Comparative morphological studies of the pelvic limb bones in ostrich (Struthio camelus), emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae), domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus) and duck (Anas platyrhynchos domesticus

DOI: 10.18805/ijar.B-3673    | Article Id: B-3673 | Page : 1445-1449
Citation :- Comparative morphological studies of the pelvic limb bones in ostrich (Struthio camelus), emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae), domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus) and duck (Anas platyrhynchos domesticus).Indian Journal Of Animal Research.2019.(53):1445-1449
Chukkath Vijayan Rajani, Harshad Sudheer Patki, Helna Maria Wilson and Kalaripparambath Surjith rajanirag73@gmail.com
Address : Department of Anatomy and Histology, College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Pookode, Wayanad-673 576, Kerala, India.
Submitted Date : 26-06-2018
Accepted Date : 1-08-2018

Abstract

Morphological and morphometrical study of pelvic limb bones from adult birds viz., ostrich (n=4), emu (n=6), domestic fowl (n=8) and duck (n=8) were carried out. Pubic symphysis was a distinctive feature of os coxae in ostrich. Medial surface of ilium was united to lumbosacral mass in ostrich and emu, whereas, only medial border made fusion in domestic fowl and duck. Post acetabular ilium was an elongated triangle in ostrich and emu, whereas, quadrilateral plate in domestic fowl and duck. Iliac fossae for kidneys were lacking in ostrich and emu. Ischium was a long rod in ostrich and emu. Ilio-ischiatic notch was present in ostrich and emu, while, ilio-ischiatic foramen was found in domestic fowl and duck. Caudal extremity of pubis was free in all the species studied excluding ostrich. Ostrich and emu exhibited a distinct pneumatic foramen on femur which was lacking in domestic fowl and duck. Length ratio of femur to tibiotarsus was 1:1.75, 1:1.88, 1:1.38 and 1:1.69 in ostrich, emu, domestic fowl and duck correspondingly. Lateral cnemial crest was a large tuberosity in ostrich; whereas, in other species it was a thick curved spine.  Hypotarsus was in the form of spine in ostrich and emu. Bony spur of tarsometatarsus observed in male domestic fowl was lacking in the other species. Distal extremity showed two trochleae in ostrich, whereas, three trochleae, in the other species. Ostrich is the only didactyl bird with two digits. Emu possessed three digits, while, domestic fowl and duck possessed four. Our present study revealed pneumatic femur, longer tibiotarsus and tarsometatarsus and less number of digits in ostrich and emu.  Reduction in number of phalanges also led to reduce the number of muscles and tendons associated to digits. The above mentioned features may aid ostrich and emu for high-speed locomotion.

Keywords

Domestic fowl Duck Emu Morphology Ostrich Pelvic limb

References

  1. Charutha, A., Dzier, M., Pierzchala, M., Cooper, R.G., Polawska, E. and Horbanczuk, J.O. (2013). Sex related differences of morphometric, densiometric and geometric parameters of tibia and tarsometatarsal bone in 14-month-old ostriches (Struthio camelus). Poultry Science, 92: 2965-2976.
  2. Fowler, M. E. (1991). Comparative clinical anatomy of ratites. Journal of Zoo and Wild life Medicine, 22(2): 204-227.
  3. Gilbert, M.M., Snively, E. and Cotton, J. (2016). The Tarsometatarsus of the Ostrich Struthio camelus: Anatomy, Bone Densities, and Structural Mechanics. Plos One,11(3): e0149708.
  4. Nickel, R., Schummer, A. and Seiferie, E. (1977). Anatomy of the Domestic Birds. Verlag Paul Perey, Berlin. pp 17-19.
  5. O’Conner, P. M. (2009). Evolution of Archosaurian body plan: Skeletal adaptations of an air –sac based Breathing apparatus in birds and other Archosaurs. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 311A: 629-646.
  6. Rankin, J.W., Rubenson, J., Hutchinson, J.R. (2016). Inferring muscle functional roles of the ostrich pelvic limb during walking and running using computer optimization. Journal of Royal Society Interface, 13: 20160035.
  7. Santhilakshmi, M., Chandrasekar Rao, T.S., Ramaiah, T.J. and Reddy, R.Y. (2007). Gross anatomical studies on the os coxae and femur of emu. Indian Journal of Poultry Science, 42(1): 61-63.
  8. Smith, N. C., Wilson, A. M., Jespers, K. J. and Payne, R. C. (2006). Muscle architecture and functional anatomy of the pelvic limb of the ostrich (Struthio camelus). Journal of Anatomy, 209: 765–779.
  9. Tamilselvan, S., Iniyah, K., Jayachithra, S., Sivagnanam, S., Balasundaram, K. and Lavanya, C. (2015). Gross Anatomy of Os Coxae of Ostrich (Stuthio camellus). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 4(4): 201-205.
  10. Venkatesan, S., Paramasivam, S., Kannan, T.A., Sabiha, H.B. and Geetha, R. (2006), A comparative anatomical study of femur of domestic fowl, guinea fowl, turkey and ostrich. Journal of Animal Sciences, 76(11): 925-926.
  11. Young, T.H. (1980). Preparation of skeletal specimen. Equine Practice, 2: 276.
  12. Zhang, R., Wang, H., Zeng, G., Zhou, C., Pan, R., Wang, Q. and Li, J. (2016). Anatomical study of the ostrich (Struthio camelus) foot locomotor system. Indian Journal of Animal Research, 50 (4): 476-483. 

Global Footprints