Ear Structures of The Naked Mole-Rat, (Rodentia: Bathyergidae)
Ear Structures of The Naked Mole-Rat, (Rodentia: Bathyergidae)
Ear Structures of The Naked Mole-Rat, (Rodentia: Bathyergidae)
a11111
Abstract
Although increasingly popular as a laboratory species, very little is known about the periph-
eral auditory system of the naked mole-rat, Heterocephalus glaber. In this study, middle and
inner ears of naked mole-rats of a range of ages were examined using micro-computed
tomography and dissection. The ears of five other bathyergid species (Bathyergus suillus,
OPEN ACCESS
Cryptomys hottentotus, Fukomys micklemi, Georychus capensis and Heliophobius argen-
Citation: Mason MJ, Cornwall HL, Smith ES. J.
teocinereus) were examined for comparative purposes. The middle ears of bathyergids
(2016) Ear Structures of the Naked Mole-Rat,
Heterocephalus glaber, and Its Relatives (Rodentia: show features commonly found in other members of the Ctenohystrica rodent clade, includ-
Bathyergidae). PLoS ONE 11(12): e0167079. ing a fused malleus and incus, a synovial stapedio-vestibular articulation and the loss of the
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079 stapedius muscle. Heterocephalus deviates morphologically from the other bathyergids
Editor: Heike Lutermann, University of Pretoria, examined in that it has a more complex mastoid cavity structure, poorly-ossified processes
SOUTH AFRICA of the malleus and incus, a ‘columelliform’ stapes and fewer cochlear turns. Bathyergids
Received: September 26, 2016 have semicircular canals with unusually wide diameters relative to their radii of curvature.
Accepted: November 8, 2016 How the lateral semicircular canal reaches the vestibule differs between species. Heteroce-
phalus has much more limited high-frequency hearing than would be predicted from its
Published: December 7, 2016
small ear structures. The spongy bone forming its ossicular processes, the weak incudo-sta-
Copyright: © 2016 Mason et al. This is an open
pedial articulation, the columelliform stapes and (compared to other bathyergids) reduced
access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which cochlear coiling are all potentially degenerate features which might reflect a lack of selective
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and pressure on its peripheral auditory system. Substantial intraspecific differences were found
reproduction in any medium, provided the original in certain middle and inner ear structures, which might also result from relaxed selective
author and source are credited.
pressures. However, such interpretations must be treated with caution in the absence of
Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are experimental evidence.
within the paper and its Supporting Information
files.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared restricted to just one female and one to two males (see [2] for a review). Naked mole-rats are
that no competing interests exist. weaned at around 3–6 weeks of age, can become reproductively active at 7–12 months, reach
full adult size at about 2 years and can live for more than 28 years (reviewed by [3]).
Visual cues are very limited in mole-rat burrows. The small eyes of naked mole-rats can
apparently detect the difference between light and dark [4], as can the eyes of other bathyergids
[5], but they are ill-equipped for image formation. There are challenges to audition under-
ground too: airborne sound, particularly at high frequencies, has been shown to be rapidly
attenuated with distance within the burrow systems of another mole-rat [6]. Low frequencies
of a few hundred Hertz propagate most effectively. It has been suggested that certain frequen-
cies may be selectively amplified in a “stethoscope effect” [7].
Despite the limits to sound propagation underground, vocalisations appear to be important
in the social communication of Heterocephalus. The naked mole-rat has an extensive repertoire
of at least 17 distinct sounds, including five juvenile-only vocalisations. Many are shorter than
200 ms duration but most are repeated. Atonal sounds contain frequencies from 0.2 to over 40
kHz, while tonal sounds fall between 1 and 9 kHz. Naked mole-rats can also scrape their upper
and lower incisors together to generate click-like sounds with most energy between 1 and 20
kHz, but it is not known if these sounds are used to communicate [8].
The hearing of Heterocephalus has been examined behaviourally, using a conditioned
avoidance method [9]. For airborne sound presented at 60 dB SPL, the hearing range of this
animal extends between 65 Hz and 12.8 kHz, which is an extremely restricted, low-frequency
range for a small mammal. Thresholds between 125 Hz and 8 kHz are rather flat and unusually
high, the lowest being 35 dB SPL. Together with its very poor sound localization ability, these
characteristics led Heffner & Heffner [9] to dub the hearing of the naked mole-rat “degener-
ate”. Heffner & Heffner suggested that the limitations on hearing in this animal are central
rather than peripheral, based on the fact that auditory thresholds are reduced with increased
sound duration. A recent examination of central auditory structures in the naked mole-rat has
shown that the binaural auditory brainstem nuclei lack the ion channel HCN1 [10]. This could
result in slowed integration of inputs in binaural auditory brainstem neurons, which could
impede the analysis of interaural time differences, potentially contributing to poor localization
abilities [10]. Insensitive hearing restricted to low frequencies is also a feature of a Zambian
bathyergid originally referred to as Cryptomys sp. but subsequently reidentified as Fukomys
anselli [11, 12], and has also been found in the more distantly-related spalacid mole-rat Spalax
[13, 14] and the pocket gopher Geomys [15]. It appears to be a general feature of subterranean
rodents. The somewhat wider hearing range of the coruro Spalacopus, a fossorial caviomorph,
is thought to relate to an increased amount of above-ground behaviour [16].
The fact that underground tunnels represent a ‘low-frequency’ environment has been used
to explain why vocalizations of subterranean rodents tend to emphasize such frequencies [6,
16–19]. This suggests that the peripheral auditory systems of these animals might show conver-
gently-derived, low-frequency adaptations, and many similarities have indeed been found
between the ear structures of distantly-related groups. Most subterranean mammals have
‘freely mobile’ ossicles which are relatively loosely articulated with the skull, reduced or miss-
ing middle ear muscles, relatively large stapes footplates and tympanic membranes lacking a
pars flaccida [20–24]. Freely-mobile ossicles may improve low-frequency sound transmission
through their reduced stiffness, but the physiological significance of the other features remains
unclear. The anatomical characteristic most closely linked to improved low-frequency hearing
in small mammals seems to be an enlarged middle ear cavity volume [25], but subterranean
species do not, in general, have markedly expanded middle ear cavities compared to terrestrial
species [21]. It has been argued that, despite the selective pressure towards low-frequency hear-
ing, hearing sensitivity need not be enhanced in these animals because of the so-called
“stethoscope effect” operating in their tunnels; the notion that the hearing of these animals is
degenerate has been strongly rejected [7, 20].
Among bathyergids, the middle and inner ears of species in the Cryptomys/Fukomys clade
have been examined in detail [26–35]. The ears of other bathyergids have received much less
attention, although brief descriptions exist of the middle ear apparatus in Bathyergus, Geory-
chus [20] and Heliophobius [36, 37]. The lack of information on Heterocephalus is surprising:
the only description of the middle ear of the naked mole-rat which we are aware of comes
from the unpublished PhD thesis of one of the present authors [38], and we have found no
information in the literature relating to its inner ear.
The purpose of the current paper is to produce the first detailed anatomical description of
the peripheral auditory system of Heterocephalus, considering not just adult morphology but
also postnatal ontogeny. Heterocephalus is increasingly used as a laboratory model species in
research into cancer, ageing and pain [39]. This description of its auditory apparatus comple-
ments the increasing body of knowledge being gathered about this strange and enigmatic
mammal, and allows us to investigate the extent to which its peripheral auditory system con-
tributes towards its restricted hearing. Other bathyergid species were examined for compara-
tive purposes: this is the first ear study to include representatives of all six currently-recognised
bathyergid genera.
