SHAPE ANALYSİS OF THE OLECRANON İN COWS, SHEEP AND HORSES

Öz

With the geometric morphometrics method, bones and structures can be examined in terms of shape. In this study, the olecranon of sheep, cattle, and horses was examined by geometric morphometry method, and shape variations between species were revealed. 39 (15 cow, 9 sheep and 15 horse) olecranon was used for this study. Images of olecranon were acquired for geometric morphometrics. Five Landmarks and 37 semilandmarks were used. A total of 39 principal component analyses were obtained as a result of the shape analysis. PC1 is responsible mostly for the shape between species, declared 25.8 % of the total variation. PC2 declared 17.2 % of the total variation and PC3 declared 11.5 % of the total variation. Shape and centroid size were statistically different between groups (p<0.0001). The PC1 value of horses was generally lower than that of cows and sheep. For PC1, sheep had wider shape variation. Cows had the highest PC1 values. The CV1 value was in the lowest cow. The highest CV1 value was in the horses. The CV2 value was higher in sheep compared to other breeds. The olecranon of cows was larger in shape than other species. In horses, the olecranon was narrower. The anconeus process was narrower in shape in horses. Olecranon was longer in shape in sheep than in other species. The difference in shape was statistically significant between all three species for CVA. The biggest difference in shape was between horse and cow (p<0.0001). The highest Mahalanobis distance was between horse and cow (MD: 10.4659).

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Antebrachial bones
• Geometric Morphometrics
• Veterinary Anatomy
• Ulna

Kaynakça

1. Aiello LC, Dean C. (1990). “An Introduction to Human Evolutionary Anatomy”, London: Academic Press.
2. Bauchot R, Stephan H. (1964). “Le poids ence ́phalique chez les insectivores malgaches”, Acta Zoo 4(5):63-75.
3. Barone R. (1986). Anatomie comparée des mammifères domestiques. Tome II. Arthrologie et Myologie Vigot Frères, Paris.
4. Demircioglu I., Duro S., Gungoren G., Choudhary OP., Gundemir O. 2022. Digits angle and digits length ratio in japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Indian Journal of Animal Research 56 (9), 1105-1109.
5. Duro, S., Gündemir, O., Sönmez, B., Jashari, T., Szara, T., Pazvant, G., & Kambo, A. (2021). “A different perspective on sex dimorphism in the adult Hermann's tortoise: geometric morphometry”. Zoological Studies, 60.
6. Dursun Nejdet. (2007). Veteriner Anatomi I. Medisan yayinevi Ankara. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Anatomi Anabilim Dalı.
7. Getty. R. Sisson and Grossman's. (1975). “The Anatomy of The Domestic Animals” (5th ed), WB Saunders, Philadelphia.
8. Gündemir, O., Özkan, E., Dayan, M. O., & AYDOĞDU, S. (2020). “Sexual analysis in turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) neurocranium using geometric-morphometric methods”. Turkish Journal of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, 44(3), 681-687.

9. Gündemir MG, Szara T, Spataru C, Demircioglu I, Turek B, Petrovas G, Spataru MC. (2022). Shape differences of the Carina sterni in birds of various locomotion types. Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia Oct 1. doi: 10.1111/ahe.12870.
10. Gürbüz, İ., Demiraslan, Y., Rajapakse, C., Weerakoon, D. K., Fernando, S., Spataru, MC., & Gündemir, O. (2022). Skull of the Asian (Paradoxurus Hermaphroditus) and the golden (Paradoxurus Zeylonensis) palm civet:” Geometric morphometric analysis using palate, tooth and frontal landmarks”. Anatomia, Histologia, Embryologia, 51(6):718-727.
11. Grand, T. I. (1967). “The functional anatomy of the ankle and foot of the slow loris (Nycticebus coucang)”. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 2(6): 207-218.
12. Jashari, T., Duro, S., Gündemir, O., Szara, T., Ilieski, V., Mamuti, D., & Choudhary, O. P. (2022). “Morphology, morphometry and some aspects of clinical anatomy in the skull and mandible of Sharri sheep”. Biologia, 77(2), 423-433.
13. Klingenberg, C.P.; Marugán-Lobón, J. (2013). “Evolutionary covariation in geometric morphometric data: Analyzing integration, modularity, and allometry in a phylogenetic context”. Systematic Biology, 6(2):591–610.
14. Klingenberg, C.P. MorphoJ. (2011). “An integrated software package for geometric morphometrics”. Molecular Ecology Resources, 11(2), 353-357.
15. König, H.E, Liebich, H.G., (2020). Veterinary Anatomy of Domestic Animals. Textbook and Color Atlas, 7th edition. Thieme Verlag. Stuttgart-New York.
16. Kranioti EF, Bastir M, Sanchez-Meseguer A, Rosas A. (2009). “A geometric-morphometric study of the Cretan humerus for sex identification”. Forensic Science International, 189(1– 3):111. e1–8.
17. Lemic, D.; Benítez, H.A.; Bažok, R. (2014). “Intercontinental effect on sexual shape dimorphism and allometric relationships in the beetle pest Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)”. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 253, 203–206.
18. Martín-Serra, A.; Figueirido, B.; Palmqvist, P. (2014). “Three-Dimensional Analysis of Morphological Evolution and Locomotor Performance of the Carnivoran Forelimb”. PLoS ONE, 9(1): e85574.
19. Nickel, R., Schummer, A., Seiferle, E., Frewein, J., Wilkens, H. and K.H. Wille. (1986). The Locomotor System of the Domestic Mammals “Bones of the thoracic limb of ruminantes and horse’’. 67 - 75, Verlag Paul Parey, Berlin- Hamburg.
20. Rohlf, F.J. (2004). “TpsUtil, file utility program”. Stony Brook: Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York.
21. Rohlf FJ (2015) The TPS series of software. – Hystrix, 26(1): 9 – 12.
22. Steudel K. (1982). “Allometry and adaptation in the catarrhine postcranial skeleton”. Am J Phys Anthropol 59:431–441.
23. Szara, T., Duro, S., Gündemir, O., & Demircioğlu, İ. (2022). “Sex determination in Japanese Quails (Coturnix japonica) using geometric morphometrics of the skull”. Animals, 12(3), 302.
24. Yilmaz O, Demircioğlu İ. (2021). Morphometric analysis and three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction of the long bones of femoral and crural regions in Van cats. Folia Morphologica, 80(1):186-195.
25. Zelditch, M.L.; Swiderski, D.L.; Sheets, H.D.; Fink, W.L. (2012). Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists: A Primer, 2nd ed.; Elsevier Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA.