Comparative Skull and Mandible Geometric Morphometrics of Two Species of Mice, Mus domesticus and Mus macedonicus (Muridae, Rodentia) in Turkey

Sadık Demirtaş; Medine Özmen; Metin Silsüpür; Damla Kıral

doi:10.17776/csj.1250269

EN

Comparative Skull and Mandible Geometric Morphometrics of Two Species of Mice, Mus domesticus and Mus macedonicus (Muridae, Rodentia) in Turkey

Abstract

Using a geometric morphometrics approach, we examined shape and size variations of skull and mandible bone of two evolutionarily distantly related mice from Turkey: Mus domesticus and Mus macedonicus. PCA analyses revealed overlap in dorsal cranium and mandible shapes of both species, consistent with previous traditional morphological methods. The skull of M. macedonicus seems to be larger in size than M. domesticus according to box-plot analyses of centroid size values, however there is no obvious difference for the mandible. No difference was observed between sexes in either of the characters. We suggest that future studies focus on dental characteristics and also consider the variation among local populations and ecological variables.

Keywords

Thanks

We are very grateful to Dr. İ. GÜNDÜZ for providing access to the study material.

References

[1] Berry R.J., Town Mouse, Country Mouse: adaptation and adaptability in Mus domesticus (M. musculus domesticus), Mammal Review, 11 (1981) 91-136.
[2] Wilson D.E., Reeder D.M., Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference (Vol. 1). Johns Hopkins University Press, Bucknell University, Baltimore, Maryland, (2005).
[3] Kryštufek B., Vohralík V., Mammals of Turkey and Cyprus Rodentia II: Cricetinae, Muridae, Spalacidae, Calomyscidae, Capromyidae, Hystricidae, Castoridae. University of Primorska, Science and Research Centre, Koper, Slovenia, (2009) 146-169.
[4] Yavuz G., Examination of some cranial characteristics of Mus domesticus Linnaeus 1758 and Mus macedonicus Petrov & Ruzic 1983 (Mammalia: Rodentia) distributed in Turkey, Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2 (1) (2022) 43-55.
[5] Abi-Said M.R., Karam S.S., Morphological Cranial Study and Habitat Preference of Mus macedonicus (Petrov & Ruzic, 1983) (Mammalia: Rodentia) in Lebanon, Jordan Journal of Biological Sciences (JJBS), 10 (4) (2017) 235-237.
[6] Gözcelioğlu B., Çolak R., Çolak E., Yiğit N., A study on Mus domesticus Rutty, 1772 and Mus macedonicus Petrov and Ruzic, 1983 (Mammalia: Rodentia) Distrubuted along the Line of Ankara, Bolu and Zonguldak, Turkish Journal of Zoology, 29 (2) (2005) 133-140.
[7] Çolak E., Yiğit E., Sözen M., Çolak R., Özkurt Ş., Kankılıç T., Kankılıç T., The morphological analysis of Mus domesticus and Mus macedonicus (Mammalia: Rodentia) in Turkey, Turkish Journal of Zoology, 30 (3) (2006) 309-317.
[8] Adams D.C., Rohlf F.J., Slice D.E., Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the ‘revolution’, Italian Journal of Zoology, 71 (2004) 5-16.