Heterocephalus ‘CU’ specimens were from the colony in the University of Cambridge while ‘BZ’ specimens came originally from Bristol Zoo. The litter
lettering indicates which naked mole-rats were siblings. The associated number 1 refers to a member of the original Cambridge colony, 2 to an animal bred
from the colony queen, and 3 to animals bred from a male and female which had been separated from the original colony. CT scans from the University of
Hull were made by Dr. Phil Cox as part of a separate research project.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.t001
collected at the Cape of Good Hope, South Africa), from the collections of the University
Museum of Zoology, Cambridge, were CT-scanned.
Two heads of Fukomys micklemi, formalin-preserved and stained with iodine for use in
another project, were donated by Dr. Phil Cox. The specimens had originally been obtained
from a colony at the University of Ghent, belonging to Prof. Dominique Adriaens. Dr. Cox
also kindly provided us with computed tomograms of prepared skulls of Bathyergus suillus and
Heliophobius argenteocinereus, which had been made at the University of Hull. The two Bath-
yergus specimens had been collected in Cape Town, South Africa, by Prof. Nigel Bennett,
while the two Heliophobius specimens had been collected in Blantyre, Malawi, by Prof. Radim
Šumbera.
Results
The anatomical description in the first two sub-sections below is restricted to older Heteroce-
phalus specimens (>100 days) unless otherwise noted. The ears of the younger specimens
are described in the third sub-section, and the ears of other bathyergids in the fourth.
Measurement data are presented in the tables below; additional data are presented as support-
ing information (see S1 Table).
Fig 1. The external ear of Heterocephalus. A: Lateral view of a live, adult animal. The position of the external ear,
which lacks a pinna, is indicated by an arrow. B: Photomicrographic close-up of the left external ear opening of a
different adult specimen, post-mortem. Note that the lumen is semi-occluded with hairs and cerumen. Scale bar for B
is 1 mm.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g001
relationship between age and the volumes of the middle ear subcavities in specimens older
than 100 days (Table 2).
The malleus and incus of the adult Heterocephalus are fused together (Figs 3A and 7A),
although a trace of the articulation zone can be discerned. The malleus is the larger ossicle. It
has a relatively short manubrium with prominent muscular and lateral processes. Internally,
Fig 2. MicroView reconstruction of the skull of an adult Heterocephalus (65 months). A: Ventral view of
skull. B: Lateral view, the left mandible having been digitally removed. The approximate extent of the left
middle ear cavity is indicated in both cases by red shading. Scale bar 10 mm.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g002
Note that the ventral mastoid cavity (VMC) could be distinguished from the tympanic cavity only in Heterocephalus, and only this species has a
posteromedial mastoid cavity (PMC). In some Heterocephalus specimens, ear structures were damaged and some measurements therefore could not be
made. In the very young specimens the outlines of the cavities were sometimes very unclear, so these values should be considered estimates.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.t002
the manubrium consists of spongy bone surrounding large, open spaces, presumably vascular
spaces (Fig 3B), which are not readily visible in a fresh specimen because of the periosteum
covering the ossicle. The distal tip of the long process of the incus is similarly developed, but
the bone is more compact elsewhere in the ossicular chain. The rounded malleus head, as its
name suggests, does resemble the head of a hammer. It expands much more rostrally than cau-
dally. Just below the head is a thin, bony lamina which represents a much abbreviated anterior
process. The free edge of this lamina joins the bony ridge which supports the tympanic mem-
brane and helps to divide the tympanic cavity from the epitympanic recess. The articulation
here between malleus and skull appears to be ligamentous and it is very flexible. The incus has
a long, narrow short process, which articulates with the skull at its tip, and a thicker long pro-
cess which abruptly tapers and turns medially to support a very tiny lenticular apophysis, for
articulation with the stapes. The connection between long process and lenticular apophysis is
narrow and flexible (Fig 4A). The zone of fusion between malleus and incus extends half-way
down the long process.
The stapes footplate is approximately oval in shape and averages 0.240 mm2 in area (n = 8).
It is very thin centrally with a thickened ridge around its perimeter (Figs 4A and 7A). Its ves-
tibular surface is quite flat. Instead of being stirrup-shaped with two crura, as would be typical
for a placental mammal, a triangular, bony plate extends out of the middle of the tympanic
side of the footplate. This very thin plate is strengthened by a low ridge on its dorsal aspect. Its
apex expands slightly to form the head of the stapes, for articulation with the incus. There is no
muscular process, consistent with the absence of a stapedius muscle.
Fig 3. Middle ear structures of Heterocephalus. A: Photomicrograph of a dissected left ear of an adult Heterocephalus (54 months), medial
view. The malleus, incus and tympanic membrane are visible; the stapes and tensor tympani muscle have been removed. Scale bar 1 mm. B:
Tomogram section through the left malleus of an adult mole-rat (65 months), posterior view. Note the difference between the compact bone which
forms the head and the spongy bone which forms the manubrium. The tensor tympani tendon is also visible. Scale bar 0.5 mm. APSC = ampulla for
posterior semicircular canal; ASC = anterior semicircular canal; C = cochlea; DMC = dorsal mastoid cavity; ED = bony tube for endolymphatic duct;
ER = epitympanic recess; FP = footplate of stapes; HM = head of malleus; LA = lenticular apophysis of incus; LPI = long process of incus;
LSC = lateral semicircular canal; MI = malleoincus; MM = manubrium of malleus; OW = oval window; PC = posterior crus of stapes; PD = bony tube
for perilymphatic duct (canaliculus cochleae); PMC = posteromedial mastoid cavity; PSC = posterior semicircular canal; RW = round window;
SPI = short process of incus; TC = tympanic cavity; TM = tympanic membrane; TT = tensor tympani tendon; V = vestibule of inner ear;
VMC = ventral mastoid cavity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g003
Fig 4. The stapes of Heterocephalus, in situ. A: MicroView reconstruction of the left stapes region in an adult
mole-rat (65 months), ventrolateral view. The malleoincudal complex has been coloured blue, the stapes yellow.
Note the very wide gap between stapes footplate and the rim of the oval window. This gap and the opening of
the round window (both shaded grey) are covered over by membranes, but these do not show up on the CT
reconstruction. Scale bar 0.5 mm. B: Histological section of the stapes of a neonatal Heterocephalus, showing
the synovial structure of the stapedio-vestibular articulation. The red arrows indicate the synovial joint capsule,
which lies between the stapes footplate and the rim of the oval window. Scale bar 0.1 mm. APSC = ampulla for
posterior semicircular canal; ASC = anterior semicircular canal; C = cochlea; DMC = dorsal mastoid cavity;
ED = bony tube for endolymphatic duct; ER = epitympanic recess; FP = footplate of stapes; HM = head of
malleus; LA = lenticular apophysis of incus; LPI = long process of incus; LSC = lateral semicircular canal;
MI = malleoincus; MM = manubrium of malleus; OW = oval window; PC = posterior crus of stapes; PD = bony
tube for perilymphatic duct (canaliculus cochleae); PMC = posteromedial mastoid cavity; PSC = posterior
semicircular canal; RW = round window; SPI = short process of incus; TC = tympanic cavity; TM = tympanic
membrane; TT = tensor tympani tendon; V = vestibule of inner ear; VMC = ventral mastoid cavity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g004
There are on average 2.74 cochlear turns; the length of the cochlear canal averages 5.79 mm
(Table 3). The canaliculus cochleae, the very narrow channel for the perilymphatic duct, leaves
the bony labyrinth just posterior to the round window, while the channel which carries the
endolymphatic duct emerges from the vestibule at the base of the crus commune (the short
canal segment shared by both anterior and posterior semicircular canals) and travels adjacent
to the crus commune, widening just before it opens into the cranial cavity.
