Faruk BOZKAYA, Bestami YILMAZ, İsmail DEMİRCİOĞLU, İsmail Şah HAREM, Gülsüm ÖZYİĞİT

Aseel ırkı horoz ve tavuklarda Glandula uropygialis’in anatomik, morfometrik ve histolojik özellikleri

Amaç: Bu çalışma Aseel ırkı horoz ve tavuklarda glandula uropygialis’in anatomik, morfometrik ve histolojik yapısını incelemek amacıyla yapıldı. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmada materyal olarak 8 adet (4 erkek, 4 dişi) erişkin Aseel ırkı tavuk ve horoza ait glandula uropygialis kullanıldı. Glandula uropygialis’in topografik özellikleri in situ olarak incelendi. Daha sonra diseksiyonla bezler gövdeden ayrılarak morfometrik ölçümleri yapıldı. Bezlerin histolojik yapısını belirlemek için üçlü boyama yöntemi, bezdeki glikojen ve nötral müsinleri belirlemek için Periodic Acid-Shiff (PAS) boyama teknikleri uygulandı. Bulgular: Glandula uropygialis’in topografik olarak kuyruk tabanı üzerinde, dördüncü kuyruk omuru ile pygostil arasında bulunduğu gözlendi. Morfometrik parametreler açısından tavuk ve horozlar arasında ya da sağ ve sol loblar arasında istatistiki olarak anlamlı bir fark tespit edilmedi. Histolojik olarak, bezin parankimini oluşturan sekretorik tubüllerin, periferden merkeze doğru ışınsal dizilim gösterdiği, merkezi boşluğa açıldığı ve bağ doku bölmeleri ile birbirinden ayrıldığı belirlendi. Öneri: Aseel ırkı horoz ve tavuklarda glandula uropygialis’in histolojik ve anatomik özelliklerininin, diğer kanatlılarda bildirilen özelliklerle genel olarak benzerlik gösterdiği sonucuna varıldı.

Anatomic, morphometric and histological features of Glandula uropygialis in Aseel roosters and hens

Aim: The present study was conducted to analyze the anatomic, morphometric and histological structure of the glandula uropygialis in Aseel roosters and hens. Materials and Methods: In the study, a total of 8 (4 males, 4 females) glandula uropygialis belonging to adult Aseel hens and roosters were used. Topographic features of the glandula uropygialis were analyzed in situ. The morphometric measurements were conducted on the dissected glands. Trichrome staining method was used to determine the histological structure of the glands, and Periodic Acid-Shiff (PAS) staining techniques were implemented to determine the glycogen and neutral mucins in the glands. Results: It was found out that the glandula uropygialis was topographically located on the cauda base, between the fourth caudal vertebrae and pygostyl. In terms of morphometric parameters, there were no statistically significant differences between hens and roosters or right and left lobes. Histologically, it was found that the secretoric tubules forming the parenchyma of the gland were separated from each other by connective tissue and showed a radial arrangement beginning from periphery and ending at the central cavity. Conclusion: It was concluded that the histological and anatomical structure of the glandula uropygialis in Aseel roosters and hens showed considererable similarities with that reported in other birds species.

