Advertisement

Cell and Tissue Research

, Volume 236, Issue 3, pp 505–515 | Cite as

“Spinner” cephalopods: defects of statocyst suprastructures in an invertebrate analogue of the vestibular apparatus

  • William F. Colmers
  • Raymond F. Hixon
  • Roger T. Hanlon
  • John W. Forsythe
  • Margarita V. Ackerson
  • Michael L. Wiederhold
  • William H. Hulet
Article

Summary

Individuals of seven species of coleoid cephalopods (three species of octopus, three of squid, and one of cuttlefish), that were cultured and reared in laboratory aquarium systems, had a behavioral defect at hatching which was characterized by an inability to control orientation while swimming. These defective animals were designated as “spinners.”

An examination of statocysts from individuals of five of the affected species revealed abnormalities of the neuroepithelial suprastructures: absence or malformation of the statolith of the gravity receptor system and absence of the cupulae of the angular acceleration receptor systems. The sensory epithelia did not differ from those of normal animals, nor did the synaptic structures and relationships, when examined both with scanning and transmission electron microscopy. The abnormalities were compared with congenital defects of the neuropeithelial suprastructures of the vestibular apparatus (especially in mammals). The defects observed in statocysts of spinner animals are thought to be the result of environmental causes, such as the temperature or chemistry of the seawater in the transportation vessels or rearing systems, rather than genetic causes.