Fig 5. Middle ear cavities of bathyergids. WinSurf reconstructions of the left middle ear cavities and associated structures in four species of
bathyergids (Heterocephalus glaber, Fukomys micklemi, Cryptomys hottentotus and Georychus capensis), from lateral and slightly anterior views.
The walls of the middle ear cavities are shown semitranslucent. Positions of the tympanic membranes are indicated by brown shading. The
epitympanic recess is colour-coded red, the dorsal mastoid cavity blue and the ventral mastoid cavity green. The ossicles are yellow. The
posteromedial mastoid cavity, present only in Heterocephalus, is not visible in this view. The posterior parts of the middle ear cavities of the other
species extend into the mastoid region and are equivalent to the ventral mastoid cavity of Heterocephalus, but they lack constricted entrances and
so have not been separately coloured. Not to scale. APSC = ampulla for posterior semicircular canal; ASC = anterior semicircular canal;
C = cochlea; DMC = dorsal mastoid cavity; ED = bony tube for endolymphatic duct; ER = epitympanic recess; FP = footplate of stapes; HM = head
of malleus; LA = lenticular apophysis of incus; LPI = long process of incus; LSC = lateral semicircular canal; MI = malleoincus; MM = manubrium of
malleus; OW = oval window; PC = posterior crus of stapes; PD = bony tube for perilymphatic duct (canaliculus cochleae); PMC = posteromedial
mastoid cavity; PSC = posterior semicircular canal; RW = round window; SPI = short process of incus; TC = tympanic cavity; TM = tympanic
membrane; TT = tensor tympani tendon; V = vestibule of inner ear; VMC = ventral mastoid cavity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g005
The ossified parts of the malleus and incus were of the same shape and size in the neonates
as in the older specimens. CT scans revealed them to be composed of a shell of cortical bone
surrounding a large marrow space, although there were some bony trabeculae within the mar-
row space. Most of the manubrium, including the lateral process, remained cartilaginous, as
did the head and part of the neck of the stapes. There was no lenticular apophysis of the incus
and the position of the incudo-stapedial articulation was not clearly identifiable; instead, the
Fig 6. Bony labyrinths and mastoid cavities of Heterocephalus. WinSurf reconstructions of the left bony labyrinths and
mastoid cavities of three Heterocephalus specimens of different ages, seen from approximately posterior views. In the
youngest specimen on the left, coloured arrows indicate the future directions of expansion of the middle ear cavity into the
mastoid region. Blue = dorsal mastoid cavity; green = ventral mastoid cavity; orange = posteromedial mastoid cavity. The
38-month-old specimen had smaller mastoid cavities than many younger specimens, so this diagram should not be taken to
indicate a strict temporal sequence. APSC = ampulla for posterior semicircular canal; ASC = anterior semicircular canal;
C = cochlea; DMC = dorsal mastoid cavity; ED = bony tube for endolymphatic duct; ER = epitympanic recess; FP = footplate of
stapes; HM = head of malleus; LA = lenticular apophysis of incus; LPI = long process of incus; LSC = lateral semicircular
canal; MI = malleoincus; MM = manubrium of malleus; OW = oval window; PC = posterior crus of stapes; PD = bony tube for
perilymphatic duct (canaliculus cochleae); PMC = posteromedial mastoid cavity; PSC = posterior semicircular canal;
RW = round window; SPI = short process of incus; TC = tympanic cavity; TM = tympanic membrane; TT = tensor tympani
tendon; V = vestibule of inner ear; VMC = ventral mastoid cavity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g006
long process of the incus simply tapered into a cartilage bar which was continuous with the
bony body of the stapes. This bar proved to be flexible and tough. The malleus and incus were
tightly articulated but could be separated with a scalpel blade.
The ossified part of the stapes body in the neonates was relatively squat and broad, but the
bony part of the stapes footplate was smaller in area (0.166 mm2, n = 4) than in the adult speci-
mens. In some specimens there was an unossified region at the centre of this ossicle, represent-
ing an intercrural foramen (Fig 7A). This was covered over with periosteum such that it was
not patent. Histological sections of a neonatal Heterocephalus revealed the stapedio-vestibular
articulation to be synovial (Fig 4B). The joint capsule extended between the stapes footplate
and the rim of the oval window on both the tympanic and vestibular sides of the articulation,
with an open space for synovial fluid in-between.
In the larger of the 37 day-old specimens, the manubrium was ossified but there was still
cartilage between incus and stapes; the ossicles of the smaller specimen were less well-devel-
oped. The vascular cavities within the ossicles remained prominent, but malleus and incus
were now fused. The stapedes lacked intercrural foramina.
The inner ears of the neonatal specimens were almost completely surrounded by a shell of
bone. Although still poorly calcified, this allowed an accurate CT reconstruction of all parts
except for the medial side of the lateral semicircular canal, where no ossification was visible
and the boundaries of the canal had to be estimated. The inner ears were very similar in shape
and volume to those of the adult specimens examined, but the volumes (Table 2) are overesti-
mates because of the lack of ossification of internal structures such as the modiolus of the
cochlea, which could not be subtracted from the total volume. The bone around the inner ear
was more compact in the 37-day-old specimen and the boundaries of the lateral semicircular
Fig 7. Auditory ossicles of bathyergids. Left auditory ossicles of bathyergid mole-rats, drawn to scale. The mallei and incudes, which are fused
in these animals, are shown from an internal view in each case, the stapedes from a dorsal view. A: Heterocephalus glaber; B: Fukomys micklemi;
C: Heliophobius argenteocinereus; D: Bathyergus suillus; E: Georychus capensis; F: Cryptomys hottentotus. Two stapedes are shown for
Heterocephalus: the lower one comes from a neonate and has a small intercrural foramen and a cartilaginous head and neck (indicated by a
dashed outline). Two stapedes are also shown for Cryptomys, in this case illustrating individual variation in the adult ossicle. Scale bar 2 mm.
APSC = ampulla for posterior semicircular canal; ASC = anterior semicircular canal; C = cochlea; DMC = dorsal mastoid cavity; ED = bony tube for
endolymphatic duct; ER = epitympanic recess; FP = footplate of stapes; HM = head of malleus; LA = lenticular apophysis of incus; LPI = long
process of incus; LSC = lateral semicircular canal; MI = malleoincus; MM = manubrium of malleus; OW = oval window; PC = posterior crus of
stapes; PD = bony tube for perilymphatic duct (canaliculus cochleae); PMC = posteromedial mastoid cavity; PSC = posterior semicircular canal;
RW = round window; SPI = short process of incus; TC = tympanic cavity; TM = tympanic membrane; TT = tensor tympani tendon; V = vestibule of
inner ear; VMC = ventral mastoid cavity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g007
canal could be clearly distinguished (Fig 6). The internal structures of the cochlea were also
better ossified. The reconstructed inner ear was of adult form.
Fig 8. Bony labyrinths of three bathyergid species. WinSurf reconstructions of the left bony labyrinths of Heterocephalus glaber, Cryptomys
hottentotus and Fukomys micklemi, seen from approximately lateral (left column), posterior (middle column) and medial (right column) views. Grey
shading has been added to indicate the positions of the openings into the labyrinth. The stapedes are shown in yellow. Note that Heterocephalus
has fewer cochlear turns than Cryptomys and Fukomys. The lateral semicircular canal of Heterocephalus reaches the vestibule directly, whereas in
Fukomys it merges with the ampulla of the posterior canal; the condition in Cryptomys is intermediate. Not to scale. APSC = ampulla for posterior
semicircular canal; ASC = anterior semicircular canal; C = cochlea; DMC = dorsal mastoid cavity; ED = bony tube for endolymphatic duct;
ER = epitympanic recess; FP = footplate of stapes; HM = head of malleus; LA = lenticular apophysis of incus; LPI = long process of incus;
LSC = lateral semicircular canal; MI = malleoincus; MM = manubrium of malleus; OW = oval window; PC = posterior crus of stapes; PD = bony
tube for perilymphatic duct (canaliculus cochleae); PMC = posteromedial mastoid cavity; PSC = posterior semicircular canal; RW = round
window; SPI = short process of incus; TC = tympanic cavity; TM = tympanic membrane; TT = tensor tympani tendon; V = vestibule of inner ear;
VMC = ventral mastoid cavity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g008
Posteromedial mastoid cavities were lacking. Three or four small septa were present ventral to
the inner ear as it projected into the tympanic cavity.
