Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative study of the olfactory epithelium of the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and the nine-spined stickleback (Pungitius pungitius)

  • Published:
Cell and Tissue Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The olfactory epithelium of the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and the nine-spined stickleback (Pungitius pungitius) has been studied with a conventional histochemical and a novel immunological staining technique. In both species, the sensory epithelium is arranged in folds separated by non-sensory epithelial tissue. In the nine-spined stickleback, intrinsic folds consisting of non-sensory cells are found in the apical part of the sensory epithelium where they divide the surface of the sensory epithelium into small islets. These non-sensory cells are non-ciliated, flattened and piled on top of each other; they contain numerous electron-translucent vesicles. The intrinsic folds are absent from the sensory epithelium of the three-spined stickleback. In both species, axons of receptor cells form a layer of fibers in the sensory epithelium immediately above the basal cells. In the three-spined stickleback, thick branches of the olfactory nerve are frequently found in this layer. These branches are only occasionally observed in the sensory epithelium of the nine-spined stickleback. Thus, the three-spined stickleback and the nine-spined stickleback show considerable differences in the organization of the sensory regions of the olfactory epithelium.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bannister LH (1965) The fine structure of the olfactory surface of teleostean fishes. Q J Microsc Sci 106:333–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertmar G (1973) Ultrastructure of the olfactory, mucosa in the homing Baltic sea trout, Salmo trutta trutta. Marine Biology 19:74–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Coad BW (1981) A bibliography of the sticklebacks (Gasterosteidae: Osteichthyes). Syllogeus 35:1–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Elofsson R, Hallberg E (1973) Correlation of ultrastructure and chemical composition of crustacean chromatophore pigment. J Ultrastruct Res 44:421–429

    Google Scholar 

  • Getchell MI, Zielinski B, Getchell TV (1986) Ontogeny of the secretory elements in the vertebrate olfactory mucosa. In: Breipohl W (ed) Ontogeny of olfaction. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 71–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallberg E, Reschke M (1990) The ultrastructural characteristics of the pheromone gland cells of Dendrolimus pini (Insecta: Lepidoptera). Acta Zool (Stockh) 71:169–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Holl A (1965) Vergleichende morphologische und histologische Untersuchungen am Geruchsorgan der Knochenfische. Z Morphol Ökol Tiere 54:707–782

    Google Scholar 

  • Honkanen T, Ekström P (1990) An immunocytochemical study of the olfactory projections in the three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus L. J Comp Neurol 292:65–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Honkanen T, Ekström P (1991) An immunocytochemical study of the development of the olfactory system in the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L., Teleostei). Anat Embryol 184:469–477

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudon J, Guderley H (1984) An electrophoretic study of the phylogenetic relationships among four species of sticklebacks (Pisces: Gasterosteidae). Can J Zool 62:2313–2316

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis DH, Tarpley RJ, Marks JE, Sis RF (1985) Drug induced structural changes in olfactory organ of channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus, Rafinesque. J Fish Biol 26:355–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Liermann K (1933) Über den Bau des Geruchsorgans der Teleostier. Z Anat Entwicklungsgesch 100:1–39

    Google Scholar 

  • McLennan DA, Brooks DR, McPhail JD (1988) The benefits of communication between comparative ethology and phylogenetic systematics: a case study using gasterosteid fishes. Can J Zool 66:2177–2190

    Google Scholar 

  • Penczak T (1961) Serological relationships between the nine-spined and the three-spined stickleback. Nature 192:673–674

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulte E, Holl A (1971) Feinstruktur des Riechepithels von Calamoichthys calabaricus JA Smith (Pisces, Brachiopterygii). Z Zellforschung 120:261–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Teichmann H (1954) Vergleichende Untersuchungen an der Nase der Fische. Z Morphol Ökol Tiere 43:171–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Theisen B (1982) Functional morphology of the olfactory organ in Spinachia spinachia (L.) (Teleostei, Gasterosteidae). Acta Zool (Stockh) 63:247–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Theisen B (1984) On the morphology of the olfactory organs in the Gasterosteidae (Teleostei) and related families. Videnskabelige meddelelser fra dansk naturhistorisk forening 145:87–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Thommesen G (1983) Morphology, distribution and specificity of olfactory receptor cells in salmonid fishes. Acta Physiol Scand 117:241–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Wootton RJ (1976) The biology of the sticklebacks. Academic Press, London New York San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto M (1982) Comparative morphology of the peripheral olfactory organ in teleosts. In: Hara TJ (ed) Chemoreception in fishes. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 39–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto M, Ueda K (1978) Comparative morphology of fish olfactory epithelium. V. Gasterosteiformes, Channiformes and Synbranchiformes. Bull Jpn Soc Sci Fish 44:1309–1314

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Honkanen, T., Ekström, P. Comparative study of the olfactory epithelium of the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and the nine-spined stickleback (Pungitius pungitius). Cell Tissue Res 269, 267–273 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00319617

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00319617

Key words

Navigation