Key words

Statocyst Statolith defects Cephalopods Octopus Squid 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barber VC (1966) The fine structure of the statocyst of Octopus vulgaris. Z Zellforsch 70:91–107Google Scholar
  2. Boletzky S von, Hanion RT (1983) A review of the laboratory maintenance, rearing, an culture of cephalopod molluscs. Mem Nat Mus Victoria 44:136–182Google Scholar
  3. Boycott BB (1960) The functioning of the statocysts of Octopus vulgaris. Proc R Soc Lond [Biol] 152:78–87Google Scholar
  4. Budelmann BU (1970) Die Arbeitsweise der Statolithenorgane von Octopus vulgaris. Z Vgl Physiol 70:278–312Google Scholar
  5. Budelmann BU (1975) Gravity receptor function in cephalopods with particular reference to Sepia officinalis. Fortschr Zool 23:84–96Google Scholar
  6. Budelmann BU (1976) Equilibrium receptor systems in molluscs. In: Mill PJ (ed) Structure and function of proprioceptors in the invertebrates. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 529–566Google Scholar
  7. Budelmann BU (1977) Structure and function of the angular acceleration receptor systems in the statocysts of cephalopods. Symp Zool Soc Lond 38:309–324Google Scholar
  8. Budelmann BU (1978) The function of the equilibrium receptor systems of cephalopods. In: Claussen C-F (ed) Equilibriometric vestibular-spinal tests and their clinical importance. Proceedings of the Neurootological and Equilibriometric Society Vol. IV, edition m + p, Hamburg Neu Isenburg, p 15Google Scholar
  9. Budelmann BU, Thies G (1977) Secondary sensory cells in the gravity receptor system of the statocysts of Octopus vulgaris. Cell Tissue Res 182:93–98Google Scholar
  10. Budelmann BU, Wolff HG (1976) Mapping of neurons in the gravity receptor system of the Octopus statocyst by iontophoretic cobalt staining. Cell Tissue Res 171:403–406Google Scholar
  11. Budelmann BU, Young JZ (1982) Studies on the oculomotor system of Octopus vulgaris. Verh Dtsch Zool Ges 75:266Google Scholar
  12. Budelmann BU, Barber VC, West S (1973) Scanning electron microscopical studies of the arrangements and numbers of hair cells in the statocysts of Octopus vulgaris, Sepia officinalis, and Loligo vulgaris. Brain Res 56:25–41Google Scholar
  13. Colmers WF (1977) Neuronal and synaptic organization in the gravity receptor system of the statocyst of Octopus vulgaris. Cell Tissue Res 185:491–503Google Scholar
  14. Colmers WF (1981) Afferent synaptic connections between hair cells and the somata of intramacular neurons in the gravity receptor system of the statocyst of Octopus vulgaris. J Comp Neurol 197:385–394Google Scholar
  15. Colmers WF (1982) The central afferent and efferent organization of the gravity receptor system of the statocyst of Octopus vulgaris. Neuroscience 7:461–476Google Scholar
  16. Colmers WF, Hixon RF, Hanlon RT, Forsythe JW, Ackerson MV, Wiederhold ML, Hulet WH (1983) “Spinner” cephalopods — defects of statolith formation in an invertebrate model of the vestibular system. In: Lim DJ (ed) Abstracts of the Sixth Midwinter Research Meeting, Association for Research in Otolaryngology, p 87Google Scholar
  17. Crow T, Harrigan JF (1979) Reduced behavioral variability in laboratory-reared Hermissenda crassicomis (Eschscholtz 1831) (Opisthobranchia: nudibranchia). Brain Res 173:179–184Google Scholar
  18. Dijkgraaf S (1961) The statocyst of Octopus vulgaris as a rotation receptor. Pubbl Stn Zool Napoli 32:64–87Google Scholar
  19. Dilly PN (1976) The structure of some cephalopod statoliths. Cell Tissue Res 175:147–163Google Scholar
  20. Erway LC, Hurley LS, Fraser AS (1970) Congenital ataxia and otolith defects due to manganese deficiency in mice. J Nutr 100:643–654Google Scholar
  21. Forkel J (1980) Ein Beitrag zur strukturellen Organization der Statocysten frisch geschlüpfter Sepia officinalis. Zulassungsarbeit, Wissenschaftliche Prüfung für das Lehramt an Höheren Schulen, University of Regensburg, Federal Republic of GermanyGoogle Scholar
  22. Forsythe JW, Hanlon RT (1980) A closed marine culture system for rearing Octopus joubini and other large-egged benthic octopods. Lab Anim 14:137–142Google Scholar
  23. Geuze JJ (1968) Observations on the function and the structure of the statocysts of Lymnaea stagnalis (L.). Neth J Zool 18:155–204Google Scholar
  24. Johnsson L-G, Wright CG, Preston RE, Henry PJ (1980) Defects of the otoconial membranes in normal guinea pigs. Acta Otolaryngol 89:93–104Google Scholar
  25. Johnsson L-G, Rouse RC, Wright CG, Henry PJ, Hawkins JE Jr (1982) Pathology of neuroepithelial suprastructures of the human inner ear. Am J Otolaryngol 3:77–90Google Scholar
  26. Larsen MM (1959) Mouse News Lett 20:49Google Scholar
  27. Lim DJ (1980) Morphogenesis and malformation of otoconia: a review. In: Birth defects: original article series, XVI (4), pp 111–146Google Scholar
  28. Lim DJ, Erway LC (1974) Influence of manganese on genetically defective otolith. A behavioral and morphological study. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 83:565–581Google Scholar
  29. Lim DJ, Erway LC, Clark DL (1978) Tilted-head mice with genetic otoconial anomaly. Behavioural and morphological correlates. In: Hood JD (ed) Vestibular mechanisms in health and disease. Academic Press, London, pp 195–206Google Scholar
  30. Lyon MF (1951) Hereditary absence of otoliths in the house mouse. J Physiol (Lond) 114:410–418Google Scholar
  31. Purichia N, Erway LC (1972) Effects of dichlorophenamide, zinc and manganese on otolith development in mice. Dev Biol 27:395–405Google Scholar
  32. Shrader RE, Everson GJ (1967) Anomalous development of otoliths associated with postural defects in manganese-deficient guinea pigs. J Nutr 91:453–460Google Scholar
  33. Stephens PR, Young JZ (1982) The statocyst of the squid Loligo. J Zool (Lond) 197:241–266Google Scholar
  34. Wells MJ (1960) Proprioception and visual discrimination of orientation in Octopus. J Exp Biol 37:489–499Google Scholar
  35. Wells MJ (1978) Octopus. Physiology and behavior of an advanced invertebrate. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Yang WT, Hanlon RT, Krejci ME, Hixon RF, Hulet WH (1983) Laboratory rearing of Loligo opalescens, the market squid of California. Aquaculture 31:77–88Google Scholar
  37. Young JZ (1960) The statocysts of Octopus vulgaris. Proc R Soc Lond [Biol] 152:3–29Google Scholar
  38. Young JZ (1971) The anatomy of the nervous system of Octopus vulgaris. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • William F. Colmers
    • 1
  • Raymond F. Hixon
    • 2
  • Roger T. Hanlon
    • 2
  • John W. Forsythe
    • 2
  • Margarita V. Ackerson
    • 2
  • Michael L. Wiederhold
    • 1
  • William H. Hulet
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of OtorhinolaryngologyThe University of Texas Health Science CenterSan Antonio
  2. 2.The Marine Biomedical Institute, The University of Texas Medical Branch at GalvestonGalvestonUSA

Personalised recommendations