A Morphometric Study on the Skull of the Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo)

Öz

In this study, 80 turkey skulls (40 females and 40 males) were used. Turkeys slaughtered at the age of 128 days. The females had an average weight of 11.5 kg and the males had 19 kg. We measured 14 features and determined 6 indices on the skulls of turkeys. Our study focused on morphometric differences and comparison of determined features of those skulls for males and female turkeys. Correlations between all features and indices of the skulls were examined for each male and female group, separately. All morphometric measurements were significantly higher in male group. All indices except skull index and foramen magnum index were significantly higher in female group. These measurements showed that males have bigger skulls. Cranial index, facial index, index 1 and index 2 showed that males have narrower and longer skulls while the females have smaller and wider. According to foramen magnum index, foramen magnum of turkeys is slightly vertical oval. Also, ratio of skull length and width is similar for both sexes. This study is the morphometric evaluation of the skull in turkeys. Therefore, this study will lead to further studies on turkeys and other bird species.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Meleagris gallopavo,Morphometry,Skull anatomy

A Morphometric Study on the Skull of the Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo)

Öz

In this study, 80 turkey skulls (40 females and 40 males) were used. Turkeys slaughtered at the age of 128 days. The females had an average weight of 11.5 kg and the males had 19 kg. We measured 14 features and determined 6 indices on the skulls of turkeys. Our study focused on morphometric differences and comparison of determined features of those skulls for males and female turkeys. Correlations between all features and indices of the skulls were examined for each male and female group, separately. All morphometric measurements were significantly
higher in male group. All indices except skull index and foramen magnum index were significantly higher in female group. These measurements showed that males have bigger skulls. Cranial index, facial index, index 1 and index 2 showed that males have narrower and longer skulls while the females have smaller and wider. According to foramen magnum index, foramen magnum of turkeys is slightly vertical oval. Also, ratio of skull length and width is similar for both sexes. This study is the morphometric evaluation of the skull in turkeys. Therefore, this study will lead to further studies on turkeys and other bird species.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Meleagris gallopavo,Morphometry,Skull anatomy,Turkey

Kaynakça

1. Acosta Hospitaleche C. Variation in the cranial morphometry of the Magellanic Penguin (Spheniscus magellanicus). Ornitol Neotrop, 20: 19-26, 2009.
2. Acosta Hospitaleche C, Tambussi C. Skull morphometry of Pygoscelis (Sphenisciformes): inter- and intraspecific variations. Polar Biol, 29: 728-734, 2006.
3. Acosta Hospitaleche C, Montalti D, Marti LJ. Skeletal morphoanatomy of the brown skua Stercorarius antarticus lonnbergi and the south polar skua Stercorarius maccormicki. Polar Biol, 32: 759-774, 2009.
4. Bahadır A. Osteologia. In. N Dursun (Ed.), Evcil Kuşların Anatomisi. 1. Baskı, Medisan Yayınevi, Ankara, pp. 4-28, 2002.
5. Baumell JJ, Witmer LM. Osteologia. In. JJ Baumel, JE Breazile, HW Evans, JC Van den Berge (Eds.), Handbook of avian anatomy: Nomina Anatomica Avium, 2nd Edition, Publications of the Nuttal Ornithological Club, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 45-132, 1993.
6. Cakir A. Kelaynak kuşunda (Geronticus eremita) neurocranium kemikleri. Türk Veteriner Hekimleri Birliği Dergisi, 72: 35-38, 2001.
7. Degrange FJ, Picasso MBJ. Geometric morphometrics of the skull Tinamidae (Aves, Palaeognathae). J Zool, 113: 334-338, 2010.
8. Evans KE, McGreevy PD. Conformation of the equine skull: a morphometric study. Anat Histol Embryol, 35: 221-227, 2006.

