Nuclear organization and morphology of cholinergic, putative catecholaminergic and serotonergic neurons in the brain of the rock hyrax, Procavia capensis.

The nuclear subdivisions of the cholinergic, putative catecholaminergic and serotonergic systems within the brain of the rock hyrax (Procavia capensis) were identified following immunohistochemistry for acetylcholinesterase, tyrosine hydroxylase and serotonin. The aim of the present study was to investigate possible differences in the complement of nuclear subdivisions of these systems by comparing those of the rock hyrax to published studies of other mammals. The rock hyrax belongs to the order Hyracoidea and forms part of the Afroplacentalia mammalian cohort. For the most part, the nuclear organization of these three systems closely resembled that described for many other mammalian species. The nuclear organization of the serotonergic system was identical to that seen in all eutherian mammals. The nuclear organization of the putative catecholaminergic system was very similar to that seen in rodents except for the lack of a C3 nucleus and the compact division of the locus coeruleus (A6c). In addition, the diffuse locus coeruleus (A6d) appeared to contain very few tyrosine hydroxylase immunoreactive (TH+) neurons. The cholinergic system showed many features in common with that seen in both rodents and primates; however, there were three differences of note: (1) cholinergic neurons were observed in the anterior nuclei of the dorsal thalamus; (2) cholinergic parvocellular nerve cells, probably representing interneurons, forming subdivisions of the laterodorsal and pedunculopontine tegmental nuclei were observed at the midbrain/pons interface; and (3) a large number of cholinergic nerve cells in the periventricular grey of the medulla oblongata were observed. Thus, while there are many similarities to other mammalian species, the nuclear organization of these systems in the rock hyrax shows specific differences to what has been observed previously in other mammals. These differences are discussed in both a functional and phylogenetic perspective.