The mallei and incudes were similar in all bathyergids, although the shapes of the malleus
heads differed (Fig 7), as did the width of the manubrial blades, as seen from rostrally (widest
in Bathyergus). The zone of fusion between malleus and incus always extended down the incu-
dal long process but it was not continuous: the two ossicles separated slightly somewhere in
the middle of the articulating region, to a variable extent between individuals. The manubria
and incudal long processes were made of compact bone, as opposed to the spongy structure
found in Heterocephalus. The stapedes all possessed intercrural foramina, the size of which var-
ied among Cryptomys specimens (Fig 7F). The gap separating the footplate from the rim of the
oval window was particularly wide in this species. It was not possible to discern the nature of
the articulation in most of the CT scans, but in one Fukomys and one Cryptomys specimen a
synovial cavity could be seen within the zone of articulation. All species showed signs of a ten-
sor tympani muscle, but no stapedius was found.
The number of cochlear turns in one Heliophobius specimen was in the Heterocephalus
range, but in this animal both left and right cochleae were unusually loosely coiled: it looked
like the apical coils had failed to develop properly. In all other bathyergids, including the other
Heliophobius, the numbers of turns were greater (Table 3), reaching a maximum value of 4.00
in one specimen of Bathyergus. How the posterior limb of the lateral semicircular canal
reached the rest of the inner ear also varied between species. In Heliophobius it entered the ves-
tibule directly, as in Heterocephalus. In Fukomys (Fig 8) and Bathyergus it joined the ampulla
of the posterior canal. The morphology of Georychus was intermediate: although the lateral
canal converged with the posterior ampulla before reaching the vestibule, the two remained
Values cited are means ± standard deviation. The measurements of radii of curvature of the cochlear turns at base and apex (Rbase, Rapex) follow the
method given in [40]; measurements of semicircular canal (SCC) radii of curvature follow [41]. Heterocephalus measurements were from specimens over
100 days old only. The semicircular canals were not measured in Bathyergus and Heliophobius due to poor scan resolution.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.t003
externally demarcated. The three Cryptomys specimens varied between the Heterocephalus and
Georychus conditions.
Discussion
Ctenohystrica ear features in bathyergids
The Ctenohystrica rodent group, to which the bathyergids belong, has some very characteristic
middle ear features [43, 44]. These include a malleus with a ‘bullet-shaped’ head and a very
reduced anterior process, malleo-incudal fusion and a relatively loose stapedio-vestibular artic-
ulation, which has been found to be synovial rather than fibrous in the species examined. Cer-
tain species such as chinchillas have very capacious middle ear cavities. Loose articulations and
large cavities increase middle ear compliance, which aids low-frequency sound transmission.
This is thought to be advantageous to arid-region species because low-frequency sound propa-
gates best in such environments [45, 46]. It is therefore possible that the ancestral Ctenohy-
strica rodents evolved in an arid habitat. However, ‘low-frequency’ ears are also considered to
be advantageous in subterranean environments (see Introduction). It has been noted that cer-
tain features of Ctenohystrica rodents, including their generally blunt body-shapes and small
pinnae and tails, are also characteristic of subterranean mammals, while a unique carpal bone
found in the hystricognath subgroup is considered an adaptation to digging [47]. This raises
the possibility that the ancestral Ctenohystrica rodents were fossorial. Whether or not this was
the case, it is no surprise that tuco-tucos (Ctenomys species: [24, 48]) and the coruro (Spalaco-
pus: [22]), which are subterranean, retain typical, low-frequency, Ctenohystrica-type ears. Our
findings, which confirm and extend previous descriptions of the ear in the Bathyergidae (see
Introduction), lead to the conclusion that the ears of this family of mole-rats also retain many
ancestral Ctenohystrica features. However, bathyergids are unique in that their malleo-incudal
fusion zone extends down the long process of the incus [36].
The tensor tympani muscle can be well-developed in Ctenohystrica rodents, but the stapedius
is typically reduced or absent [43, 44]. In the present study, a stapedius was not found in any
bathyergid, consistent with several previous descriptions [20, 34, 35, 49]. However, some other
reports suggest that a small stapedius may be retained in some individual mole-rats [26, 27, 36]
Mason [43] hypothesized that a very compliant stapedio-vestibular articulation could not
be stiffened to a functionally relevant extent by the stapedius muscle. This may have led that
muscle to degenerate, while a compensatory role of the tensor tympani could in principle be
augmented by malleo-incudal fusion. These Ctenohystrica characteristics may therefore be
functionally linked. Not only is the stapedio-vestibular articulation synovial in at least some
bathyergids (this could not be assessed in all species) but the gap between stapes footplate and
oval window is unusually wide (Fig 4A), which is expected to increase compliance still further.
A very wide gap has previously been documented in the spalacid mole-rat Spalax [23] and the
gerbil Gerbillurus [42].
Among the Ctenohystrica, the cochleae of Ctenodactylus and Petromus have 3.5 turns [34],
and a ‘high-spiralled’ cochlea with a similarly large number of turns is also characteristic of
caviomorph rodents [22, 41, 50, 51]. We found up to 4 cochlear turns in the bathyergids we
examined (Table 3), while Müller et al. [30] found 4 to 4.5 turns in Fukomys anselli. High-spi-
ralled cochleae therefore appear to be widespread within the Ctenohystrica, and may well be
primitive both for this group and for the Bathyergidae.
its mastoid subcavities (Figs 5 and 6), the spongy bone of its ossicular processes (Fig 3B) and
the structure of its stapes, which lacks an intercrural foramen in the adult (Fig 7A). Its inner
ear is unusual in its low number of cochlear turns (Fig 8) and, probably related to this, its short
cochlear canal length (Table 3).
A ‘columelliform’ stapedial morphology was found in one of two specimens of Georychus
examined by Burda et al. [20], but not in the specimen that we examined. We are unaware of
any other report of a columelliform stapes in a rodent but they are found in certain other
mammals including monotremes, some marsupials, pangolins, some edentates and many
aquatic species [36, 52, 53]. The existence of a tiny foramen in some neonatal Heterocephalus
specimens (Fig 7A) may reflect the presence of a stapedial artery in the embryo. This artery
regresses in many mammals, typically leaving an empty intercrural foramen [52] although a
bony spicule passes through it in caviomorph rodents [54]. The arch made by the stapedial
crura is thought to be mechanically advantageous in resisting bending [53], and the relative
development of the stapes crura may be influenced by the pull of the stapedius muscle [55].
Heterocephalus lacks this muscle, but so too do many other Ctenohystrica rodents which none-
theless retain normally-shaped stapedes, including other bathyergids.
Molecular phylogenetic studies suggest that Heterocephalus forms a basal outgroup to the
rest of the Bathyergidae [1, 56]. This genus is sometimes placed in a separate subfamily, the
Heterocephalinae, with the other genera forming the Bathyerginae [57]. It is therefore possible
that Heterocephalus retains the primitive ear characteristics for its family, while the bathyer-
gines are derived. However, the bathyergines are more similar to other Ctenohystrica species
in terms of their ossicular process ossification, stapedial morphology and cochlear coiling.
