4.1 Article

Optic chiasm in the species of order Clupeiformes, family Clupeidae: Optic chiasm of Spratelloides gracilis shows an opposite laterality to that of Etrumeus teres

Journal

LATERALITY
Volume 14, Issue 5, Pages 495-514

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13576500802628160

Keywords

Optic nerve; Chiasma; Decussation; Spratelloides gracilis; Etrumeus teres; Clupeidae

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In most teleost fishes, the optic nerves decussate completely as they project to the mesencephalic region. Examination of the decussation pattern of 25 species from 11 different orders in Pisces revealed that each species shows a specific chiasmic type. In 11 species out of the 25, laterality of the chiasmic pattern was not determined; in half of the individuals examined, the left optic nerve ran dorsally to the right optic nerve, while in the other half, the right optic nerve was dorsal. In eight other species the optic nerves from both eyes branched into several bundles at the chiasmic point, and intercalated to form a complicated decussation pattern. In the present study we report our findings that Spratelloides gracilis, of the order Clupeiformes, family Clupeidae, shows a particular laterality of decussation: the left optic nerve ran dorsally to the right (n=200/202). In contrast, Etrumeus teres, of the same order and family, had a strong preference of the opposite (complementary) chiasmic pattern to that of S. gracilis (n=59/59), revealing that these two species display opposite left-right optic chiasm patterning. As far as we investigated, other species of Clupeiformes have not shown left-right preference in the decussation pattern. We conclude that the opposite laterality of the optic chiasms of these two closely related species, S. gracilis and E. teres, enables investigation of species-specific laterality in fishes of symmetric shapes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available