Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Spontaneous ophthalmic lesions in laboratory-housed common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis and hummingbird bobtail squid Euprymna berryi

  • Nadiah M H A van Eijk*
  • , Nina Vogt
  • , Mark F Stidworthy
  • , Emily Northrup
  • , Andrew F Rich
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objectives
Given the limited ocular pathology data for common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis and hummingbird bobtail squid Euprymna berryi despite their high visual dependency, the purpose of this study was to investigate and describe the ophthalmic lesions in a cohort of laboratory-housed common cuttlefish and hummingbird bobtail squid.

Methods
Cases were retrospectively selected from the International Zoo Veterinary Group Pathology database that reported confirmed clinical ophthalmic lesions or histopathological lesions. Twenty-five cases were identified that included clinical records and gross and histopathological examination of whole specimens. The cases included 19 common cuttlefish and six hummingbird bobtail squid, thus providing a sample of 50 eyes and orbital cavities.

Results
Thirty-two of 50 individual eyes (64%) and 30 of 50 white bodies (60%) were affected. The most frequent lesion that was observed was inflammation (n = 29/32, 91%), primarily manifesting as uveitis (n = 23/32, 72%) and phakitis (n = 10/32, 31%). Cataracts were also common (n = 14/32, 44%), often with cataract-associated inflammation (n = 9/14, 64%). Leukopoietic hyperplasia of the white body was bilaterally observed in 15 of 25 animals (60%) and was thought to be associated with exophthalmos. In the absence of notable intraocular or infraorbital lesions in some animals, this change was considered reactive, likely in response to nonocular lesions, such as ulcerative dermatitis and branchitis. Notable additional findings included hypopyon-like lesions (n = 3/32, 9%), a single case of congenital ocular malformation, and one case with mesenchymal proliferations that were reminiscent of florid fibroplasia.

Conclusions
This study contributes to the expanding knowledge of cephalopod ocular pathology, with previously unreported findings in these cephalopods including congenital ocular malformation and cases of ­hypopyon-like lesions with proteinaceous material exudation and hemocytes in the anterior chamber. Additionally, it offers specific insights into the ocular pathology of the hummingbird bobtail squid.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbervsag003
Pages (from-to)73-86
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Aquatic Animal Health
Volume38
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2026

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2026. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of American Fisheries Society. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Funding

The authors would like to thank the Max Planck Institute for Brain Research for their continued cephalopod submissions and support of this publication. Additionally, the authors thank the veterinary and caretaker staff from the MPIBR for expert animal care and veterinary support, the technicians at IZVG Pathology for their histology expertise, the staff at Nationwide Laboratories for their microbiology support, and Marin Bussi and Martijn Siepel for their advice regarding statistical analyses and interpretation. ChatGPT (OpenAI) was used for generating and refining Excel formulas and RStudio code. None declared.

Funders
MPIBR

    Keywords

    • cephalopod
    • ocular pathology
    • white body

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Spontaneous ophthalmic lesions in laboratory-housed common cuttlefish Sepia officinalis and hummingbird bobtail squid Euprymna berryi'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this