This suggests that, in these respects at least, it is Heterocephalus which shows the derived con-
dition. It is not clear what the ancestral middle ear cavity morphology would be for the Cteno-
hystrica because this varies so much among different rodent species, even within the same
family [23, 34, 42]. Heterocephalus is the smallest bathyergid: although cochlear coiling is unre-
lated to body size among mammals in general [41], it is possible that within the Bathyergidae
the number of turns is somehow restricted by size, and that size affects middle ear cavity
structure.
These unusual characteristics of the naked mole-rat ear are discussed again later, in the con-
text of possible degeneration of its peripheral auditory system.
in our oldest specimen (65 months). Stapes structure changes significantly post-natally: the
head and neck ossify, the bony footplate expands slightly and the body is slimmed down. Dur-
ing this process the intercrural foramen, if still present, is lost. Substantial postnatal remodel-
ling of the stapes has also been observed in the rat, kangaroo rat and rabbit, but in these
animals the intercrural foramen widens [58, 59, 65].
Unlike the middle ear cavity, the inner ear of Heterocephalus had achieved its adult dimen-
sions in the neonatal specimens. It seems to be a common trend among mammals that the
bony labyrinth changes little, post-ossification (see e.g. [65–67]). The membranous semicircu-
lar canals of Fukomys mole-rats have also been found not to expand postnatally [31].
Bone conduction
Foot-drumming and stomping are used for intraspecific communication in several species of
bathyergids, but these behaviours have not been observed in Heterocephalus or Heliophobius
(see [74] for a review). Ground vibrations generated in this way could be detected by the
somatosensory system, or alternatively by the ear through a form of bone conduction. Certain
species of golden moles [75] and talpid moles [76] have relatively enormous mallei which likely
underpin a form of inertial bone conduction. The mole-rat Spalax lacks notably enlarged ossi-
cles, but other features of its ear region may augment alternative modes of bone-conducted
hearing [23, 77].
The malleoincus unit of Heterocephalus weighs around 0.47 mg (n = 2), while its stapes
weighs around 0.026 mg (n = 1) [38]. These values are slightly smaller than expected for its
body mass [21], which is quite unlike the situation in golden moles. Heterocephalus shares cer-
tain features of its middle ear with that of Spalax, however, notably a loose articulation between
malleus and skull, a flexible incudo-stapedial articulation and a particularly wide annular liga-
ment of the stapes. It has been suggested that these features may reduce constraint to the point
where the ossicular chain could vibrate in response to skull vibrations [23]. However, any role
of this in promoting bone conduction will be limited by the small mass of the ossicles in these
animals.
where LFL = low-frequency hearing limit at 60 dB SPL (kHz), HFL = high-frequency hearing
Fig 9. Relationships between inner ear measurements and body mass. Relationships between the natural logarithms of
inner ear measurements and body mass. Plot A considers the total volume of the bony labyrinth. Plot B considers the length of
the cochlear canal. Plots C, D and E consider the radii of curvature of the anterior semicircular canal (SCC), lateral semicircular
canal and posterior semicircular canal respectively. Plot F shows the mean cross-sectional diameter of all three semicircular
canals. In each plot, data for 28 extant mammalian species (black crosses) were taken from Ekdale (2013), and a least squares
regression line fitted as in that paper. Data-points representing mean values for bathyergids were superimposed as red symbols:
Heterocephalus individuals over 100 days old (square), Bathyergus (open triangle), Cryptomys (solid triangle), Fukomys (circle),
Georychus (diamond) and Heliophobius (plus). Body mass data, where available, were taken from Table 1 for the individual
animals concerned. Unrecorded body masses were estimated as follows: Fukomys 89 g, a mean value for animals from the same
laboratory colony [78]; Cryptomys 82 g, Georychus 211 g [79]. Inner ear data were taken from Tables 2 and 3.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.g009
limit at 60 dB SPL (kHz), BML = basilar membrane length (mm) and CT = number of cochlear
turns. Using these equations, and using cochlear canal length as an estimate of basilar mem-
brane length, one can predict a low-frequency hearing limit of 585 Hz and a high-frequency
limit of 125 kHz in Heterocephalus (Table 4). These values compare poorly with the naked
mole-rat’s behavioural hearing limits of 65 Hz and 12.8 kHz respectively [9]. Manoussaki et al.
[40] found a relationship between the radii of curvature at the cochlear base and apex and low-
frequency hearing limits in mammals:
where Rbase is the radius of curvature of the cochlear basal turn (mm) and Rapex is the radius of
curvature of the cochlear apical turn (mm). Using this equation, the low-frequency hearing
limit of Heterocephalus should be 291 Hz (Table 4), which is still much higher than the
observed value. These results suggest that normal mammalian structure-function relationships
do not hold for Heterocephalus, which has better low-frequency hearing but much poorer
high-frequency hearing than expected. Audiograms are not available for the other bathyergids
examined here, but predictions from the three equations are included in Table 4 for compara-
tive purposes.
Soft tissue structures of the cochlea could not be observed in our CT scans, but were
described in Fukomys anselli by Müller et al. [30]. Unusual features included a scala tympani
and helicotrema of very small cross-sectional areas, and a very low spiral ganglion cell density.
The basilar membrane is also of almost constant width and thickness over nearly half of its
length, and frequencies between 0.6 and 1 kHz were found to be tonotopically over-repre-
sented. However, there is no evidence for the particularly sharp tuning which would be
expected of a low-frequency “acoustic fovea” [81]. Müller et al. [30] noted that F. anselli has a
more limited range of hearing than predicted from anatomical correlations.
Turning to the vestibular system, the posterior limb of the lateral semicircular canal may
enter the vestibule directly (e.g. in Heterocephalus), merge with the posterior ampulla (e.g. in
Fukomys) or show an intermediate morphology (Fig 8). Direct entry into the vestibule was
found in the mouse (Mus) and guinea pig (Cavia), and was reconstructed as primitive both for
Rodentia and placental mammals as a whole [41]. This may well be so, but the diversity of phe-
notypes found here in just one family illustrates the need for caution in the interpretation of
the direction of inner ear evolution based on the sampling of a few, isolated species. The nature
of the entry of the lateral canal into the vestibule influences whether there is a space between
LFL = 60 dB SPL low-frequency hearing limit; HFL = 60 dB SPL high-frequency hearing limit. Mean values taken from Table 3 were used in the calculations;
the length of the cochlear canal was used as an estimate of basilar membrane length. A comparison of the predictions for Heterocephalus with audiogram
data suggests that there is little reason to be confident about these values (see text).
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167079.t004
lateral and posterior canals through which a posteromedial mastoid cavity can emerge, but the
functional implications of these differences in lateral canal morphology are otherwise
unknown.
One of the most striking features of the bony labyrinth of bathyergids is the ‘short and fat’
appearance of the semicircular canals (Fig 8). Our measurements (Table 3) may be compared
to values for a wide range of mammals tabulated by Ekdale [41]. The radii of curvature of each
of the semicircular canals of bathyergids are smaller than expected for their body masses (Fig
9C,9D and 9E), but the canal cross-sectional diameters are substantially greater than expected
(Fig 9F). The ratios of canal diameter to radius of curvature are as a result very high. From
Ekdale’s data, only the pangolin Manis and an extinct elephantimorph of uncertain identity
have canals of similar proportions. Among subterranean mammals, data tabulated by Crump-
ton et al. [82] show that certain golden moles and the marsupial mole Notoryctes can be added
to that list, while the membranous semicircular canals of the spalacid mole-rat Spalax have
similar dimensions to those of Fukomys [33]. ‘Short and fat’ canals have evidently evolved sev-
eral times in parallel among subterranean mammals, although they are not found in all
species.
