Applied Microscopy

  • 제39권3호
  • /
  • Pages.267-276
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 2287-5123(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-4445(eISSN)
한국현미경학회 (Korean Society of Microscopy)
권호 표지

긴가락박쥐(Miniopterus schreibersi fuliginosus)와 검은집박쥐(Pipistrellus savii) 혀의 비교형태

Comparative Morphology of the Tongue of Miniopterus schreibersi fuliginosus and Pipistrellus savii

  • 박지원 (한국외국어대학교부속 용인외국어고등학교) ;
  • 이정훈 (경남대학교 과학교육과)
  • 투고 : 2009.08.27
  • 심사 : 2009.09.14
  • 발행 : 2009.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

주사전자현미경을 이용하여 한국산 긴가락박쥐(Miniopterus schreibersi fuliginosus)와 검은집박쥐(Pipistrellus savii)의 혀유두의 형태를 관찰하였다. 본 연구에서 두 종 모두 세 가지의 혀유두, 즉, 실유두, 버섯유두 그리고 성곽유두가 관찰되었다. 실유두는 다시 두 종류로 세분화되어졌으며, 침상의 돌기물을 갖는 유형1은 혀의 전반부의 1/2 지점까지 분포하며, 유형2는 밋밋하고 두꺼운 돌기물을 갖고 있으며 혀의 후반부의 1/2에 분포한다. 두 종 모두 35~45개의 버섯유두가 혀의 표면에서 관찰된다. 이들 버섯유두는 혀의 측면과 혀의 전반과 후반부의 끝 쪽에서 나타난다. 두 종의 버섯유두는 각각 두 개 혹은 세 개의 매우 큰 유두로 혀의 후반부 중앙에 일직선으로 배열되어 있다. 두 개의 성곽유두는 혀의 후반부 끝쪽 가까이에 분포하고 있다. 이들 성곽유두는 크고 둥글며 각각은 두 층의 pad를 갖고 있다. 긴가락박쥐와 검은집박쥐의 혀유두의 전체적인 형태는 다른 익수류와 유사하였다. 그럼에도 불구하고, 두 종 사이에 드물지만 주목할 만한 차이점이 실유두와 버섯유두에서 나타났다. 검은집박쥐와는 달리 긴가락박쥐의 유형2의 실유두는 두 개 혹은 세 개의 돌기를 가지고 있었다. 혀의 후반부 중앙에 위치하고 있는 큰 버섯유두의 경우, 긴가락박쥐에서는 3개, 검은집박쥐에서는 단지 2개만 관찰되었다.

