Zur Myologie der Erdkröte

Bigalke, R. C.

doi:10.1007/bf02119515

Cited by 7 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…extensores distales, following the terminology of Faivovich (2002). My first reason for using Dunlap's terminology rather than Gaupp's (which was followed by Andersen [1978] and Burton [2001]) is that Dunlap's term "m. extensor digitorum communis longus" (after Bigalke, 1926) is preferable to Gaupp's "m. extensor longus digiti IV"-Dunlap demonstrated that this long extensor muscle is not always associated with the fourth digit. Second, Dunlap (following Perrin, 1892) employs the term "m. contrahentis digiti I" for the slender flexor arising from a distal tarsal and inserting proximally on the basal phalanx.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Muscles of the pes of hylid frogs

Burton

2004

Journal of Morphology

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complete or partial dissection of the foot musculature of 404 hylid frogs representing 247 species and 33 genera, along with representatives of eight other families, revealed a number of apomorphic characters that distinguish the hyloid frogs (Hylidae plus Allophryne and Centrolenidae) from other bufonoid frogs. Additional characters were found to define some of the hylid subfamilies. Addition of characters from the foot musculature to Duellman's phylogenetic tree of the hyloids produced a tree in which Allophryne and Centrolenidae are nested within Hylidae. Support was found for the monophyly of the 30-chromosome group within Hyla, and for a large number of the groups that comprise "Boana," viz., the Hyla albomarginata, H. albopunctata, H. boans (except H. vasta), H. geographica, and H. pulchella groups, but foot muscle characters provide no information relating to relationships of the West Indies hylines.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Muscles of the pes of hylid frogs

Burton

2004

Journal of Morphology

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Diogo and Ziermann (2014), in contrast, reported the presence of both, a pars epicoracoidea of the m. pectoralis and a separate m. supracoracoideus, which contradicts the homology assumption by Ritland (1955). Jones (1933) observed the presence of a m. supracoracoideus profundus in, among others, two bufonid species, whereas Bigalke (1927) reported no such muscle in Bufo bufo (then B. vulgaris) but a pars superficialis of the m. coraco-brachialis brevis that remarkably resembled the m. supracoracoideus profundus in Jones (1933). The m. scapulohumeralis profundus anterior was observed in various anuran species, including representatives of the Ranidae (Tyson 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Furthermore, histological serial sections from the ZMH museum collection of a late metamorphic stage of A. truei (ZMH A09807, Stage 42) were included. The latest larval stages examined and, if available, adult specimens of each exemplar species were used to reassess previously published anatomical descriptions (Gaupp 1896;Bigalke 1927;Ritland 1955) of those or closely related (Pyron and Wiens 2011) species. Specimens that were sectioned for this study were deposited at the ZMH collection (Table 1).…”

Section: Specimens and Usagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To do so, the ontogenetic development and innervation of the shoulder joint muscles were assessed in three anuran species representing one ancient lineage (Bombinatoridae: Bombina orientalis (Boulenger, 1890)) and the two major neobatrachian groups (Ranoidea: Ranidae: Rana temporaria Linnaeus, 1758; Hyloidea: Bufonidae: Rhinella marina (Linnaeus, 1758)). In addition, previously published descriptions of the shoulder joint muscles in selected species (various species of Rana in Gaupp 1896; Bufo bufo (Linnaeus, 1758) in Bigalke 1927;Ascaphus truei Stejneger, 1899in Ritland 1955 were reassessed to identify inconsistencies in the use of muscle names and to suggest a consistent nomenclature. The descriptions by Gaupp (1896) were included, because they seem to be the most frequently referenced for anuran muscle anatomy; the nomenclature introduced by him, and modified versions of it, presumably are the most widely used (compare, e.g., Bigalke 1927;Jones 1933;Mahendra 1936;Ritland 1955;Burton 1983;Duellman and Trueb 1994;Manzano et al 2008;Baleeva 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, previously published descriptions of the shoulder joint muscles in selected species (various species of Rana in Gaupp 1896; Bufo bufo (Linnaeus, 1758) in Bigalke 1927;Ascaphus truei Stejneger, 1899in Ritland 1955 were reassessed to identify inconsistencies in the use of muscle names and to suggest a consistent nomenclature. The descriptions by Gaupp (1896) were included, because they seem to be the most frequently referenced for anuran muscle anatomy; the nomenclature introduced by him, and modified versions of it, presumably are the most widely used (compare, e.g., Bigalke 1927;Jones 1933;Mahendra 1936;Ritland 1955;Burton 1983;Duellman and Trueb 1994;Manzano et al 2008;Baleeva 2009). The works of Ritland (1955) and Bigalke (1927) were used for comparison as they provide thorough descriptions of the muscles in species belonging to an ancient anuran linage and the Hyloidea, respectively, and because both refer to the nomenclature of Gaupp (1896).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ontogenetic development of the shoulder joint muscles in frogs (Amphibia: Anura) assessed by digital dissection with implications for interspecific muscle homologies and nomenclature

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous myological studies show inconsistencies with regard to the identification and naming of the shoulder joint muscles in frogs and toads (Amphibia: Anura). Those inconsistencies were revealed and resolved by assessing the ontogenetic development, innervation, and adult morphology of selected anuran species representing ancient lineages and two major neobatrachian groups. To do so, digital dissections of volumes acquired by histological serial sectioning, episcopic microtomy, and contrast-enhanced micro-computed tomography scanning were performed and three-dimensional reconstructions were derived. Muscle units crossing the shoulder joint were defined, their ontogenetic development was described, their homology across species was established, and a consistent nomenclature was suggested. The mm. anconaeus, dorsalis scapulae, latissimus dorsi, and the group of scapulohumeralis muscles were ontogenetically derived from the dorsal pre-muscle mass present in all tetrapods. The ventral pre-muscle mass gave rise to the mm. cleidohumeralis, episternohumeralis, supracoracoideus, coracoradialis, subcoracoscapularis, coracobrachialis, and pectoralis. The results indicate that the mm. anconaeus, dorsalis scapulae, latissimus dorsi, coracoradialis, and the portionis sternalis and abdominalis of the m. pectoralis have consistently been recognized and denoted in previous studies, whereas the names for the muscle units commonly denoted as m. coraco-brachialis longus and as parts of the m. deltoideus are misleading with regard to the ontogenetic origin of these muscles. The mm. scapulohumeralis profundus anterior and posterior, although present, have been overlooked in some studies. The mm. cleidohumeralis, supracoracoideus, and coracobrachialis are present with two parts or portions in some species, these portions have previously not always been recognized and assigned correctly.

show abstract