Cargando…
No news from old drawings? Stomach anatomy in muroid rodents in relation to body size and ecology
Muroid rodents mostly have a complex stomach: one part is lined with a cornified (nonglandular) epithelium, referred to as a “forestomach”, whereas the rest is lined with glandular epithelium. Numerous functions for the forestomach have been proposed. We collated a catalog of anatomical depictions o...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9543737/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35830587 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmor.21496 |
Sumario: | Muroid rodents mostly have a complex stomach: one part is lined with a cornified (nonglandular) epithelium, referred to as a “forestomach”, whereas the rest is lined with glandular epithelium. Numerous functions for the forestomach have been proposed. We collated a catalog of anatomical depictions of the stomach of 174 muroid species from which the respective nonglandular and glandular areas could be digitally measured, yielding a “stomach ratio” (nonglandular:glandular area) as a scale‐independent variable. Stomach ratios ranged from 0.13 to 20.15, and the coefficient of intraspecific variation if more than one picture was available for a species averaged at 29.7% (±21.5). We tested relationships of the ratio with body mass and various anatomical and ecological variables, including diet. There was a consistent phylogenetic signal, suggesting that closely related species share a similar anatomy. Apart from classifying stomachs into hemiglandular and discoglandular, no anatomical or ecological measure showed a consistent relationship to the stomach ratio. In particular, irrespective of statistical method or the source of dietary information, dietary proxies did not significantly correlate with the stomach ratio, except for a trend towards significance for invertivory (insectivory). Yet, even this relationship was not convincing: whereas highly insectivorous species had high but no low stomach ratios, herbivorous species had both low and high stomach ratios. Thus, the statistical effect is not due to a systematic increase in the relative forestomach size with invertivory. The most plausible hypotheses so far associate the muroid forestomach and its microbiome with a generic protective role against microbial or fungal toxins and diseases, without evident correlates of a peculiar need for this function under specific ecological conditions. Yet, this function remains to be confirmed. While providing a catalog of published depictions and hypotheses, this study highlights that the function of the muroid rodent forestomach remains enigmatic to date. |
---|