» Articles » PMID: 29871983

Bluegill Sunfish Use High Power Outputs from Axial Muscles to Generate Powerful Suction-feeding Strikes

Overview
Journal J Exp Biol
Specialty Biology
Date 2018 Jun 7
PMID 29871983
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Suction-feeding fish rapidly expand the mouth cavity to generate high-velocity fluid flows that accelerate food into the mouth. Such fast and forceful suction expansion poses a challenge, as muscle power is limited by muscle mass and the muscles in fish heads are relatively small. The largemouth bass powers expansion with its large body muscles, with negligible power produced by the head muscles (including the sternohyoideus). However, bluegill sunfish - with powerful strikes but different morphology and feeding behavior - may use a different balance of cranial and axial musculature to power feeding and different power outputs from these muscles. We estimated the power required for suction expansion in sunfish from measurements of intraoral pressure and rate of volume change, and measured muscle length and velocity. Unlike largemouth bass, the sternohyoideus did shorten to generate power, but it and other head muscles were too small to contribute more than 5-10% of peak expansion power in sunfish. We found no evidence of catapult-style power amplification. Instead, sunfish powered suction feeding by generating high power outputs (up to 438 W kg) from their axial muscles. These muscles shortened across the cranial half of the body as in bass, but at faster speeds that may be nearer the optimum for power production. Sunfish were able to generate strikes of the same absolute power as bass, but with 30-40% of the axial muscle mass. Thus, species may use the body and head muscles differently to meet the requirements of suction feeding, depending on their morphology and behavior.

Citing Articles

Precision and accuracy of the dynamic endocast method for measuring volume changes in XROMM studies.

Kaczmarek E, Li E, Capano J, Falkingham P, Gatesy S, Brainerd E J Exp Biol. 2025; 228(4).

PMID: 39835821 PMC: 11883290. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.249420.


Do salamanders chew? An X-ray reconstruction of moving morphology analysis of ambystomatid intraoral feeding behaviours.

Spence M, Rull-Garza M, Roba Y, Konow N Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2023; 378(1891):20220540.

PMID: 37839445 PMC: 10577041. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2022.0540.


Beam theory predicts muscle deformation and vertebral curvature during feeding in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss).

Jimenez Y, Camp A J Exp Biol. 2023; 226(20).

PMID: 37671501 PMC: 10629686. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.245788.


What good is a measure of muscle length? The how and why of direct measurements of skeletal muscle motion.

Roberts T, Dick T J Biomech. 2023; 157:111709.

PMID: 37437458 PMC: 10530376. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2023.111709.


A power amplification dyad in seahorses.

Avidan C, Day S, Holzman R Proc Biol Sci. 2023; 290(1996):20230520.

PMID: 37040808 PMC: 10089724. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2023.0520.