AUTHOR=Sykes António V. , Almansa Eduardo , Ponte Giovanna , Cooke Gavan M. , Andrews Paul L. R. 

TITLE=Can Cephalopods Vomit? Hypothesis Based on a Review of Circumstantial Evidence and Preliminary Experimental Observations

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Physiology

VOLUME=11

YEAR=2020

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2020.00765

DOI=10.3389/fphys.2020.00765

ISSN=1664-042X

ABSTRACT=<p>In representative species of all vertebrate classes, the oral ejection of upper digestive tract contents by vomiting or regurgitation is used to void food contaminated with toxins or containing indigestible material not voidable in the feces. Vomiting or regurgitation has been reported in a number of invertebrate marine species (<italic>Exaiptasia diaphana</italic>, <italic>Cancer productus</italic>, and <italic>Pleurobranchaea californica</italic>), prompting consideration of whether cephalopods have this capability. This “hypothesis and theory” paper reviews four lines of supporting evidence: (1) the mollusk <italic>P. californica</italic> sharing some digestive tract morphological and innervation similarities with <italic>Octopus vulgaris</italic> is able to vomit or regurgitate with the mechanisms well characterized, providing an example of motor program switching; (2) a rationale for vomiting or regurgitation in cephalopods based upon the potential requirement to void indigestible material, which may cause damage and ejection of toxin contaminated food; (3) anecdotal reports (including from the literature) of vomiting- or regurgitation-like behavior in several species of cephalopod (<italic>Sepia officinalis</italic>, <italic>Sepioteuthis sepioidea</italic>, <italic>O. vulgaris</italic>, and <italic>Enteroctopus dofleini</italic>); and (4) anatomical and physiological studies indicating that ejection of gastric/crop contents <italic>via</italic> the buccal cavity is a theoretical possibility by retroperistalsis in the upper digestive tract (esophagus, crop, and stomach). We have not identified any publications refuting our hypothesis, so a balanced review is not possible. Overall, the evidence presented is circumstantial, so experiments adapting current methodology (e.g., research community survey, <italic>in vitro</italic> studies of motility, and analysis of indigestible gut contents and feces) are described to obtain additional evidence to either support or refute our hypothesis. We recognize the possibility that further research may not support the hypothesis; therefore, we consider how cephalopods may protect themselves against ingestion of toxic food by external chemodetection prior to ingestion and digestive gland detoxification post-ingestion. Reviewing the evidence for the hypothesis has identified a number of gaps in knowledge of the anatomy (e.g., the presence of sphincters) and physiology (e.g., the fate of indigestible food residues, pH of digestive secretions, sensory innervation, and digestive gland detoxification mechanisms) of the digestive tract as well as a paucity of recent studies on the role of epithelial chemoreceptors in prey identification and food intake.</p>