Bifunctional Role of the Sternohyoideus Muscle During Suction Feeding in Striped Surfperch, Embiotoca lateralis

Do salamanders chew? An X-ray reconstruction of moving morphology analysis of ambystomatid intraoral feeding behaviours

Chewing is widespread across vertebrates, including mammals, lepidosaurs, and ray-finned and cartilaginous fishes, yet common wisdom about one group-amphibians-is that they swallow food whole, without processing. Earlier salamander studies lacked analyses of internal kinematics of the tongue, analyses of muscle function, and sampled few individuals, which may have caused erroneous conclusions. Specifically, without tongue and food kinematics, intraoral behaviours are difficult to disambiguate. We hypothesized that ambystomatid salamanders use diverse intraoral behaviours, including chewing, and tested this hypothesis with biplanar videofluoroscopy, X-ray reconstruction of moving morphology, and fluoromicrometry. We generated musculoskeletal kinematic profiles for intraoral behaviours in Axolotls (Ambystoma mexicanum), including three-dimensional skeletal kinematics associated with feeding, for gape, cranial and pectoral girdle rotations, and tongue translations. We also measured muscle fibre and muscle-tendon unit strains for six muscles involved in generating skull, jaw and tongue kinematics (adductor mandibulae, depressor mandibulae, geniohyoid, sternohyoid, epaxialis and hypaxialis). A principal component analysis recovered statistically significant differences between behaviour cycles, classified based on food movements as either chewing or transport. Thus, our data suggest that ambystomatid salamanders use a previously unrecognized diversity of intraoral behaviours, including chewing. Combined with existing knowledge, our data suggest that chewing is a basal trait for tetrapods and jaw-bearing vertebrates. This article is part of the theme issue 'Food processing and nutritional assimilation in animals'.

What good is a measure of muscle length? The how and why of direct measurements of skeletal muscle motion

Over the past 50 years our understanding of the central role that muscle motion has in powering movement has accelerated significantly. Fundamental to this progress has been the development of methods for measuring the length of muscles and muscle fibers in vivo. A measurement of muscle fiber length might seem a trivial piece of information on its own. Yet when combined with knowledge of the properties of skeletal muscle it has proven a powerful tool for understanding the mechanics and energetics of locomotion and informing models of motor control. In this perspective we showcase the value of direct measurements of muscle fiber length from four different techniques: sonomicrometry, fluoromicrometry, magnetomicrometry, and ultrasound. For each method, we review its history and provide a high-level user's guide for researchers choosing tools for measuring muscle length in vivo. We highlight key insights that these measurements have provided, including the importance of passive elastic mechanisms and how skeletal muscle properties govern locomotor performance. The diversity of locomotor behaviors revealed across comparative studies has provided an important tool for discovering the rules for muscle function that span vertebrate locomotion more broadly, including in humans.

Epaxial and hypaxial co-contraction: a mechanism for modulating strike pressure and accuracy during suction feeding in channel catfish

Most fish species use concentric epaxial and hypaxial contractions to suction feed, whereby both muscle groups produce cranial expansion and negative intraoral pressures. In contrast, channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) suction feed with little to no cranial elevation and epaxial shortening, generating suction power primarily with hypaxial shortening and pectoral girdle retraction. We hypothesized that channel catfish (1) actively anchor the head via isometric contraction of the epaxials and (2) vary feeding performance by modulating the absolute and relative outputs of the co-contracting muscles. We used a combination of electromyography, intraoral pressure recordings and specimen manipulation, and developed a new dual-lever model to explore this idea. We detected epaxial and hypaxial co-contraction prior to suction force development in all strikes. Our model revealed that the differential between the co-contracting muscles may be used to modulate suction pressure and strike accuracy.

Royal knifefish generate powerful suction feeding through large neurocranial elevation and high epaxial muscle power

Suction feeding in ray-finned fishes involves powerful buccal cavity expansion to accelerate water and food into the mouth. Previous XROMM studies in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus), and channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) have shown that more than 90% of suction power in high performance strikes comes from the axial musculature. Thus, the shape of the axial muscles and skeleton may impact suction feeding mechanics. Royal knifefish (Chitala blanci) have an unusual postcranial morphology, with a ventrally flexed vertebral column and relatively large mass of epaxial muscle. Based on their body shape, we hypothesized that royal knifefish would generate high power strikes by utilizing large neurocranial elevation, vertebral column extension, and epaxial shortening. As predicted, C. blanci generated high suction expansion power compared to the other three species studied to date (up to 160 W), which was achieved by increasing both the rate of volume change and the intraoral subambient pressure. The large epaxial muscle (25% of body mass) shortened at high velocities to produce large neurocranial elevation and vertebral extension (up to 41 deg, combined), as well as high muscle mass-specific power (up to 800 W kg-1). For the highest power strikes, axial muscles generated 95% of the power, and 64% of the axial muscle mass consisted of the epaxial muscles. The epaxial-dominated suction expansion of royal knifefish supports our hypothesis that postcranial morphology may be a strong predictor of suction feeding biomechanics.

A new conceptual framework for the musculoskeletal biomechanics and physiology of ray-finned fishes

Suction feeding in ray-finned fishes requires substantial muscle power for fast and forceful prey capture. The axial musculature located immediately behind the head has been long known to contribute some power for suction feeding, but recent XROMM and fluoromicrometry studies found nearly all the axial musculature (over 80%) provides effectively all (90–99%) of the power for high-performance suction feeding. The dominance of axial power suggests a new framework for studying the musculoskeletal biomechanics of fishes: the form and function of axial muscles and bones should be analysed for power production in feeding (or at least as a compromise between swimming and feeding), and cranial muscles and bones should be analysed for their role in transmitting axial power and coordinating buccal expansion. This new framework is already yielding novel insights, as demonstrated in four species for which suction power has now been measured. Interspecific comparisons suggest high suction power can be achieved in different ways: increasing the magnitude of suction pressure or the rate of buccal volume change, or both (as observed in the most powerful of these species). Our framework suggests that mechanical and evolutionary interactions between the head and the body, and between the swimming and feeding roles of axial structures, may be fruitful areas for continued study.

Summary: The recent discovery that some fish use their whole bodies for high-performance suction feeding prompts a reappraisal of cranial and axial biomechanics and overall body shape in ray-finned fishes.

Suction feeding biomechanics of Polypterus bichir: investigating linkage mechanisms and the contributions of cranial kinesis to oral cavity volume change

Many fishes use substantial cranial kinesis to rapidly increase buccal cavity volume, pulling prey into the mouth via suction feeding. Living polypterids are a key lineage for understanding the evolution and biomechanics of suction feeding due to their phylogenetic position and unique morphology. Polypterus bichir have fewer mobile cranial elements compared to teleosts (e.g., immobile [pre]maxillae) but successfully generate suction through dorsal, ventral, and lateral oral cavity expansion. However, the relative contributions of these motions to suction feeding success have not been quantified. Additionally, extensive body musculature and lack of opercular jaw opening linkages make P. bichir of interest for examining the role of cranial vs. axial muscles in driving mandibular depression. Here we analyze the kinematics of buccal expansion during suction feeding in P. bichir using X-Ray Reconstruction of Moving Morphology (XROMM) and quantify the contributions of skeletal elements to oral cavity volume expansion and prey capture. Mouth gape peaks early in the strike, followed by maximum cleithral and ceratohyal rotations, and finally by opercular and suspensorial abductions, maintaining the anterior-to-posterior movement of water. Using a new method of quantifying bones' relative contributions to volume change (RCVC) we demonstrate that ceratohyal kinematics are the most significant drivers of oral cavity volume change. All measured cranial bone motions, except abduction of the suspensorium, are correlated with prey motion. Lastly, cleithral retraction is largely concurrent with ceratohyal retraction and jaw depression while the sternohyoideus maintains constant length, suggesting a central role of the axial muscles, cleithrum, and ceratohyal in ventral expansion.

A Practical Guide to Measuring Ex vivo Joint Mobility Using XROMM

X-Ray Reconstruction of Moving Morphology (XROMM), though traditionally used for studies of in vivo skeletal kinematics, can also be used to precisely and accurately measure ex vivo range of motion from cadaveric manipulations. The workflow for these studies is holistically similar to the in vivo XROMM workflow but presents several unique challenges. This paper aims to serve as a practical guide by walking through each step of the ex vivo XROMM process: how to acquire and prepare cadaveric specimens, how to manipulate specimens to collect X-ray data, and how to use these data to compute joint rotational mobility. Along the way, it offers recommendations for best practices and for avoiding common pitfalls to ensure a successful study.