[9] Barčiová L., Advances in insectivore and rodent systematics due to geometric morphometrics, Mammal Review, 39(2) (2009) 80-91.
[10] Miele V., Dussert G., Cucchi T., Renaud S., Deep learning for species identification of modern and fossil rodent molars, bioRxiv, (2020).
[11] Bookstein F.L., Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data. Cambridge University Press, New York, (1991).
[12] Gündüz İ., Tez C., Malikov V., Vaziri A., Polyakov A.V., Searle J.B., Mitochondrial DNA and chromosomal studies of wild mice Mus from Turkey and Iran, Heredity, 84(4) (2000) 458-467.
[13] Gündüz İ., Rambau R.V., Tez C., Searle J.B., Mitochondrial DNA variation in the western house mouse (Mus musculus domesticus) close to its site of origin: studies in Turkey, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 84(3) (2005) 473-485.
[14] Demirtaş S., Genetic variations in genus of Mus L., 1758 (Mammalia: Rodentia) distributed in Turkey, Master Thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Graduate School of Education, 2006.
[15] Özçam P., Molecular phylogeography of the mouse Mus macedonicus Petrov&Ruzic, (1983) (Rodentia: Mammalia) in Turkey, Master Thesis, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Graduate School of Education, 2010.
[16] Dryden I.L., Mardia K.V., Statistical Analysis of Shape. John Wiley, New York, (1998).
[17] Rohlf F.J., tpsDig2 Software, Version 2.31. Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, New York, (2017).
[18] Rohlf F.J., tpsUtil Software, Version 1.78. Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, New York, (2019).
[19] Richtsmeier J.T., Baxter L.L., Reeves R., Parallels of Craniofacial Maldevelopment in Down Syndrome and Ts65Dn Mice, Developmental Dynamics, 217 (2000) 137-145.
[20] Macholán M., Mikula O., Vohralik V., Geographic phenetic variation of two eastern-Mediterranean non-commensal mouse species, Mus macedonicus and M. cypriacus (Rodentia: Muridae) based on traditional and geometric approaches to morphometrics, Zoologischer Anzeiger-A Journal of Comparative Zoology, 247(1) (2008) 67-80.
[21] Anderson P.S., Renaud S., Rayfield E.J., Adaptive plasticity in the mouse mandible, BMC Evolutionary Biology, 14 (2014) 85.
[22] Rohlf F.J., Slice D.E. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks, Systematic Zoology, 39 (1990) 40-59.
[23] Zelditch M.L., Swiderski D.L., Sheets H.D., Fink W.L., Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists. Academic Press, (2004) 1-20.
[24] Klingenberg C.P., MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics, Molecular Ecology Resources, 11 (2011) 353-357.
[25] SPSS: IBM SPSS Statistics 22.0 for Windows. Armonk, New York, (2013).
[26] Hammer Ø., Harper D.A.T., Ryan P.D., PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for education and data analysis, Paleontologia Electronica, 4 (1) (2001) 1-9.
[27] Inkscape (Version:0.92). Available at: https://inkscape.org/
[28] Lyalyukhina S., Kotenkova E., Walkova W., Adamczyk K., Comparison of craniological parameters in Mus musculus musculus Linnaeus, 1758 and Mus musculus hortulanus Nordmann, 1840, Acta Theriologica, 36 (1991) 95-107.
[29] Cserkész T., Gubányi A., Farkas J., Distinguishing Mus spicilegus from Mus musculus (Rodentia, Muridae) by using cranial measurements, Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 54 (2008) 305-318.
[30] Csanády A., Mošanský L., Skull morphometry and sexual size dimorphism in Mus musculus from Slovakia, North-Western Journal of Zoology, 14 (2018) 102-106.
[31] Klingenberg C.P., Leamy L.J., Cheverud J.M., Integration and modularity of quantitative trait locus effects on geometric shape in the mouse mandible, Genetics, 166 (2004) 1909-1921.
[32] Burgio G., Baylac M., Heyer E., Montagutelli X., Genetic analysis of skull shape variation and morphological integration in the mouse using interspecific recombinant congenic strains between C57BL/6 and mice of the Mus spretus species, Evolution, 63 (10) (2009) 2668-2686.
[33] Ishikawa A., A Strategy for Identifying Quantitative Trait Genes Using Gene Expression Analysis and Causal Analysis, Genes (Basel), 8 (12) (2017) 347.
[34] Macholán M., Morphometric analysis of European house mice, Acta Theriologica, 41 (1996) 255-275.
[35] Macholán M., A geometric morphometric analysis of the shape of the first upper molar in mice of the genus Mus (Muridae, Rodentia), Journal of Zoology, 270 (2006) 672-681.
[36] Klingenberg C.P., Navarro N., Development of the mouse mandible: a model system for complex morphological structures. In: Macholán M., Baird S.J.E., Munclinger P., Pialek J., (Eds). Evolution of the house mouse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (2012) 135-149.
[37] Boell L., Tautz D., Micro-evolutionary divergence patterns of mandible shapes in wild house mouse (Mus musculus) populations, BMC Evolutionary Biology, 11 (2011) 306.
[38] Ehrich T., Vaughn T.T., Koreishi S.F., Linsey R.B., Pletscher L.S., Cheverud J.M., Pleiotropic effects on mandibular morphology I. Developmental morphological integration and differential dominance, Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution, 296 (2003) 58-79.
[39] Babiker H., Tautz D., Molecular and phenotypic distinction of the very recently evolved insular subspecies Mus musculus helgolandicus Zimmermann, 1953, BMC Evolutionary Biology, 15 (2015) 160.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Structural Biology

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Sadık Demirtaş
0000-0003-0859-7887
Türkiye

Medine Özmen ^*
0000-0002-8913-1175
Türkiye

Metin Silsüpür
0000-0001-5209-4019
Türkiye

Damla Kıral
0000-0001-7610-0102
Türkiye

Publication Date

September 29, 2023

Submission Date

February 13, 2023

Acceptance Date

July 25, 2023

Published in Issue

Year 2023 Volume: 44 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17776/csj.1250269

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA24MA45MJ

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Demirtaş, S., Özmen, M., Silsüpür, M., & Kıral, D. (2023). Comparative Skull and Mandible Geometric Morphometrics of Two Species of Mice, Mus domesticus and Mus macedonicus (Muridae, Rodentia) in Turkey. Cumhuriyet Science Journal, 44(3), 444-449. https://doi.org/10.17776/csj.1250269

Cited By

Comparative Macroscopic and Morphometric Analysis of Mandible in Different Mouse (Balb-c; Cd-1; C57bl/6) and Rat Strains (Wistar Albino; Sprague Dawley; Wag/Rij)

Animal Health Production and Hygiene

https://doi.org/10.53913/aduveterinary.1581771

Geomorphometric Analysis of Intraspecific Variation in Nannospalax Ehrenbergi (Nehring, 1898) (Rodentia: Spalacidae) in Relation to Chromosomal Differentiation

Mammal Research

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13364-025-00837-7