According to the theoretical model developed by Oman et al. [83], mechanical sensitivity
of a given semicircular canal, in terms of displacement of the cupula per unit head angular
velocity, will be proportional to an ‘average radius of curvature’ of the entire fluid stream-
line and to its average squared cross-sectional area, weighted according to deviations from
perfect circularity. These measurements should include not just the narrow section of duct
but the entire circuit, including ampulla and utricular cavity, and should be based on the
membranous labyrinth rather than the bony labyrinth considered here. The Oman et al.
model has been used to predict that the sensitivities of the wide semicircular canals of bath-
yergid and spalacid mole-rats are enhanced in comparison to those of murid rats and guinea
pigs [32, 33].
3. The columelliform stapes has a thin, flexible body which appears to lack the structural stiff-
ness typical of this ossicle. It articulates with a tiny lenticular apophysis mounted on a
weakly-developed long process of the incus (Fig 4A). Increased flexibility within the ossic-
ular chain can result in reduced sound energy transmission at high frequencies [84].
4. Reduced cochlear coiling and cochlear canal length in Heterocephalus might conceivably
represent a degenerate feature, if having a ‘high-spiralled’ cochlea was the ancestral condi-
tion for bathyergids.
Like that of Heterocephalus, the hearing range of Fukomys anselli is known to be very lim-
ited [11, 12], and it may be that hearing is poor in all members of the Bathyergidae. Points 2 to
4 above suggest that the hearing of Heterocephalus might be worse than that of the other bath-
yergids examined. However, these anatomical differences could be influenced by the small size
of the naked mole-rat, its phylogenetic position as the most basal offshoot of the family or the
fact that our specimens came from laboratory colonies rather than the wild. Our specimens
were also relatively young for naked mole-rats, albeit of comparable ages to the approximately
one-year-old animals which had their hearing tested by Heffner & Heffner [9].
Increased intraspecific variability is a possible indicator of a lack of selective pressure con-
straining ear structure. If the variation in the extent of pneumatisation of the mastoid region
among adult Heterocephalus proves to exceed that found in other small mammals, this feature
could be added to the list above. Our animals were from captive colonies, but the differences
in stapes structure found here in Cryptomys specimens and the differences in cochlear struc-
ture in Heliophobius specimens, all collected from the wild, could be interpreted along similar
lines. Significant intraspecific variability in stapes structure has previously been recorded in
Georychus [20] and in the Spalax ehrenbergi superspecies [85, 86]; Spalax is known to have
‘degenerate’ hearing similar to that of Heterocephalus [13]. We did not find the same level of
intraspecific variability in all middle and inner ear structures, however, which could indicate
that some features retain more functional importance than others.
Although the anatomical features noted above are suggestive of degeneration, in accordance
with what is known about the hearing of the naked mole-rat, none are conclusive. Given the
dangers of post-hoc interpretations of this nature, experimental studies are necessary to test
these ideas.
Supporting Information
S1 Table. Middle and inner ear measurements. Worksheet 1 contains the measurements
made on individual animals from which mean values were calculated. Worksheet 2 contains
the x,y,z coordinates of points along the cochlear ducts, which were used to calculate some of
the inner ear parameters represented in Table 3.
(XLSX)
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to record their immense gratitude to Phil Cox for sending us speci-
mens and CT scans, and to Dominique Adriaens, Paul van Daele, Nigel Bennett and Radim
Šumbera for originally providing the specimens concerned. Matt Lowe and Robert Asher at
the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge, kindly allowed access to that collection. We
thank Mrs. Anita Shelley for making the histological slides, members of the Smith lab for help
with specimen preparation, the Cambridge Biotomography Centre for the use of their scanner
and the two reviewers for commenting on this paper. This work was supported by a John Ray
Trust Summer Research Grant to H.L.C. and a Royal Society Research Grant (RG130110) to E.
S.J.S.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: MJM.
Formal analysis: MJM.
Funding acquisition: ESJS HLC.
Investigation: MJM HLC.
Methodology: MJM HLC.
Project administration: MJM.
Resources: ESJS.
Supervision: MJM.
Visualization: MJM.
Writing – original draft: MJM HLC.
Writing – review & editing: MJM HLC ESJS.
References
1. Fabre P-H, Hautier L, Dimitrov D, Douzery EJP. A glimpse on the pattern of rodent diversification: a phy-
logenetic approach. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 2012; 12(88).
2. Jarvis JUM, Sherman PW. Heterocephalus glaber. Mammalian Species. 2002; 706:1–9.
3. Buffenstein R. The naked mole-rat: a new long-living model for human aging research. Journals of Ger-
ontology Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2005; 60(11):1369–77.
4. Hetling JR, Baig-Silva MS, Comer CM, Pardue MT, Samaan DY, Qtaishat NM, et al. Features of visual
function in the naked mole-rat Heterocephalus glaber. Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 2005; 191
(4):317–30.
5. Kott O, Sumbera R, Nemec P. Light perception in two strictly subterranean rodents: life in the dark or
blue? PLoS One. 2010; 5(7):e11810. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011810 PMID: 20676369
6. Heth G, Frankenberg E, Nevo E. Adaptive optimal sound for vocal communication in tunnels of a subter-
ranean mammal (Spalax ehrenbergi). Experientia. 1986; 42:1287–9. PMID: 3780955
7. Lange S, Burda H, Wegner RE, Dammann P, Begall S, Kawalika M. Living in a "stethoscope": burrow
acoustics promote auditory specializations in subterranean rodents. Naturwissenschaften. 2007;
94:134–8. doi: 10.1007/s00114-006-0168-0 PMID: 17119910
8. Pepper JW, Braude SH, Lacey EA, Sherman PW. Vocalizations of the naked mole-rat. In: Sherman
PW, Jarvis JUM, Alexander RD, editors. The Biology of the Naked Mole-Rat. Princeton: Princeton Uni-
versity Press; 1991. p. 243–74.
9. Heffner RS, Heffner HE. Degenerate hearing and sound localization in naked mole rats (Heterocepha-
lus glaber), with an overview of central auditory structures. Journal of Comparative Neurology. 1993;
331:418–33. doi: 10.1002/cne.903310311 PMID: 8514919
10. Gessele N, Garcia-Pino E, Omerbašić D, Park TJ, Koch U. Structural changes and lack of HCN1 chan-
nels in the binaural auditory brainstem of the naked mole-rat (Heterocephalus glaber). PLoS One. 2016;
11(1):e0146428. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146428 PMID: 26760498
11. Brückmann G, Burda H. Hearing in blind subterranean Zambian mole-rats (Cryptomys sp.): collective
behavioural audiogram in a highly social rodent. Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 1997; 181:83–8.
12. Müller M, Burda H. Restricted hearing range in a subterranean rodent, Cryptomys hottentotus. Natur-
wissenschaften. 1989; 76:134–5. PMID: 2725692
13. Heffner RS, Heffner HE. Hearing and sound localization in blind mole rats (Spalax ehrenbergi). Hearing
Research. 1992; 62:206–16. PMID: 1429264
14. Bruns V, Müller M, Hofer W, Heth G, Nevo E. Inner ear structure and electrophysiological audiograms
of the subterranean mole rat, Spalax ehrenbergi. Hearing Research. 1988; 33:1–10. PMID: 3372367
15. Heffner RS, Heffner HE. Vestigial hearing in a fossorial mammal, the pocket gopher (Geomys bursar-
ius). Hearing Research. 1990; 46:239–52. PMID: 2394636
16. Begall S, Burda H, Schneider B. Hearing in coruros (Spalacopus cyanus): special audiogram features
of a subterranean rodent. Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 2004; 190(11):963–9.
