The Infraorbital Canal, Its Lateral-Line Ossicles and Neuromasts, in the Minnows Notropis volucellus and N. buchanani

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists (ASIH)is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Copeia.To determine the role of the neuromast in bone formation, histological and osteological studies were made of the infraorbital canal in Notropis volucellus and N. buchanani. Special emphasis was placed on the histological structure of the superficial and canal sense organs.The infraorbital canal in N. volucellus is complete or incomplete, while that in N. buchanani is absent or rudimentary. The number of infraorbital ossicles in N. buchanani has been reduced from five, as in N. volucellus, to two or three. In both species the sustentacular cells of the neuromasts extend upward to surround the sense cells. The sense cells are strongly polarized and apically bear two "sense hairs" each. In N. volucellus a cellular enlargement in the innervating nerve of the canal neuromast was described. It was concluded that lateral-line bones are of composite origin, part stemming from anasmestic forces and part from the tropic activities of the neuromast.

Development of the supraorbital and mandibular lateral line canals in the cichlid, archocentrus nigrofasciatus

“…Finally, an appreciation of the pattern of development of lateral line canals and of the dermal bones with which they are associated can provide an ontogenetic context for the testing of meaningful hypotheses concerning the developmental mechanisms that underlie this association. The putative inductive relationship between neuromasts and dermal cranial bones has been discussed by several workers (e.g., Branson and Moore, 1962;Reno, 1966;Kapoor, 1970;Patterson, 1977;Schaeffer, 1977;Graham-Smith, 1978;Northcutt and Gans, 1983) and the mechanism underlying this association has been stated to be a major problem by deBeer (1985) and Hall and Hanken (1985), but it remains unexplored, and thus unresolved.…”

“…Interestingly, reports of two-component lateral line bones in the literature appear not to be uniformly distributed among fishes. The older histological studies document the development of lateral line bones from two bony components in non-teleost actinopterygians (Amia, Allis, 1889; Pehrson, 1922Pehrson, , 1940Lepisosteus, Aumonier, 1941;deBeer, 1985), elopomorph teleosts (Muraenidae, Allis, 1903;Anguilla, deBeer, 1985), basal euteleosts, including esocids (Esox, Pehrson, 1944), ostariophysans (Kindred, 1919;Lekander, 1949;Kapoor, 1961;Reno, 1966), and salmonids (reviewed in Pehrson, 1922;Jollie, 1984b;deBeer, 1985). In contrast, Kapoor (1961) described "lamellar extensions developing from the membranous component of the frontal" (a one-component pattern) in Channa (ϭ Ophicephalus), a derived teleost.…”

“…The development of lateral line bones from two bony components has been documented in Amia (Allis, 1889;Pehrson, 1922Pehrson, , 1940 and has been suggested by features of the adult osteology of Lepisosteus (Aumonier, 1941;deBeer, 1985), elopomorphs (Muraenidae, Allis, 1903;Anguilla, de Beer, 1985), esocids (Esox, Pehrson, 1944), several ostariophysans (Kindred, 1919;Lekander, 1949;Kapoor, 1961;Reno, 1966) and salmonids (Jollie, 1984b;deBeer, 1985, reviewed in Pehrson, 1922. In ostariophysan fishes, for example, the laterosensory component and the underlying lamellar component develop from two separate centers of intramembranous ossification, which subsequently fuse (e.g., the cyprinid, Phoxinus phoxinus, Lekander, 1949).…”

Feeding in the dark: lateral-line-mediated prey detection in the peacock cichlid Aulonocara stuartgranti

“…melamphaeids and other mesopelagic species (Marshall, 1996)] and either on or in a sandy or muddy substrate [e.g. witch flounder, Glyptocephalus zachirus (Webb, 1995), silverjaw minnow, Notropis buccatus (Reno, 1966;Reno, 1971;Wallace, 1976), Eurasian ruffe, Gymnocephalus cernuus (Janssen, 1997)]. The ruffe, a freshwater percid with widened lateral line canals (Denton and Gray, 1989;Gray and Best, 1989;Janssen, 1997;Ćurcić-Blake and van Netten, 2006), is an invasive species in North American waters (Ogle et al, 1995) that has been used to explore the role of the lateral line canal system in prey detection.…”

Cranial morphology of Ateleopus japonicus (Ateleopodidae: Ateleopodiformes), with a discussion on metamorphic mouth migration and lampridiform affinities

“…1B) appear to represent parts of these dermal bones, the frontal carrying the supraorbital canal and an ossicle on the sphenotic (i.e., dermosphenotic) being common in teleosts. The fusion of bony lateral line canal ossicles ("sensory-line components" of Stensiö, 1947) to the dermal bones beneath them ("anamestic components") usually results in a single bony structure containing the lateral line canals (Lekander, 1949;Reno, 1961). Therefore, a loss of fusion is in accordance with the condition in A. japonicus.…”