, Volume 124, Issue 2, pp 57–65 | Cite as

Morphology of female genital tracts in Dasypodidae (Xenarthra, Mammalia): a comparative survey

  • Pablo D. Cetica
  • Hernán J. Aldana Marcos
  • María Susana Merani
Original Article


Previous works about comparative spermatology in Dasypodidae determined that sperm morphology is a striking variable among genera. It was suggested that this sperm feature may be related to specific morphologies of the female reproductive tract. The present comparative study of the morphology of the female genital tract from seven species corresponding to six genera of Dasypodidae is aimed to determine the main similarities and differences between the species and to establish a possible correlation with the sperm shapes and sizes. Genital tracts were studied macroscopically and histologically. Dasypus hybridus has disk-shaped ovaries and the cortex occupies almost all the organ with a single oocyte in each follicle. Tolypeutes matacus, Chaetophractus villosus, Chaetophractus vellerosus, Zaedyus pichiy, Cabassous chacoensis and Clamyphorus truncatus possess ovoid and elongated ovaries, with both longitudinally polarized cortex and medulla, and the peculiar presence of several oocytes in the same follicle. D. hybridus and T. matacus have a simple pear-shaped uterus, but in the other species the uterus is pyramid shaped and bicornuate. The uterine cervix is very long in all studied species. Only T. matacus presents a true vagina as in most eutherian mammals; on the other hand, in the other species a urogenital sinus is observed. The structure of female reproductive tracts in Dasypodidae contains a mixture of assumedly primary and other derived features. According to the different morphologies of the regions analyzed, a classification of the female genital tracts in three groups can be performed (group 1: Dasypus; group 2: Tolypeutes; group 3: Chaetophractus, Zaedyus, Cabassous, Clamyphorus) and a correlation between each group and a specific sperm morphology can be established.


Genital tract Reproduction Armadillos Dasypodidae Xenarthra 



We thank Dr. J.M. Affani from the Instituto de Neurociencia (CONICET), Dr. H. Lagiglia from Museo Municipal de Historia Natural de San Rafael, Dr. O. Vaccaro from Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales Bernardino Rivadavia and M.L. Bolcovich for help in obtaining the samples. We acknowledge Dr. A.J. Solari for the critical reading of the manuscript. This research was supported by grants of PICTR 00074.


