comprise more than half of internal nasal SA. All ETs combined comprise about 30% of total nasal fossa SA, and contribute nearly half of all olfactory SA. Of these, the nasoturbinal (NT) is most completely covered with olfactory mucosa, whereas ET I is least covered with olfactory mucosa. The FR contributes significantly to total olfactory SA (ca. 20%). This recess and the single frontoturbinal within it lie in a more lateral pathway of airflow compared with interturbinals, which lie in more central zone just anterior to the olfactory recess of Microcebus. Variations in the turbinals and recesses that complicate central and paranasal in primates should be investigated further in light of zone-specific distributions of olfactory receptors (ORs) that differ between these regions in rodents. Anat Rec, 294:1217Rec, 294: -1225

show abstract

The Comparative Anatomy and Physiology op the Nose and Paranasal Sinuses

Cited by 94 publications

References 0 publications

Scaling of mammalian ethmoid bones can predict olfactory organ size and performance

Scaling of mammalian ethmoid bones can predict olfactory organ size and performance

How much does nasal cavity morphology matter? Patterns and rates of olfactory airflow in phyllostomid bats

Distribution of Olfactory and Nonolfactory Surface Area in the Nasal Fossa of Microcebus murinus: Implications for Microcomputed Tomography and Airflow Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About