17. Credner S, Burda H, Ludescher F. Acoustic communication underground: vocalization characteristics
in subterranean social mole-rats (Cryptomys sp., Bathyergidae). Journal of Comparative Physiology A.
1997; 180:245–55.
18. Knotková E, Veitl S, Šumbera R, Sedlaček F, Burda H. Vocalisations of the silvery mole-rat: Compari-
son of vocal repertoires in subterranean rodents with different social systems. Bioacoustics. 2009; 18
(3):241–57.
19. Vanden Hole C, Van Daele PAAG, Desmet N, Devos P, Adriaens D. Does sociality imply a complex
vocal communication system? A case study for Fukomys micklemi (Bathyergidae, Rodentia). Bioacous-
tics. 2014; 23(2):143–60.
20. Burda H, Bruns V, Hickman GC. The ear in subterranean Insectivora and Rodentia in comparison with
ground-dwelling representatives. I. Sound conducting system of the middle ear. Journal of Morphology.
1992; 214:49–61. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1052140104 PMID: 1433307
21. Mason MJ. Middle ear structures in fossorial mammals: a comparison with non-fossorial species. Jour-
nal of Zoology. 2001; 255:467–86.
22. Begall S, Burda H. Acoustic communication and burrow acoustics are reflected in the ear morphology
of the coruro (Spalacopus cyanus, Octodontidae), a social fossorial rodent. Journal of Morphology.
2006; 267(3):382–90. doi: 10.1002/jmor.10411 PMID: 16400643
23. Mason MJ, Lai FWS, Li J-G, Nevo E. Middle ear structure and bone conduction in Spalax, Eospalax
and Tachyoryctes mole-rats (Rodentia: Spalacidae). Journal of Morphology. 2010; 271:462–72. doi: 10.
1002/jmor.10810 PMID: 19941379
24. Mason MJ. The middle ear apparatus of the tuco-tuco Ctenomys sociabilis (Rodentia, Ctenomyidae).
Journal of Mammalogy. 2004; 85(4):797–805.
25. Mason MJ. Structure and function of the mammalian middle ear. II: Inferring function from structure.
Journal of Anatomy. 2016; 228:300–12. doi: 10.1111/joa.12316 PMID: 26100915
26. Lange S, Burda H, Bennett NC, Nemec P. Middle ear ossicles as a diagnostic trait in African mole-rats
(Rodentia: Bathyergidae). In: Huber BA, Sinclair BJ, Lampe K-H, editors. African Biodiversity: Mole-
cules, Organisms, Ecosystems. Proc. 5th Intern. Symp. Trop. Biol., Museum Koenig, Bonn. New York:
Springer Verlag; 2005. p. 329–37.
27. Lange S, Burda H. Comparative and functional morphology of the middle ear in Zambezian mole-rats
(Coetomys—Cryptomys, Bathyergidae). Belgian Journal of Zoology. 2005; 135 (supplement):5–10.
28. Laube B, Müller M, Burda H, Dannhof B, Bruns V. Zur Hörbiologie des Graumulls Cryptomys hottento-
tus. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Zoologischen Gesellschaft. 1990; 83:415.
29. Burda H. Ear and eye in subterranean mole-rats, Fukomys anselli (Bathyergidae) and Spalax ehren-
bergi (Spalacidae): progressive specialisation or regressive degeneration? Animal Biology. 2006; 56
(4):475–86.
30. Müller M, Laube B, Burda H, Bruns V. Structure and function of the cochlea in the African mole rat
(Cryptomys hottentotus): evidence for a low frequency acoustic fovea. Journal of Comparative Physiol-
ogy A. 1992; 171(4):469–76.
31. Lindenlaub T, Burda H. Morphometry of the vestibular organ in neonate and adult African mole-rats
Cryptomys species. Anatomy and Embryology. 1993; 188(2):159–62. PMID: 8214630
32. Lindenlaub T, Burda H. Functional allometry of the semicircular ducts in subterranean mole-rats Crypt-
omys (Bathyergidae, Rodentia). Anatomical Record. 1994; 240:286–9. doi: 10.1002/ar.1092400217
PMID: 7992896
33. Lindenlaub T, Burda H, Nevo E. Convergent evolution of the vestibular organ in the subterranean mole-
rats, Cryptomys and Spalax, as compared with the aboveground rat, Rattus. Journal of Morphology.
1995; 224(3):303–11. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1052240305 PMID: 7595956
34. Oaks ECJ. Structure and function of inflated middle ears of rodents [PhD]. New Haven, USA: Yale Uni-
versity; 1967.
35. Parent J-P. Recherches sur l’oreille moyenne des rongeurs actuels et fossiles. Anatomie. Valeur sys-
tématique. Mémoires et Travaux de l’Institut de Montpellier. 1980; 11:1–286.
36. Fleischer G. Studien am Skelett des Gehörorgans der Säugetiere, einschließlich des Menschen. Säu-
getierkundliche Mitteilungen. 1973; 21:131–239.
37. Segall W. Characteristics of the ear, especially the middle ear, in fossorial mammals, compared to
those in the Manidae. Acta Anatomica. 1973; 86:96–110. PMID: 4755751
38. Mason MJ. The Functional Anatomy of the Middle Ear of Mammals, with an Emphasis on Fossorial
Forms [PhD]. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge; 1999.
39. Schuhmacher LN, Husson Z, Smith ES. The naked mole-rat as an animal model in biomedical research:
current perspectives. Open Access Animal Physiology. 2015; 7:137–48.
40. Manoussaki D, Chadwick RS, Ketten DR, Arruda J, Dimitriadis EK, O’Malley JT. The influence of
cochlear shape on low-frequency hearing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
USA. 2008; 105(16):6162–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0710037105 PMID: 18413615
41. Ekdale EG. Comparative anatomy of the bony labyrinth (inner ear) of placental mammals PLoS One.
2013; 8(6):e66624. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066624 PMID: 23805251
42. Mason MJ. Structure and function of the mammalian middle ear. I: Large middle ears in small desert
mammals. Journal of Anatomy. 2016; 228:284–99. doi: 10.1111/joa.12313 PMID: 26104342
43. Mason MJ. Of mice, moles and guinea-pigs: functional morphology of the middle ear in living mammals.
Hearing Research. 2013; 301:4–18. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.10.004 PMID: 23099208
44. Mason MJ. Functional morphology of rodent middle ears. In: Cox PG, Hautier L, editors. Evolution of
the Rodents: Advances in Phylogeny, Functional Morphology and Development. Cambridge Studies in
Morphology and Molecules: New Paradigms in Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press; 2015. p. 373–404.
45. Rosowski JJ, Ravicz ME, Songer JE. Structures that contribute to middle-ear admittance in chinchilla.
Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 2006; 192(12):1287–311.
46. Huang GT, Rosowski JJ, Ravicz ME, Peake WT. Mammalian ear specializations in arid habitats: struc-
tural and functional evidence from sand cat (Felis margarita). Journal of Comparative Physiology A.
2002; 188:663–81.
47. Prochel J, Begall S, Burda H. Morphology of the carpal region in some rodents with special emphasis
on hystricognaths. Acta Zoologica. 2014; 95:220–38.
48. Schleich CE, Busch C. Functional morphology of the middle ear of Ctenomys talarum (Rodentia: Octo-
dontidae). Journal of Mammalogy. 2004; 85(2):290–5.
49. Parent J-P. Disposition fondamentale et variabilité de la région auditive des rongeurs hystricognathes.
Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances de l’Académie des Sciences, série D. 1976; 283:243–
5.
50. Pye A. The structure of the cochlea in some myomorph and caviomorph rodents. Journal of Zoology.
1977; 182:309–21.
