DOCSLIB.ORG

The Evolutionary Position of Turtles Revised

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Evolutionary Position of Turtles Revised Naturwissenschaften (2001) 88:193–200 DOI 10.1007/s001140100228 REVIEW ARTICLE Rafael Zardoya · Axel Meyer The evolutionary position of turtles revised Published online: 17 May 2001 © Springer-Verlag 2001 Abstract Consensus on the evolutionary position of tur- niches (Pough et al. 1998). Based on the mechanism of tles within the amniote phylogeny has eluded evolution- retraction of their heads into the shell, extant turtles are ary biologists for more than a century. This phylogenetic classified into two main suborders, Cryptodira (turtles problem has remained unsolved partly because turtles that bend their neck vertically) and Pleurodira (side- have such a unique morphology that only few characters necked turtles) (Shaffer et al. 1997). Cryptodires (ap- can be used to link them with any other group of amnio- proximately 200 species) have a worldwide distribution tes. Among the many alternative hypotheses that have (though rare in Australia) whereas pleurodires (approxi- been postulated to explain the origin and phylogenetic mately 50 species) are currently found only in South relationships of turtles, a general agreement among pale- America, Africa and Australia. ontologists emerged in favoring the placement of turtles The exact phylogenetic position of turtles within the as the only living survivors of the anapsid reptiles (those Amniota (reptiles, birds, and mammals) is the subject of that lack temporal fenestrae in the skull). However, re- a lively debate that dates back for over a century (Benton cent morphological and molecular studies have radically 1991). The current classification of amniotes is consis- changed our view of amniote phylogenetic relationships, tent with a single key morphological character, the pres- and evidence is accumulating that supports the diapsid ence and type of temporal fenestration of the skull affinities of turtles. Molecular studies favor archosaurs (Fig. 1) (Günther 1867; Willinston 1917). Extant amnio- (crocodiles and birds) as the living sister group of turtles, tes that show a completely roofed skull (i.e., turtles) are whereas morphological studies support lepidosaurs (tua- tara, lizards, and snakes) as the closest living relatives of turtles. Accepting these hypotheses implies that turtles Fig. 1 Temporal fenestration of the amniote skull. Anapsida: cannot be viewed any longer as primitive reptiles, and the skull of early amniotes that they might have lost the temporal holes in the skull shows complete dermal roofing secondarily rather than never having had them. of the temporal region. Turtles Living turtles (order Testudines) are among the most also have no true temporal openings. Diapsida: the skull striking and strangest tetrapods. Early on in their evolu- of crocodiles and the tuatara tionary history, these reptiles evolved distinctive shells has two temporal windows as effective defense (Burke 1989). This innovation is (shown in black) that accom- probably the key to their evolutionary success and per- modate jaw muscles. Birds, liz- ards, and snakes have modified sistence, and has constrained the evolution of the rest of the primitive diapsid pattern by their morphology (Lee 1996). The general Baüplan of the lost of one or more of the turtles has barely changed since the Triassic (200 MYA), bone arches that defined the yet their carapaces show a great variety of shapes that re- original two openings. Synaps- flect adaptations to terrestrial, freshwater and marine ida: the skull of mammals presents a single lower tempo- ral hole (shown in black) R. Zardoya (✉) Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, José Gutiérrez Abascal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain e-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34-91-4111328, Fax: +34-91-5645078 A. Meyer Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78457 Konstanz, Germany 194 Fig. 2A–F Alternative hypotheses explaining the phylogenetic Poling 1999; Kumazawa and Nishida 1999; Mannen and position of turtles within living amniotes. A Mammals are the Li 1999; Rieppel and Reisz 1999; Cao et al. 2000). Al- most basal living amniotes. Turtles are the only living representa- tives of anapsid reptiles. Living diapsid reptiles include Lepidosa- ternative hypotheses, based either on morphological or uria (the tuatara, snakes, and lizards) and Archosauria (crocodiles on molecular evidence, have placed turtles as the most and birds) (e.g. Laurin and Reisz 1995; Lee 1997). B Turtles re- basal amniotes (Fig. 2B) (Gaffney 1980), as sister group present the sister group of all other extant amniotes (Gaffney of the Archosauria (crocodiles and birds) (Fig. 2C) 1980). C Turtles have diapsid affinities, and are the sister group of Archosauria (e.g. Kumazawa and Nishida 1999; Zardoya and (Hennig 1983; Platz and Conlon 1997; Zardoya and Meyer 2001). D Turtles have diapsid affinities, and are the sister Meyer 1998, 2001; Kumazawa and Nishida 1999), as group of Lepidosauria (e.g. deBraga and Rieppel 1997). E Turtles sister