Premium
Muscular Anatomy of the Forelimb of the Tiger, Panthera tigris
Author(s) -
Dunn Rachel Heather,
Beresheim Amy,
Meachen Julie,
Bitterman Kathleen,
Butaric Lauren,
Miller Dustin,
Roje-Jones Lorraine,
Bejes Katelyn
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.2020.34.s1.05266
Subject(s) - panthera , forelimb , anatomy , tiger , biology , myology , extant taxon , evolutionary biology , paleontology , predation , computer security , computer science
Understanding the comparative muscular anatomy of living carnivores is imperative to the reconstruction of locomotor and prey‐catching behavior in fossil carnivores. Further, because most fossils consist of only bones, detailed knowledge of the bony origin and insertion of muscles is necessary to map these muscles onto fossils for use in functional analyses. Whereas the muscular anatomy of the lion ( Panthera leo ) has been well documented by scholars in the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries, that of the tiger ( Panthera tigris ) is less well known; although numerous sources describe the muscular anatomy of the lion both in words and in images, there has been no published muscle map of lion or tiger limbs depicting the origins and insertions of the hind or forelimb muscles. The objective of this study was to create a muscle map of the origins and insertions of muscles acting on the forelimb of the tiger for use in comparative and paleontological research. We dissected the left forelimb of an 18‐year‐old female Amur tiger that died at the Blank Park Zoo in Des Moines, IA, documenting bony and soft‐tissue origin and insertion of all muscles present. Muscle weights were also collected. Because there is no published muscle map for extant large cats, we compared our origin and insertion data to the recently published description of the ocelot ( Leopardus pardalis ). The bony pattern of muscle origin and insertion is very similar between the tiger and the ocelot, suggesting a fairly conservative morphology among large terrestrial and medium‐sized scansorial felids. Where differences were present, most concerned relative area of muscle origins, rather than location. For example, unlike that of the ocelot, the anconeus of the tiger was not divisible into superficial and deep bellies and did not fuse with the extensor carpi ulnaris, instead partially fusing with the origin of the extensor to digits I and II. The right forelimb will be dissected in the future to provide insight into potential variation in tiger musculature.