9. Feduccia A. Aves Osteology. In. R Getty (Ed.), Sisson and Grossman’s The Anatomy of the Domestic Animals, Vol. 2, 5th Edition, W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp. 1790-1801, 1975.
10. Gusselkoo WS, Bout RG. Cranial kinesis in palaeognathous birds. J Exp Biol, 208: 3409-3419, 2005.
11. Gussekloo SWS, Vosselman MG, Bout RG. Three-dimensional kinematics of skeletal elements in avian prokinetic and rhynchokinetic skulls determined by roentgen stereophotogrammetry. J Exp Biol, 204: 1735-1744, 2001.
12. Hall MI, Iwaniuk AN, Gutierrez-Ibanez C. Optic Foramen Morphology and Activity Pattern in Birds. Anat Rec, 292: 1827-1845, 2009.
13. Ilgun R, Akbulut Y, Kuru N. Beç tavuğu (numida meleagridis) ve hindi (meleagridis gallapova) neurocranium’u üzerinde karşılaştırmalı makro-anatomik ve morfometrik incelemeler. FÜ Sağ Bil Vet Derg, 30: 29-32, 2016.
14. King AS, McLelland J. Outlines of Avian Anatomy. First published, Bailliѐre Tindall, London, 1975.
15. Kunzel W, Breit S, Oppel M. Morphometric investigations of breed specific features in feline skulls and considerations on their functional implications. Anat Histol Embryol, 32: 218-223, 2003.
16. McLelland J. A color atlas of avian anatomy. Wolfe Publishing Ltd, London, 1990.
17. Moller AP. Brain size, head size and behaviour of a passerine bird. J Evol Biol 23: 625-635, 2009.
18. Morugán-Lobón J, Buscalioni AD. Avian skull morphological evolution: exploring exo- and endocranial covariation with two block partial least squares. J Zool, 109: 217-230, 2006.
19. Morugán-Lobón J, Buscalioni AD. New Insight on the Anatomy and Architecture of the Avian Neurocranium. Anat Rec, 292: 364-370, 2009.
20. Nickel R, Schummer A, Seiferle E. Anatomy of the Domestic Birds. Verlag Paul Parey, Berlin, 1977.
21. Olopade JO, Onwuka SK. Morphometric studies of the craniofacial region of the West African Dwarf Goat in Nigeria. Int J Morphol, 22: 145-148, 2004.
22. Olopade JO, Onwuka SK. A craniometric analysis of the skull of the red Sokoto (Maradi) goat (Capra hircus). Eur J Anat, 12: 57-62, 2008.
23. Olopade JO, Onwuka SK. Morphometric analysis of the skull of the Sahel goat breed: basic and clinical anatomy. Ital J Anat Embryol, 114: 167-178, 2009.
24. Olopade JO, Onwuka SK. A review of the craniofacial and neurometric anatomy of the goat. Trop Vet, 27: 1-19, 2009.
25. Onar V. A Morphometric Study on the Skull of the German Shepherd Dog (Alsatian). Anat Histol Embryol, 28: 253-256, 1999.
26. Onar V, Günes H. On the variability of skull shape in German shepherd (Alsatian) puppies. Anat Rec, 272A: 460-466, 2003.
27. Onar V, Mutuş R, Kahvecioğlu KO. Morphometric analysis of the foramen magnum in German Shepherd dogs (Alsatians). Ann Anat, 179: 563-568, 1997.
28. Parés, IC, Kamal S, Jordana J. On biometrical aspects of the cephalic anatomy of Xisqueta Sheep (Catalunya; Spain). Int J Morphol, 28: 347-351, 2010.
29. Schwarze E, Schröder L. Kompendium der Geflügelanatomy. 3. Auflage, Gustav Fisher, Verlag, Stuttgart, 1979.
30. Singh NS, Bamon I, Dixit AS. Structural variations and their adaptive significances in the bones of some migratory and resident birds. J Basic Appl Zool, 70: 33-40, 2015.
31. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical Methods. 8th Edition, Iowa State University Press, Iowa, 1989.
32. Tasbas M, Tecirlioglu S. Maserasyon tekniği üzerinde araştırmalar. Ankara Üniv Vet Fak Derg, 4: 324-330, 1965.
33. Vermaijen D, Van Damme R, Herrel A. Relationships between head size, bite force, prey handling efficiency and diet in two sympatric lacertid lizards. Funct Ecol, 16: 842-850, 2002.
34. Zusi RL. Patterns of diversity in the avian skull. In. J Hanken, B Hall (Eds.), The Skull. Patterns of Structural and Systematic Diversity. Vol. 2, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 391-437, 1993.