group of the Lepidosauria (tuatara, lizards, and have archosaurian affinities, and are the sister group of crocodiles snakes) (Fig. 2D) (Rieppel and deBraga 1996; deBraga (Hedges and Poling 1999; Mannen and Li 1999; Cao et al. 2000). and Rieppel 1997), as sister group of crocodiles F The Haematothermia hypothesis: birds are the sister group of mammals (e.g. Gardiner 1993) (Fig. 2E) (Hedges and Poling 1999; Mannen and Li 1999; Cao et al. 2000), or basal to crocodiles and the Haematothermia clade (mammals and birds) (Fig. 2F) called anapsids. Those that have two fenestrae in the (Owen 1866; Gardiner 1982, 1993; Løvtrup 1985). temporal region of the skull (tuatara, lizards, snakes, Living turtles are highly derived reptiles which also crocodiles, and birds) are the diapsids. Finally, living retain numerous amniote ancestral characters. It is diffi- amniotes that possess a single lower temporal hole in cult to estimate with confidence their phylogenetic affin- their skulls (mammals) are the synapsids. According to ities based on morphological data due to a general lack the fossil record, the first branching event in amniote of shared derived characters with other amniotes and due evolution appears to have separated the synapsids from to conflicting phylogenetic signal in different data sets anapsids and diapsids (Carroll 1988; Gauthier et al. (Rieppel and deBraga 1996). Moreover, the major lin- 1988; Laurin and Reisz 1995; Caspers et al. 1996; eages of amniotes (including turtles) show significantly Rieppel and deBraga 1996; Lee 1997; Reisz 1997; Cao different rates of molecular evolution, complicating phy- et al. 1998; Zardoya and Meyer 1998). Within reptiles logenetic inference based on molecular data (Kumazawa (Sauropsida), the anapsid condition shown by turtles is and Nishida 1999). regarded by some as primitive with respect to the more In recent years, new morphological and molecular da- advanced condition of diapsids (Fig. 2A) (e.g. Carroll ta sets bearing on the phylogenetic position of turtles, 1988; Laurin and Reisz 1995; Lee 1997, 2001; Reisz and on amniote relationships, have accumulated. Most 1997; Cao et al. 1998). current phylogenetic information seems to be able to dis- However, the traditional phylogenetic position of tur- tinguish between some of the competing hypotheses and tles as the only surviving representatives of anapsids is provides stunning new insights into our view of this highly controversial (Benton 1991; Rieppel and deBraga long-standing phylogenetic issue. 1996; deBraga and Rieppel 1997; Platz and Conlon 1997; Zardoya and Meyer 1998, 2001; Hedges and 195 Morphological evidence The monophyly of turtles is supported by many derived features such as their shell, strengthened skull, absence of teeth, and the position of the limb girdles inside the rib cage (Gaffney and Meylan 1988). Other undisputed monophyletic groups within the amniotes are: mammals (diagnosed by, e.g., possession of hair and mammary glands; Rowe 1988), squamates, i.e., lizards and snakes (diagnosed by, e.g., their skin and paired copulatory or- gans; Estes et al. 1988), crocodilians (diagnosed by, e.g., their posterior skull bones and elongated wrist bone; Benton and Clark 1988), and birds (diagnosed by, e.g., their feathers and furcula; Ostrom 1976). Furthermore, a close relationship of the tuatara (Sphenodon) and squa- mates to form the monophyletic clade Lepidosauria, and a sister group relationship of crocodilians and birds to Fig. 3 Turtles as anapsid reptiles. Traditional phylogenetic hy- form the monophyletic clade Archosauria are accepted potheses based on morphological and paleontological data place generally among paleontologists. The debate about the Synapsida (mammals and extinct relatives) as the most basal Am- niota. Turtles (Testudines) are considered anapsid reptiles and are position of turtles with respect to mammals, lepidosaurs, grouped either with extinct procolophonids (Laurin and Reisz and archosaurs is still ongoing. 1995) or with extinct pareiasaurs (Lee 1997, 2001) in the Pararep- It is now widely accepted that mammals represent the tilia clade. Living taxa are shown in bold sister group of all other living amniotes (Carroll 1988; Gauthier et al. 1988; Laurin and Reisz 1995; Rieppel and deBraga 1996; Lee 1997; Reisz 1997). However, in the captorhinids are commonly placed basal to diapsids in past, two alternative hypotheses have been postulated. the Eureptilia clade, and turtles are grouped either with Gaffney (1980) proposed that mammals and diapsid rep- procolophonids (Laurin and Reisz 1995) or with pare- tiles (lepidosaurs and archosaurs)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sauropareion Anoplus, with a Discussion of Possible Life History
