Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 271, Issue 1, pp 11–25 | Cite as

Influences of phylogenetic position and fertilization biology on spermatozoal ultrastructure exemplified by exocoetoid and poeciliid fish

  • B. G. M. Jamieson
  • H. J. Grier
Article

Abstract

In a cladistic analysis, poeciliids and zenarchopterids homoplasically show elongation and flattening of the nucleus at right angles to the plane of the central axonemal singlets; in both the tip of the nucleus appears rounded in the plane of flattening but pointed in the plane at right angles. The two families differ in the distribution of mitochondria in the .elongate midpiece: circumferential in poeciliids but bilateral in zenarchopterids. In poeciliid sperm and independently in Zenarchopterus, the individual mitochondria are considerably more extensive circumferentially than longitudinally; they differ in poeciliids in being C-shaped. In Hemirhamphodon they are moderately elongate. In Dermogenys and Nomorhamphus they have been modified monophyletically as a pair of elongate mitochondrial derivatives. A wide cytoplasmic periaxonemal sheath (not seen in poeciliids) appears to have developed monophyletically in the ancestry of Hemirhamphodon, Dermogenys and Nomorhamphus with acquisition of radial rodlets only in Hemirhamphodon. A distinctive development in poeciliids is the submitochondrial net. Poeciliids have greatly reduced the axonemal fins which are a synapomorphy of the Actinopteri. Exocoetoids have retained well developed fins in Arrhamphus, Dermogenys and Nomorhamphus but reduction has occurred in Zenarchopterus, in which the fins are small, and, apparently independently, in Hemirhamphodon in which fins are absent. A posterior extension of the nucleus over the base of the axoneme is C-shaped and embraces almost the entire circumference of the axoneme in poeciliids but, independently developed, in zenarchopterids is a ‘dorsal’ plate. Its absence in Hemirhamphodon is computed as a loss. These modifications relative to the aquasperm condition are deduced to have been occasioned by the adoption of internal fertilization. To what extent they are constrained by features of the genome peculiar to poeciliids, zenarchopterids or atherinomorphs or are demanded by minute differences in fertilization biology, or by a combination of the two, is not at present determinable.

Key words

Spermatozoa ultrastructure fertilization phylogeny Zenarchopteridae Poeciliidae 

Abbreviations

a:

axoneme

as:

central axonemal singlet microtubules

ad:

axonemal doublets

cc:

cytoplasmic canal (periaxonemal space)

cca:

centriolar cap

dc:

distal centriole

f:

flagellum

fi:

axonemal fin

m:

mitochondrion

n:

nucleus

nf:

basal nuclear fossa

ps:

peri-axonemal cytoplasmic sheath

s:

‘dorsal spur’ of nucleus

sl:

submitochondrial dense layer

sr:

satellite rays

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Collette, B. B., G. E. McGowen, N. V. Parin & S. Mito, 1984. Beloniformes: development and relationships. In Ontogeny and Systematics of Fishes. Special Publication Number 1. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists: 335–354.Google Scholar
  2. Grier, H. J., 1976. Sperm development in the teleost Oryzias latipes. Cell Tiss. Res. 168: 419–431.Google Scholar
  3. Grier, H. J. & B. B. Collette, 1987. Unique spermatozeugmata in testes of halfbeaks of the genus Zenarchopterus (Teleostei: Hemiramphidae). Copeia 1987: 300–311.Google Scholar
  4. Jamieson, B. G. M., 1989. Complex spermatozoon of the livebearing half-beak, Hemirhamphodon pogonognathus (Bleeker): ultrastructural description (Euteleostei, Atherinomorpha, Beloniformes). Gamete Res. 24: 247–259.Google Scholar
  5. Jamieson, B. G. M., 1991. Fish evolution and systematics: evidence from spermatozoa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  6. Jordan, D. S., 1907. Fishes. Henry Holt, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Mattei, X. 1970. Spermiogenèse comparee des poissons. In B. Baccetti (ed.), Comparative Spermatology. Academic Press, New York: 57–69.Google Scholar
  8. Russell, L. & S. Burquet, 1977. Ultrastructure of Leydig cells as revealed by secondary tissue treatment with a ferrocyanide-osmium mixture. Tiss. Cell 9: 751–766.Google Scholar
  9. Swofford, D. L., 1990. PAUP: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony, Version 3.0. Illinois Natl. Hist. Surv., Champaign, Illinois.Google Scholar
  10. Tibbetts, I. R., 1992. The trophic ecology, functional morphology and phylogeny of the Hemiramphidae (Beloniformes). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Queensland, Brisbane.Google Scholar
  11. Weber, M. & L. F. DeBeaufort, 1922. The Fishes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago. Brill, Leiden. Vol. 4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. G. M. Jamieson
    • 1
  • H. J. Grier
    • 2
  1. 1.Zoology DepartmentUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA

Personalised recommendations