PDF

___

Zık B, Erdost H, 2002. Horozlarda acı kırmızı biberli rasyonla beslemenin üropigi bezi üzerine etkisinin histolojik yönden incelenmesi. Turk J Vet Anim Sci, 26, 1223-1232.
Wagner RC, Boord RL, 1975. Cytological differentiation in the uropygial gland. J Morphol, 146(3), 395-413.
Taşbaş M, 1996. Veteriner Aesthesiologia, Tamer Yayınları, Ankara, Türkiye.
Stevens L, 2004. Avian biochemistry and molecular biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Stettenheim PR, 2000. The integumentary morphology of modern birds-An overview. Amer Zool, 40, 461-477.
Schumacher S, 1919. Der Bürzeldocht. Anat Anz, 52, 291- 301.
Schales C, Schales K, 1994. Galliformes, In: Avian Medicine: Principles and Application, Eds: Branson WR, Harrison GJ, Harrison LR, Wingers Publishing, Florida, pp; 1219-1236.
Sawad AA, 2006. Morphological and histological study of uropygial gland in Moorhen (Gallinula choropus). Int J Poult Sci, 5(10), 931-941.
Sandilands V, Powell K, Keeling L, Savory CJ, 2004. Preen gland function in layer fowls; factors affecting preen oil fatty acid composition. Brit Poultry Sci, 45(1), 109-115.
Salibian A, Montalti D, 2009. Physiological and biochemical aspects of the avian uropygial gland. Braz J Biol, 69(2), 437-446.
Reynolds S, 2013. The anatomy and histomorphology of the uropygial gland in New Zealand endemic species. Master of Zoology, Massey University, New Zealand.
Møller AP, Erritzøe J, Rózsa L, 2010. Ectoparasites, uropygial glands and hatching success in birds. Oecol, 163(2), pp; 303-311.
Menon GK, Aggarwal SK, Lucas AM, 1981. Evidence for the holocrine nature of lipoid secretion by avian epidermal cells: a histochemicaland fine structural study of rictus and the gland. J Morphol, 167, 185-199.
Maiti BR, Bose S, 1980. Role of vitamin C on the uropygial gland function in juvenile pigeons. Z Mikrosk Anat Forsch, 94(2), 269-272.
Lucas AM, 1980. Lipoid secretion by the body epidermis in avian skin, In: The skin of vertebrates, Eds: Spearman RIC, Riley PA, Academic Press, London.
Lucas AM, Stettenheim PR, 1972. Uropygial gland, In: Avian Anatomy, Part II, US Dept Agric Handb, Washington, pp: 613-626.
Kozlu T, Bozkurt YA, Ateş S, 2011. A macroanatomical and histological study of the uropygial gland in the white stork (Ciconia cicionia). Int J Morphol, 29(3), 723-726.
Kolattukudy PE, 1981. Avian uropygial (preen) gland. Methods Enzymol, 72(1), 714-720.
King AS, McLelland J, 1984. Outlines of avian anatomy. 2nd ed, Baillière Tindall, London, United Kingdom.
Kennedy RJ, 1971. Preen gland weights. Ibis, 113, 369-372.
Johnston DWA, 1988. Morphological atlas of the avian uropygial gland. Bull Br Mus Nat Hist, 54(5), 199-259.
Jacob J, Ziswiler V, 1982. The uropygial gland, In: Avian Biology, Eds; Farner DS, King JR, Parkes KC, vol 6, Academic Press, New York, pp:199-324.
Gezici M, 2002. Deri ve epidermoidal oluşumlar, In: Evcil Kuşların Anatomisi, Ed; Dursun N, Medisan Yayınevi, Ankara, pp; 207-216.
Galván I, Barba E, Piculo R, Cantó JL, Córtes V, Monrós JS, Atiénzar F, Proctor H, 2007. Feather mites and birds: an interaction mediated by uropygial gland size? J Evol Biol, 21(1), 133-44.
Chiale MC, Fernández PE, Gimeno EJ, Barbeito C, Montalti D, 2014. Morphology and histology of the uropygial gland in Antarctic birds: relationship with their contact with the aquatic environment? Aust J Zool, 62, 157-165.
Carpenter WR, Goodridge AG, 1988. Differentiation in culture of cells from an avian holocrine secretory gland: preparation of isolated cells and conditions which induce accumulation of malic enzyme. J Cell Physiol, 137(2), 205-213.
Bhattacharyya SP, Sahu C, 1976. Histomorphological and histochemical studies on the preen gland of cortisone-treated male pigeons. Anat Anz, 140, 162-169.
Baumel JJ, King AS, Breasile JE, Evans HE, Berge JCV, 1993. Handbook of avian anatomy (Nomina anatomica avium). Publications of the Nuttall Ornithological Club, Cambridge, United Kingdom, pp; 22-44.
Ahmad Z, Sahoota AW, 2015. Pre and post moult performance of aseel chicken. Lap Lambert Academic Publishing. Asnani MV, Ramachandran AV, 1993. Roles of adrenal and gonadal steroids and season in uropygial gland function in male pigeons, columba civia. Gen Comp Endocrinol, 92(1), 213-224.
Abalain JH, Amet Y, Lecaque D, Secchi J, Daniel JY, Floch HH, 1986. Ultrastructural changes in the uropygial gland of the male Japanese quail, Coturnix coturnix, after testosterone treatment (Comparision with the sebaceous gland of the male rat). Cell Tissue Res, 246, 373-378.
Abalain JH, Amet Y, Daniel JY, Floch HH, 1984. Androgen control of the secretion in the sebaceous-like preen gland. J Steroid Biochem, 20(1), 529-531.