    The postcranial skeleton of the Early Triassic parareptile Sauropareion anoplus, with a discussion of possible life history MARK J. MACDOUGALL, SEAN P. MODESTO, and JENNIFER BOTHA−BRINK MacDougall, M.J., Modesto, S.P., and Botha−Brink, J. 2013. The postcranial skeleton of the Early Triassic parareptile Sauropareion anoplus, with a discussion of possible life history. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 58 (4): 737–749. The skeletal anatomy of the Early Triassic (Induan) procolophonid reptile Sauropareion anoplus is described on the basis of three partial skeletons from Vangfontein, Middelburg District, South Africa. Together these three specimens preserve the large majority of the pectoral and pelvic girdles, articulated forelimbs and hindlimbs, and all but the caudal portion of the vertebral column, elements hitherto undescribed. Our phylogenetic analysis of the Procolophonoidea is consonant with previous work, positing S. anoplus as the sister taxon to a clade composed of all other procolophonids exclusive of Coletta seca. Previous studies have suggested that procolophonids were burrowers, and this seems to have been the case for S. anoplus, based on comparisons with characteristic skeletal anatomy of living digging animals, such as the presence of a spade−shaped skull, robust phalanges, and large unguals. Key words: Parareptilia, Procolophonidae, phylogenetic analysis, burrowing, Induan, Triassic, South Africa. Mark J. MacDougall [[email protected]], Department of Biology, Cape Breton University, Sydney, Nova Scotia, B1P 6L2, Canada and Department of Biology, University of Toronto at Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road, Ontario, L5L 1C6, Canada; Sean P. Modesto [[email protected]], Department of Biology, Cape Breton University, Sydney, Nova Scotia, B1P 6L2, Canada; Jennifer Botha−Brink [[email protected]], Karoo Palaeontology, National Museum, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservation Biology of Tortoises
    The Conservation Biology of Tortoises Edited by Ian R. Swingland and Michael W. Klemens IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group and The Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology Occasional Papers of the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) No. 5 IUCN—The World Conservation Union IUCN Species Survival Commission Role of the SSC 3. To cooperate with the World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) The Species Survival Commission (SSC) is IUCN's primary source of the in developing and evaluating a data base on the status of and trade in wild scientific and technical information required for the maintenance of biological flora and fauna, and to provide policy guidance to WCMC. diversity through the conservation of endangered and vulnerable species of 4. To provide advice, information, and expertise to the Secretariat of the fauna and flora, whilst recommending and promoting measures for their con- Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna servation, and for the management of other species of conservation concern. and Flora (CITES) and other international agreements affecting conser- Its objective is to mobilize action to prevent the extinction of species, sub- vation of species or biological diversity. species, and discrete populations of fauna and flora, thereby not only maintain- 5. To carry out specific tasks on behalf of the Union, including: ing biological diversity but improving the status of endangered and vulnerable species. • coordination of a programme of activities for the conservation of biological diversity within the framework of the IUCN Conserva- tion Programme. Objectives of the SSC • promotion of the maintenance of biological diversity by monitor- 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Reptiles A. Cladistics 1. Many Groups of Organisms
    Reptiles A. Cladistics 1. Many groups of organisms are “polyphyletic” a. This means that the group combines 2 or more lineages - example=fish 2. Cladistics follows only pure lineages going back in time - example Osteichthys B. Reptile Classifiecation - looks like a polyphyletic group 1. Dry skin - no loss of water through skin like amphibians 2. Aminotic egg - an egg that can survive on dry land - in contrast with the amphibian egg C. Mammals and Birds are derived from different lineages of reptiles (We will see below) D. Stem Reptiles 1. Different lineages based on the temporal region of their skulls - number of holes (or bars) a. These holes are necessary to accommodate large jaw muscles b. Anapsid Skull - no holes in temporal - jaws can move fast, but with little force 1. Muscles that move the jaw are small 2. There is no good paleotological evidence for the transition between amphibians and reptiles - no fossil intermediates a. Fossil amphibians have lots of dermal bones in skull b. Amphibians have no temporal openings in skull 1. (Aside) both fossil amphibians and primitive reptiles have a parietal “eye” that senses light and dark (“third” eye in middle of head) c. Reptile skull is higher than amphibian to accomodate larger jaw muscles d. Of the modern reptiles only turtles are anapsids 2. Diapsid Skull - has holes in the temporal region a. Diapsid reptiles gave rise to lizards and snakes - they have a diapsid skull 1. Also Tuatara, crocodiles, dinosaurs and pterydactyls Reptiles b. One group of diapsids also had a pre-orbital hole in the skull in front of eye - this hole is still preserved in the birds - this anatomy suggests strongly that the birds are derived from the diapsid reptiles 3.