A SEM study on morphology of lingual papillae of Korean long-fingered bat (Miniopterus schreibersi fuliginosus) and Savi's Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus savii) was conducted. Three kinds of lingual papillae were observed: filiform, fungiform, circumvallate papillae. Filiform papillae were divided into two types; the type 1 had a group of needle-like projections, and was distributed throughout the front half of the tongue; the type 2 had a smooth and thick body, and was found in rear half of the tongue. 35 to 45 fungiform papillae were found on the dorsal surface of the tongue in both species. They were observed along the lateral margins and were also found on front and rear end part of the tongue. There were two to three noticeably large fungiform papillae arranged in a straight line on the region between lingual prominence and circumvallate papillae. There were two circumvallate papillae close to the rear end of the tongue. They were large and round, each having two layers of pads. The overall morphology of lingual papillae of M. schreibersi fuliginosus and P. savii was found to be similar with other Chiroptera. However, few but noticeable differences were found among the filiform papillae and fungiform papillae. Type 2 filiform papillae differed in that bifid and trifid configuration were found in M. schreibersi fulginosus unlike in P. savii. In addition, numbers of large fungiform papillae located in the center of posterior region of the tongue were different with M. schreibersi have three while P. savii having only two.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Chung YW, Kwun HS: A morphological study on the tongues of the vertebrates. I. Comparative macroscopic and microscopic observations. J Catholic Medical College 30 : 531-555, 1977
  2. Emura S, Hayakawa D, Chen H, Shoumura S, Atoji Y, Agungpriyono S: SEM study on the dorsal lingual surface of the lesser dog-faced fruit bat, Cynopterus brachyotis. Okajimas Folia Anat Jpn 78 : 123-128, 2001 https://doi.org/10.2535/ofaj1936.78.4_123
  3. Emura S, Hayakawa D, Chen H, Shoumura S, Atoji Y, Wijayanto H: SEM study on the dorsal lingual surface of the large flying fox, Pteropus vampyrus. Okajimas Folia Anat Jpn 79 : 113-120, 2002 https://doi.org/10.2535/ofaj.79.113
  4. Fawcett DW: A textbook of histology. W.B. Sanuders Company, pp. 582-597, 1986
  5. Fernandez B, Suarez I, Zapata A: Ultrastructure of the filiform papillae on the tongue of the hamster. J Anat 126 : 487-494, 1978
  6. Greenbaum IF, Phillips CJ: Comparative anatomy and general histology of tongues of lon-nosed bats (Leptonycteris sanborni and L. nivalis) with reference to infestation of oral mites. J Mamm 55 : 489-504, 1974 https://doi.org/10.2307/1379542
  7. Gregorin R: Comparative morphology of the tongue in free-tailed bats (Chiroptera, Molossidae). Iheringia. S$\acute{e}$rie Zool Porto Alegre 93 : 213-221, 2003
  8. Hwang H, Lee J: Morphological study on the dorsal lingual papillae of Myotis macrodactylus. Korean J Electron Microscopy 37 : 147-156, 2007
  9. Iida M, Yoshioka I, Muto H: Three dimensional and surfaces structures of rat filiform papillae. Acta Anat 121 : 237-244, 1985 https://doi.org/10.1159/000145972
  10. Iwasaki S, Miyata K, Kobayashi K: The surface structure of the dorsal epithelium of tongue in the mouse. Acta Anat Nippon 62 :69-76, 1987
  11. Iwasaki S, Miyata K, Wakasugi C, Kobayashi K: Scanning electron microscopic observations of the dorsal tongue surface in the Japanese house bat, Pipistrellus abramus. J Mamm Soc 11 : 155-164, 1986 https://doi.org/10.2307/1374064
  12. Iwasaki S, Yoshizawa H, Kawahara I: Study by scanning electron microscopy of the morphogenesis of three types of lingual papilla in the rat. Anat Rec 247 : 528-541, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0185(199704)247:4<528::AID-AR12>3.0.CO;2-R
  13. Iwasaki S, Yoshizawa H, Kawahara I: Ultrastructure study of the relationship between the morphogenesis of filiform papillae and the keratinization of the lingual epithelium in the rat. J Anat 195 :27-38, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-7580.1999.19510027.x
  14. Kobayashi K: Three-dimensional architecture of connective tissue core of the lingual papillae in the guinea pig. Anat Embryol 182 : 205-213, 1990
  15. Kobayashi K, Kumamura M, Yoshimura K, Takahashi M, Zeng JH, Kageyama I, Hama N: Comparative morphological studies on the stereo structure of the lingual papillae of selected primates using scanning electron microscopy. Ann Anat 186 : 525-530, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0940-9602(04)80101-8
  16. Kobayashi S, Shimamura A: Comparative anatomical observations of the tongue of the Japanese long-fingered bats, Miniopterus schreibersi fuliginosus. Okajimas Folia Anat Jpn 58 : 923-932, 1982 https://doi.org/10.2535/ofaj1936.58.4-6_923
  17. Kullaa-Mikkonen A, Hynynen M, Hyv$\ddot{o}$nen P: Filiform papillae of human, rat and swine tongue. Acta Anat 130 : 280-284, 1987 https://doi.org/10.1159/000146457
  18. Meisel D, Skobe Z, Shklar G: Lingual changes in aging mice with light and scanning electron microscopy. Archs Oral Biol 32 : 643-649, 1987 https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(87)90038-0
  19. Pastor JF, Moro JA, Verona JAG, Gato A, Represa JJ, Barbosa E: Morphological study by scanning electron microscopy of the lingual papilla in the common European bat (Pipistrellus pipistrellus). Archs Oral Biol 38 : 597-599, 1993 https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(93)90125-6
  20. Shimizu T, Kusano T, Wada M: The fine structure of the papillae epithelium on the tongue of albino rats and albino mice. Zool Mag 88 : 188-192, 1979
  21. Shimizu T, Kusano T, Wada M, Hara K: The histochemistry and fine structure of filiform papillae in the rat tongue. Zool Mag 89 : 53-57, 1980
  22. Son S, Lee H, Lee J: Ultrastructural observations of the lingual papillae of the Korean greater horseshoe bat, Rhinolophus ferrumequinum korai. J Basic Sci Res Inst 14 : 65-72, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1652715
  23. Steflik DE, Singh BB, Mckinney RV, Boshell JL: Correlated TEM, SEM, and histological observations of filiform papillae of the cow tongue. Acta Anat 117 : 21-30, 1983 https://doi.org/10.1159/000145767
  24. Toprak B: Light and scanning microscopic structure of filiform papillae in mice. Veterinarski Arhiv 76 : 555-562, 2006