51. Pye A. Variations in the structure of the ear in the different mammalian species. Sound. 1972; 6:14–8.
52. Novacek MJ, Wyss A. Origin and transformation of the mammalian stapes. In: Flanagan KM, Lillegra-
ven JA, editors. Vertebrates, Phylogeny, and Philosophy Contributions to Geology, University of Wyo-
ming, Special Paper 3. Laramie: University of Wyoming; 1986. p. 35–53.
53. Fleischer G. Evolutionary principles of the mammalian middle ear. Advances in Anatomy, Embryology
and Cell Biology. 1978; 55:1–70.
54. Argyle EC, Mason MJ. Middle ear structures of Octodon degus (Rodentia: Octodontidae), in compari-
son with those of subterranean caviomorphs. Journal of Mammalogy. 2008; 89(6):1447–55.
55. Hüttenbrink KB. Ein Vergleich der Morphologie von Säugetier- und Vogel-Gehörknöchelchen und Über-
legungen zur asymmetrischen Form des menschlichen Steigbügels. Laryngo- Rhino- Otologie. 1996;
75:123–8. PMID: 8652026
56. Ingram CM, Burda H, Honeycutt RL. Molecular phylogenetics and taxonomy of the African mole-rats,
genus Cryptomys and the new genus Coetomys Gray, 1864. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution.
2004; 31(3):997–1014. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2003.11.004 PMID: 15120397
57. Walton AH, Nedbal MA, Honeycutt RL. Evidence from intron 1 of the nuclear transthyretin (prealbumin)
gene for the phylogeny of African mole-rats (Bathyergidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution.
2000; 16(3):467–74. doi: 10.1006/mpev.2000.0808 PMID: 10991798
58. Webster DB. Auditory systems of Heteromyidae: postnatal development of the ear of Dipodomys mer-
riami. Journal of Morphology. 1975; 146:377–94. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051460305 PMID: 1142445
59. Zimmer WM, Rosin DF, Saunders JC. Middle-ear development VI: structural maturation of the rat con-
ducting apparatus. Anatomical Record. 1994; 239:475–84.
60. Huangfu M, Saunders JC. Auditory development in the mouse: structural maturation of the middle ear.
Journal of Morphology. 1983; 176:249–59. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051760302 PMID: 6887258
61. Cohen YE, Bacon CK, Saunders JC. Middle ear development III: morphometric changes in the conduct-
ing apparatus of the Mongolian gerbil. Hearing Research. 1992; 62:187–93. PMID: 1429261
62. Lay DM. The anatomy, physiology, functional significance and evolution of specialised hearing organs
of gerbilline rodents. Journal of Morphology. 1972; 138:41–120. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051380103 PMID:
5069372
63. Potapova EG. Morphological patterns and evolutionary pathways of the middle ear in dormice (Gliridae,
Rodentia). Trakya University Journal of Scientific Research, series B. 2001; 2(2):159–70.
64. Stephens CB. Development of the middle and inner ear in the golden hamster (Mesocricetus auratus):
a detailed description to establish a norm for physiopathological study of congenital deafness. Acta Oto-
Laryngologica Supplementum. 1972; 296:1–51. PMID: 4343988
65. Hoyte DAN. The postnatal growth of the ear capsule in the rabbit. American Journal of Anatomy. 1961;
108(1):1–16.
66. Mennecart B, Costeur L. Shape variation and ontogeny of the ruminant bony labyrinth, an example in
Tragulidae. Journal of Anatomy. 2016; 229(3):422–35. doi: 10.1111/joa.12487 PMID: 27245372
67. Ekdale EG. Ontogenetic variation in the bony labyrinth of Monodelphis domestica (Mammalia: Marsu-
pialia) following ossification of the inner ear cavities. Anatomical Record. 2010; 293(11):1896–912.
68. Hemilä S, Nummela S, Reuter T. What middle ear parameters tell about impedance matching and high
frequency hearing. Hearing Research. 1995; 85:31–44. PMID: 7559177
69. Ravicz ME, Rosowski JJ, Voigt HF. Sound-power collection by the auditory periphery of the Mongolian
gerbil Meriones unguiculatus. I: Middle-ear input impedance. Journal of the Acoustical Society of Amer-
ica. 1992; 92(1):157–77. PMID: 1512321
70. Heffner RS, Koay G, Heffner HE. Audiograms of five species of rodents: implications for the evolution of
hearing and the perception of pitch. Hearing Research. 2001; 157:138–52. PMID: 11470193
71. Webster DB, Webster M. Auditory systems of Heteromyidae: functional morphology and evolution of
the middle ear. Journal of Morphology. 1975; 146:343–76. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051460304 PMID:
1142444
72. Vrettakos PA, Dear SP, Saunders JC. Middle-ear structure in the chinchilla—a quantitative study.
American Journal of Otolaryngology. 1988; 9(2):58–67. PMID: 3400821
73. Peake WT, Rosowski JJ, Lynch TJ. Middle-ear transmission: acoustic versus ossicular coupling in cat
and human. Hearing Research. 1992; 57(2):245–68. PMID: 1733916
74. Mason MJ, Narins PM. Seismic sensitivity and communication in subterranean mammals. In: O’Con-
nell-Rodwell CE, editor. The Use of Vibrations in Communication: Properties, Mechanisms and Func-
tion across Taxa. Kerala: Research Signpost; 2010. p. 121–39.
75. Mason MJ. Morphology of the middle ear of golden moles (Chrysochloridae). Journal of Zoology. 2003;
260:391–403.
76. Mason MJ. Evolution of the middle ear apparatus in talpid moles. Journal of Morphology. 2006; 267
(6):678–95. doi: 10.1002/jmor.10430 PMID: 16511863
77. Rado R, Himelfarb M, Arensburg B, Terkel J, Wolberg Z. Are seismic communication signals transmit-
ted by bone conduction in the blind mole rat? Hearing Research. 1989; 41:23–30. PMID: 2793611
78. Van Daele PAAG, Herrel A, Adriaens D. Biting performance in teeth-digging African mole-rats (Fuk-
omys, Bathyergidae, Rodentia) Physiological and Biochemical Zoology: Ecological and Evolutionary
Approaches. 2009; 82(1):40–50.
79. Silva M, Downing JA. CRC Handbook of Mammalian Body Masses. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1995.
80. West CD. The relationship of the spiral turns of the cochlea and the length of the basilar membrane to
the range of audible frequencies in ground dwelling mammals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America. 1985; 77:1091–101. PMID: 3980863
81. Kössl M, Frank G, Burda H, Müller M. Acoustic distortion products from the cochlea of the blind African
mole rat, Cryptomys spec. Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 1996; 178:427–34.
82. Crumpton N, Kardjilov N, Asher RJ. Convergence vs. specialization in the ear region of moles (Mamma-
lia). Journal of Morphology. 2015; 276:900–14. doi: 10.1002/jmor.20391 PMID: 25858660
83. Oman CM, Marcus EN, Curthoys IS. The influence of semicircular canal morphology on endolymph
flow dynamics. Acta Otolaryngologica. 1987; 103:1–13.
84. Mason MJ, Farr MRB. Flexibility within the middle ears of vertebrates. Journal of Laryngology & Otol-
ogy. 2013; 127:2–14.
85. Burda H, Bruns V, Nevo E. Middle ear and cochlear receptors in the subterranean mole-rat, Spalax
ehrenbergi. Hearing Research. 1989; 39:225–30. PMID: 2753827
86. Burda H, Nevo E, Bruns V. Adaptive differentiation of ear structures in subterranean mole-rats of the
Spalax ehrenbergi superspecies in Israel. Zoologische Jahrbücher Abteilung für Systematik, Ökologie
und Geographie der Tiere. 1990; 117(3):369–82.