    [Show full text]
  • 71St Annual Meeting Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Paris Las Vegas Las Vegas, Nevada, USA November 2 – 5, 2011 SESSION CONCURRENT SESSION CONCURRENT
    ISSN 1937-2809 online Journal of Supplement to the November 2011 Vertebrate Paleontology Vertebrate Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Society of Vertebrate 71st Annual Meeting Paleontology Society of Vertebrate Las Vegas Paris Nevada, USA Las Vegas, November 2 – 5, 2011 Program and Abstracts Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 71st Annual Meeting Program and Abstracts COMMITTEE MEETING ROOM POSTER SESSION/ CONCURRENT CONCURRENT SESSION EXHIBITS SESSION COMMITTEE MEETING ROOMS AUCTION EVENT REGISTRATION, CONCURRENT MERCHANDISE SESSION LOUNGE, EDUCATION & OUTREACH SPEAKER READY COMMITTEE MEETING POSTER SESSION ROOM ROOM SOCIETY OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS SEVENTY-FIRST ANNUAL MEETING PARIS LAS VEGAS HOTEL LAS VEGAS, NV, USA NOVEMBER 2–5, 2011 HOST COMMITTEE Stephen Rowland, Co-Chair; Aubrey Bonde, Co-Chair; Joshua Bonde; David Elliott; Lee Hall; Jerry Harris; Andrew Milner; Eric Roberts EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Philip Currie, President; Blaire Van Valkenburgh, Past President; Catherine Forster, Vice President; Christopher Bell, Secretary; Ted Vlamis, Treasurer; Julia Clarke, Member at Large; Kristina Curry Rogers, Member at Large; Lars Werdelin, Member at Large SYMPOSIUM CONVENORS Roger B.J. Benson, Richard J. Butler, Nadia B. Fröbisch, Hans C.E. Larsson, Mark A. Loewen, Philip D. Mannion, Jim I. Mead, Eric M. Roberts, Scott D. Sampson, Eric D. Scott, Kathleen Springer PROGRAM COMMITTEE Jonathan Bloch, Co-Chair; Anjali Goswami, Co-Chair; Jason Anderson; Paul Barrett; Brian Beatty; Kerin Claeson; Kristina Curry Rogers; Ted Daeschler; David Evans; David Fox; Nadia B. Fröbisch; Christian Kammerer; Johannes Müller; Emily Rayfield; William Sanders; Bruce Shockey; Mary Silcox; Michelle Stocker; Rebecca Terry November 2011—PROGRAM AND ABSTRACTS 1 Members and Friends of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, The Host Committee cordially welcomes you to the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology in Las Vegas.
