4.2 Article

Sensory brain areas in mesopelagic fishes

Journal

BRAIN BEHAVIOR AND EVOLUTION
Volume 57, Issue 3, Pages 117-133

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000047231

Keywords

olfactory bulb; optic tectum; trigeminal/octavolateral area; gustatory area; bioluminescence; mesopelagic fishes; cluster analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Four areas of the brain that receive primary projections from chemical senses ([1] olfactory bulb, [2] facial and vagal lobes), the eye ([3] optic tectum), and somato- and mechanosensory systems such as the lateral line, vestibular and auditory systems ([4] trigeminal and octavolateral regions) have been studied and relative size differences used to deduce the sensory specializations of 67 species of mesopelagic fishes. One type of analysis used the average relative volumes of brain areas and identified 'specialists' with only one brain area above-average (36%), species 'dominated' by two sensory brain regions (49%), and generalists (15%), with three areas above-average. In addition, a cluster analysis was performed that separated 49 species which were mostly visually oriented from 18 non-visual species, among which 16 were characterized by an association of above-average trigeminal/octavolateral and gustatory areas, and a single species with a dominant olfactory bulb. The results support the idea that these species occupy a rich sensory environment for which the absence of sunlight is compensated by chemical and mechanosensory stimuli as well as by bioluminescent signals. This has lead to the development of specializations for the perception of single stimulus-modes, most notably for the visual system, as well as for combinations of various receptors and central processing areas, with a preference for associating either the chemical senses, including the olfactory and facial/vagal systems, or the trigeminal/octavolateral systems. Copyright (C) 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available