Radiographic anatomy of the cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus) axial and appendicular skeleton

Cockatiels are popular pets. Still, despite medical and surgical relevance, the radiographic anatomy of the cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus) skeleton, like that of different wild and exotic bird species, has seldom been described. This study set out to describe the radiographic anatomy of the cocka...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Anatomia, histologia, embryologia Vol. 49; no. 2; pp. 184 - 195
Main Authors: Silva, Isadora A., Vieira, Larissa C., Mancini, Vanda Regina M., Faillace, Ana Carolina L., Santana, Marcelo Ismar S.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Germany Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01-03-2020
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Cockatiels are popular pets. Still, despite medical and surgical relevance, the radiographic anatomy of the cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus) skeleton, like that of different wild and exotic bird species, has seldom been described. This study set out to describe the radiographic anatomy of the cockatiel skeleton. Twelve adult male and nine adult female specimens were radiographed using a digital X‐ray system and different views. The radiographic anatomy of these birds was similar to that of other Psittacidae. However, some particularities inherent to the target species were detected, such as the presence of four flexion zones in the skull (craniofacial, nasal, jugal arch and palatine), complete bony orbit comprising a suborbital arch, 34–38 vertebrae (10 or 11 cervical, 8 or 9 thoracic, 9 or 10 lumbosacral, 5 or 6 caudal vertebrae and a pygostyle comprising 2 fused vertebrae), eight or nine pairs of ribs and a notarium made up of fused T2–T6 vertebrae. Poor radiopacity of the notarium, ribs and respective uncinate processes, and synsacral vertebrae made demarcation of these structures difficult. The appendicular skeleton of the cockatiel was very similar to that of other Psittacidae, and there were no gender‐related differences.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0340-2096
1439-0264
DOI:10.1111/ahe.12510