    [Show full text]
  • A Procolophonid (Parareptilia) from the Owl Rock Member, Chinle Formation of Utah, Usa
    Palaeontologia Electronica http://palaeo-electronica.org A PROCOLOPHONID (PARAREPTILIA) FROM THE OWL ROCK MEMBER, CHINLE FORMATION OF UTAH, USA Nicholas C. Fraser, Randall B. Irmis*, and David K. Elliott ABSTRACT An isolated skull of a procolophonid is described from the Owl Rock Member of the Chinle Formation in the Abajo Mountains of southeast Utah. Although poorly pre- served, this specimen exhibits features that demonstrate a phylogenetic relationship with leptopleuronine procolophonids. These include the dentition, the greatly expanded orbitotemporal opening, the prominent quadratojugal spikes, and the shape of the jugal. Nicholas C. Fraser. Virginia Museum of Natural History, Martinsville, Virginia 24112, USA. [email protected] Randall B. Irmis. Department of Geology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011, USA. *Current Address: University of California Museum of Paleontology, 1101 Valley Life Sciences Building, Berkeley, California 94720-4780. [email protected] David K. Elliott. Department of Geology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011, USA. [email protected] KEY WORDS: Procolophonidae; Parareptilia; Late Triassic; Chinle Formation PE Article Number: 8.1.13 Copyright: Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. May 2005 Submission: 28 June 2004. Acceptance: 6 March 2005. INTRODUCTION skull has been described in detail (Kemp 1974; Carroll and Lindsay 1985). The first member of the The Procolophonidae are a group of small clade to be named was Leptopleuron from the parareptiles (sensu Laurin and Reisz
    [Show full text]
  • Alpha Taxonomy of the Russian Permian Procolophonoid Reptiles
    Alpha taxonomy of the Russian Permian procolophonoid reptiles LAURA K. SÄILÄ Säilä, L.K. 2009. Alpha taxonomy of the Russian Permian procolophonoid reptiles. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 54 (4): 599–608. doi:10.4202/app.2009.0017 European Russia has been the source of many procolophonoid taxa from both the Permian and Triassic, and a Permian or− igin for the procolophonoid family Procolophonidae has been based on the Russian taxon Microphon exiguus. Recently, this taxon was reclassified as a seymouriamorph and, in its place, the taxa Nyctiphruretus, Suchonosaurus, and Kinelia from the Middle and Upper Permian of Russia were suggested as “procolophons”, using evolutionary−systematic classifi− cation methods. In recent phylogenies, however, Nyctiphruretus has been recovered as a non–procolophonoid para− reptile, whereas Kinelia and Suchonosaurus have never been included in a phylogenetic study. Re−examination indicates that Suchonosaurus is a member of the procolophonoid subfamily Procolophonidae based on the shape of the maxillary bone and the external naris, the laterally visible maxillary depression, and the number and type of maxillary teeth. Kinelia, on the other hand, is excluded from the Procolophonoidea because of its subpleurodont dental attachment and lack of any procolophonoid features. Thus, Suchonosaurus is the only confirmed Permian procolophonid from the Permian of Rus− sia. Additionally, re−examination of the holotype of Microphon exiguus confirms that it is identical to the seymouria− morph specimens recently included in the genus Microphon and that it lacks procolophonoid features. The earliest un− equivocal record of the subfamily Procolophonidae is confirmed from the Late Permian of Russia, making Russia the only region where, with certainty, both Permian and Triassic procolophonids have been discovered.
    [Show full text]
  • 29 | Vertebrates 791 29 | VERTEBRATES
    Chapter 29 | Vertebrates 791 29 | VERTEBRATES Figure 29.1 Examples of critically endangered vertebrate species include (a) the Siberian tiger (Panthera tigris), (b) the mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei), and (c) the Philippine eagle (Pithecophega jefferyi). (credit a: modification of work by Dave Pape; credit b: modification of work by Dave Proffer; credit c: modification of work by "cuatrok77"/Flickr) Chapter Outline 29.1: Chordates 29.2: Fishes 29.3: AmphiBians 29.4: Reptiles 29.5: Birds 29.6: Mammals 29.7: The Evolution of Primates Introduction Vertebrates are among the most recognizable organisms of the animal kingdom. More than 62,000 vertebrate species have been identified. The vertebrate species now living represent only a small portion of the vertebrates that have existed. The best-known extinct vertebrates are the dinosaurs, a unique group of reptiles, which reached sizes not seen before or after in terrestrial animals. They were the dominant terrestrial animals for 150 million years, until they died out in a mass extinction near the end of the Cretaceous period. Although it is not known with certainty what caused their extinction, a great deal is known about the anatomy of the dinosaurs, given the preservation of skeletal elements in the fossil record. Currently, a number of vertebrate species face extinction primarily due to habitat loss and pollution. According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, more than 6,000 vertebrate species are classified as threatened. Amphibians and mammals are the classes with the greatest percentage of threatened species, with 29 percent of all amphibians and 21 percent of all mammals classified as threatened.