  1. Adamoli VC, Cetica PD, Merani MS, Solari AJ (2001) Comparative morphologic placental types in Dasypodidae (Chaetophractus villosus, Cabassous chacoensis, Tolypeutes matacus and Dasypus hybridus). Biocell 25(1):17–22Google Scholar
  2. Altmann F (1924) Beitrage zur Anatomie des weiblichen Genetales der Dasypodiden. Zs Ges Anat München 72:390–406Google Scholar
  3. Bernirschke K (2004) Comparative placentation. Available from: URL:
  4. Birabén M (1951) Semblanza de Miguel Fernández descubridor de la poliembrionía en los mamíferos. Ciencia e Investigación 7:224–229Google Scholar
  5. Briskie JV, Montgomerie R (1992) Sperm size and sperm competition in birds. Proc R Soc Lond B 247:89–95Google Scholar
  6. Burns RK (1939) The differentiation of sex in the opossum (Didelphys virginiana) and its modification by the male hormone testosterone propionate. J Morph 65:79–119Google Scholar
  7. Carlson BM (2000) Sistema urogenital. In: Embriología humana y biología del desarrollo. Ediciones Harcourt, Madrid, pp 361–396Google Scholar
  8. Cetica P, Sassaroli J, Merani MS, Solari A (1993) Comparative spermatology in Dasypodidae (Priodontes maximus, Chaetophractus villosus and Dasypus hybridus). Biocell 21(3):195–204Google Scholar
  9. Cetica P, Rahn IM, Merani MS, Solari A (1997) Comparative spermatology in Dasypodidae II (Chaetophractus vellerosus, Zaedyus pichiy, Euphractus sexcinctus, Tolypeutes matacus, Dasypus septemcinctus and Dasypus novemcinctus). Biocell 21(3):195–204Google Scholar
  10. Cetica PD, Solari AJ, Merani MS, de Rosas JC, Burgos MH (1998) Evolutionary sperm morphology and morphometry in armadillos. J Submicrosc Cytol and Pathol 30: 309–314Google Scholar
  11. Codón SM, Casanave EB (1996) Histology of the ovary of the armadillo Chaetophractus villosus (Mammalia, Dasypodidae). Rev Brasil Biol 56(3):599–604Google Scholar
  12. Codón SM, Casanave EB (2000) Comparative morphology of the ovaries of three species of Dasypodidae (Mammalia, Xenarthra). Rev Chil Anat 18(2):251–257Google Scholar
  13. Corbeil LB, Chatterjee A, Foresman L, Westfall JA (1985) Ultraestructure of the cyclic changes in the murine uterus, cervix and vagina. Tissue Cell 17:53–68Google Scholar
  14. Díaz GB, Ojeda RA (2000) Libro Rojo de Mamíferos Amenazados de la Argentina. 2nd edn, Sarem, MendozaGoogle Scholar
  15. Dybas LK, Dybas HS (1981) Coadaptation and taxonomic differentiation of sperm and spermathecae in featherwing beetles. Evolution 35:168–174Google Scholar
  16. Enders AC (1960) Development and structure of the villosus haemochorial placenta of the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus). J Anat 94:34–45Google Scholar
  17. Enders AC, Buchanan GD (1959) The reproductive tract of the female nine-banded armadillo. Texas Rep Bio Med 17(3):323–340Google Scholar
  18. Galbreath GJ (1985) The evolution of monozygotic polyembryony in Dasypus. In: Montgomery GG (ed) The evolution and ecology of armadillos, sloths and vermilinguas. Smithsonian Institution Press, London, pp 243–246Google Scholar
  19. Gomendio M, Roldan ERS (1994) The evolution of gametes. In: Bittar EE, Bittar N (eds) Principles of medical biology, vol 1. JAI Press, Greenwich, pp 115–151Google Scholar
  20. Grassé P (1969) Apareil génital des mammiféres placentaires. In: Messon et Cie (eds) Traité de Zoologie, Anatomie, Systématique, Biologie Vol 16, fascicule 6. Libraire de l’ Académie de Médicine, Paris, pp 453–636Google Scholar
  21. Hamilton WJ, Mossman HW (1973) Aparato urogenital. In: Embriología Humana. Desarrollo prenatal de la forma y la función. Editorial Intermédica, Buenos Aires, pp 410–419Google Scholar
  22. Kluge AG (1977) Reproduction. In: Chordate structure and function. Macmillan, New York, pp 554–597Google Scholar
  23. Laughry WJ, Prodöhl PA, McDonough CM, Avise JC (1998) Polyembryony in armadillos. Am Sci 86:274–279Google Scholar
  24. McDonald LE (1989) Veterinary endocrinology and reproduction, 4th edn. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, pp 178–179Google Scholar
  25. Nalbandov AV (1964) Reproductive physiology: comparative reproductive physiology of domestic animals, laboratory animals, and man. 2nd edn., WH Freeman and Co Publishers, California, p 59Google Scholar
  26. Newfang DM (1947) Sex differentiation in the nine-banded armadillo, Dasypus novemcinctus. J Morph 81(3):283–316Google Scholar
  27. Roldan ERS, Gomendio M, Vitullo AD (1992a) The evolution of eutherian spermatozoa and underlying selective forces: female selection and sperm competition. Biol Rev 67:551–593Google Scholar
  28. Roldan ERS, Gomendio M, Vitullo AD (1992b) Sperm shape and size: evolutionary processes in mammals. In: Baccetti B (ed) Comparative spermatology 20 years after, vol 75, Raven Press, New York, pp 1001–1010Google Scholar
  29. Sivinski J (1984) Sperm in competition. In: Smith RL (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic, Orlando, pp 86–115Google Scholar
  30. Smith TT, Yanagimachi R (1990) The viability of hamster spermatozoa stored in the isthmus of the oviduct: the importance of sperm-epithelium contact for sperm survival. Biol Reprod 42:450–457Google Scholar
  31. Stors EE, Burchfield HP, Rees RJW (1989) Reproduction delay in the common long-nosed armadillo, Dasypus novemcinctus. In: Advances in Neotropical Mammalogy, Sandhill Crane Press, pp 535–548Google Scholar
  32. Talmage RV, Buchanan GD (1954) The armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus). A review of its natural history, ecology, anatomy and reproductive physiology. Rice Inst Pamph 41(2):1–135Google Scholar
  33. van Wagenen G, Simpson ME (1965) Embryology of the ovary and testis. Homo sapiens and Macaca mulatta. Yale University Press, London, pp 98–145Google Scholar
  34. Weichert CK (1967) Reproductive system. In: Elements of chordate anatomy. Mc-Graw Hill, New York, pp 176–203Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pablo D. Cetica
    • 1
  • Hernán J. Aldana Marcos
    • 2
  • María Susana Merani
    • 1
  1. 1.Centro de Investigaciones en Reproducción, Facultad de MedicinaUniversidad de Buenos AiresBuenos AiresArgentina
  2. 2.Laboratorio de Histología y Embriología. Facultad de MedicinaUniversidad de MorónMorónArgentina

Personalised recommendations