    [Show full text]
  • Cisneros2008.Pdf
    Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 6 (3): 345–366 Issued 22 August 2008 doi:10.1017/S1477201907002350 Printed in the United Kingdom C The Natural History Museum ! Phylogenetic relationships of procolophonid parareptiles with remarks on their geological record Juan Carlos Cisneros∗ Bernard Price Institute for Palaeontological Research, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa SYNOPSIS The phylogenetic intrarelationships of procolophonid parareptiles are determined via a comprehensive cladistic analysis using a data matrix of 21 taxa and 58 characters. Most taxa are in- cluded for the first time in a phylogenetic analysis and 27 characters are novel. The relationships within the group are more firmly resolved than in previous analyses. Procolophoninae and Leptopleuron- inae, two of the three traditional subdivisions of the Procolophonidae, are valid monophyletic groups, but Spondylolestinae is polyphyletic. The Chinese genera Pentaedrusaurus and Neoprocolophon are the most primitive members of the Leptopleuroninae. A new group, Theledectinae, is erected. The latter clade consists of small procolophonids with a reduced marginal dentition and wide bulbous monocuspid teeth. Eumetabolodon from China and the former genus ‘Thelegnathus’ from South Africa are shown to be polyphyletic. The successful radiation of the Procolophonidae during the Triassic is likely to be related to the development of feeding adaptations that allowed exploration of various ecological niches, particularly the exploitation of high-fibre herbivory. The scarcity of Permian records of procolophonids is examined and the genus Spondylolestes from the Upper Permian of South Africa is considered to be a valid taxon with procolophonid affinities. Finally, a review of the records from the Middle and Upper Triassic reveals a procolophonid global hiatus of more than 15 Ma in Ladinian–Lower Carnian rocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution and Homology of the Astragalus in Early Amniotes: New Fossils, New Perspectives
    JOURNAL OF MORPHOLOGY 267:415–425 (2006) Evolution and Homology of the Astragalus in Early Amniotes: New Fossils, New Perspectives F. Robin O’Keefe,1* Christian A. Sidor,1 Hans C.E. Larsson,2 Abdoudaye Maga,3 and Oumarou Ide3 1Department of Anatomy, New York College of Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, New York 11568 2Redpath Museum, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec H3A 2K6, Canada 3Institut de Recherches en Sciences Humaines, Niamey, Niger Republic ABSTRACT The reorganization of the ankle in basal tarsal elements are unclear, rendering the study of amniotes has long been considered a key innovation al- specific joint articulations difficult (Sumida, 1997, p. lowing the evolution of more terrestrial and cursorial be- 387). New data and new insights on the developmen- havior. Understanding how this key innovation arose is a complex problem that largely concerns the homologizing tal and evolutionary repatterning of the amniote of the amniote astragalus with the various ossifications in ankle are therefore of prime importance, for they the anamniote tarsus. Over the last century, several hy- bear on one of the key transitions in tetrapod his- potheses have been advanced homologizing the amniote tory: the attainment of full terrestriality after the astragalus with the many ossifications in the ankle of long transition from fin to limb (Clack, 2002). amphibian-grade tetrapods. There is an emerging consen- Perhaps the most important novelty within the sus that the amniote astragalus is a complex structure amniote tarsus is the astragalus, a large, complex emerging via the co-ossification of several originally sep- arate elements, but the identities of these elements re- bone comprising the primary area of articulation for main unclear.
    [Show full text]
  • GEOL 104 Dinosaurs: a Natural History
    Name: GEOL 104 Dinosaurs: A Natural History Smithsonian Assignment I: Life on Land before the Dinosaurs, and the Dinosaurs Themselves! DUE: October 27 “Every man is a valuable member of society who by his observations, researches, and experiments procures knowledge for men.” -James Smithson (1765-1829), a British natural historian whose legacy of over $500,000 was given to the government of the United States of America for the creation of “an Establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge”: the Smithsonian Institution. The Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) has one of the largest collections of dinosaur and other fossils in the world. The Smithsonian museums are free; hours for the NMNH are 10 am to 5:30 pm 7 days a week. You can take the Metro from the College Park Station to any of a number of stations near the Museum. The quickest route is the Green Line from the UMd-College Park Station to Archives/Navy Memorial: you don’t have to change trains, and the NMNH is just on the other side of the Archives Building. For this exercise you may wish to bring along the anatomy sheets handed out in class. You may work in teams and discuss your answers; however ALL WORK YOU TURN IN MUST BE YOUR OWN. (I have caught and reported a number of students in the past you have cheated by copying each other’s work: please don’t make me do that again…). To comply with University Senate regulations, please sign the following so that you may receive credit for this assignment.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reassessment of the Taxonomic Position of Mesosaurs, and a Surprising Phylogeny of Early Amniotes
    ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 02 November 2017 doi: 10.3389/feart.2017.00088 A Reassessment of the Taxonomic Position of Mesosaurs, and a Surprising Phylogeny of Early Amniotes Michel Laurin 1* and Graciela H. Piñeiro 2 1 CR2P (UMR 7207) Centre de Recherche sur la Paléobiodiversité et les Paléoenvironnements (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique/MNHN/UPMC, Sorbonne Universités), Paris, France, 2 Departamento de Paleontología, Facultad de Ciencias, University of the Republic, Montevideo, Uruguay We reassess the phylogenetic position of mesosaurs by using a data matrix that is updated and slightly expanded from a matrix that the first author published in 1995 with his former thesis advisor. The revised matrix, which incorporates anatomical information published in the last 20 years and observations on several mesosaur specimens (mostly from Uruguay) includes 17 terminal taxa and 129 characters (four more taxa and five more characters than the original matrix from 1995). The new matrix also differs by incorporating more ordered characters (all morphoclines were ordered). Parsimony Edited by: analyses in PAUP 4 using the branch and bound algorithm show that the new matrix Holly Woodward, Oklahoma State University, supports a position of mesosaurs at the very base of Sauropsida, as suggested by the United States first author in 1995. The exclusion of mesosaurs from a less inclusive clade of sauropsids Reviewed by: is supported by a Bremer (Decay) index of 4 and a bootstrap frequency of 66%, both of Michael S. Lee, which suggest that this result is moderately robust. The most parsimonious trees include South Australian Museum, Australia Juliana Sterli, some unexpected results, such as placing the anapsid reptile Paleothyris near the base of Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones diapsids, and all of parareptiles as the sister-group of younginiforms (the most crownward Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Argentina diapsids included in the analyses).
    [Show full text]
  • 2Phylogenetic Systematics and the Origins of Amphibians and Reptiles
    Phylogenetic Systematics and the 2 Origins of Amphibians and Reptiles he extant amphibians and reptiles are a diverse col- lection of animals with evolutionary histories dating 2.1 Principles of Phylogenetics Tback to the Early Carboniferous period. A phylo- and Taxonomy genetic perspective helps us visualize the relationships among these organisms and interpret the evolution of Phylogenies are the basis of the taxonomic structure of rep- their physiological, morphological, and behavioral char- tiles and amphibians. A taxon (plural taxa; from the Greek acteristics. To gain this perspective, it is important to un- tax, “to put in order”) is any unit of organisms given a for- derstand how phylogenies are created and used. Thus, mal name. For example, the common five-lined skink (Ples- we begin with a brief review of phylogenetic systematics tiodon fasciatus) from eastern North America is a taxon, as is and taxonomy and then use this framework to examine its entire genus (Plestiodon), the group containing all skinks the transition from fi shlike aquatic vertebrates to the ear- (Scincidae), and several more inclusive, larger taxonomic liest terrestrial tetrapods (from the Greek tetra, “four,” + groups (Squamata, Reptilia, Tetrapoda, Vertebrata, etc.) to podos, “foot”) and the origins of modern amphibian and which it belongs. A monophyletic taxon, or clade, is made reptile groups. up of a common ancestor and all of its descendant taxa. Taxonomy is the science of categorizing, or classify- Phylogenies can be depicted in a variety of styles (Figure ing, Earth’s living organisms. A phylogeny is a hypothesis 2.1). A node is the point at which a common ancestor gives of the evolutionary relationships of these categories of rise to two sister lineages, or branches.
    [Show full text]