Anatomical Network Analyses Reveal Oppositional Heterochronies in Avian Skull Evolution ✉ Olivia Plateau1 & Christian Foth 1 1234567890():,;
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-0914-4 OPEN Birds have peramorphic skulls, too: anatomical network analyses reveal oppositional heterochronies in avian skull evolution ✉ Olivia Plateau1 & Christian Foth 1 1234567890():,; In contrast to the vast majority of reptiles, the skulls of adult crown birds are characterized by a high degree of integration due to bone fusion, e.g., an ontogenetic event generating a net reduction in the number of bones. To understand this process in an evolutionary context, we investigate postnatal ontogenetic changes in the skulls of crown bird and non-avian ther- opods using anatomical network analysis (AnNA). Due to the greater number of bones and bone contacts, early juvenile crown birds have less integrated skulls, resembling their non- avian theropod ancestors, including Archaeopteryx lithographica and Ichthyornis dispars. Phy- logenetic comparisons indicate that skull bone fusion and the resulting modular integration represent a peramorphosis (developmental exaggeration of the ancestral adult trait) that evolved late during avialan evolution, at the origin of crown-birds. Succeeding the general paedomorphic shape trend, the occurrence of an additional peramorphosis reflects the mosaic complexity of the avian skull evolution. ✉ 1 Department of Geosciences, University of Fribourg, Chemin du Musée 6, CH-1700 Fribourg, Switzerland. email: [email protected] COMMUNICATIONS BIOLOGY | (2020) 3:195 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-0914-4 | www.nature.com/commsbio 1 ARTICLE COMMUNICATIONS BIOLOGY | https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-0914-4 fi fi irds represent highly modi ed reptiles and are the only length (L), quality of identi ed modular partition (Qmax), par- surviving branch of theropod dinosaurs. In contrast to their cellation (P), and number of S-modules (identified using statis- B fi non-avian theropod ancestors, which possess a typical tical signi cance based on a two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test) diapsid skull morphology1, adult crown birds have highly apo- and Q-modules (identified based on the cutting of the dendro- morphic skulls, characterized by a toothless beak, enlarged round gram at the optimization function Q), (Fig. 2; Table 1; all para- orbits, an enlarged and highly pneumatized chrondrocranium, meters are defined in the method section). In particular, the the loss and fusion of bones and skull openings, and a complex number of Q-modules ranges from five to eight in non-avian kinetic system that allows the simultaneous motion of both jaws, archosaurs, while adult crown birds possess only two to five skull which magnitude is, however, restricted by the morphology and modules, showing a much higher integration of the skull (see articulation of the quadrate and palate2,3. In contrast, Mesozoic Supplementary Data 2 file). In general, non-avian archosaurs Avialae outside the crown, such as the Late Jurassic Archae- possess a preorbital, suborbital (zygomatic arch), braincase opteryx lithographica or the Late Cretaceous Ichthyornis dispars, (including the skull roof), and a left and right mandibular module still retain numerous ancestral theropod characters4–6. A recent (Fig. 3). In some taxa, however, the suborbital module forms a comparison of ontogenetic series of non-avian theropods and unit with the preorbital (e.g., Archaeopteryx lithographica, Erli- extant crown birds using geometric morphometrics demonstrated kosaurus andrewsi) or braincase module (e.g., Majungasaurus that avian skull shape is the result of a sequence of at least four crenatissimus), while in Allosaurus fragilis and Gallimimus bul- paedomorphic events in the evolution of Eumaniraptora, mean- latus for instance, the suborbital module is expanded, including ing that the shape of adult bird skulls retain juvenile features like the quadrate and squamosal. The palatal bones are either part of the enlarged orbit and associated brain regions7,8. Another recent the preorbital or suborbital module. While the number and dis- application of geometric morphometrics showed that the avian tribution of modules vary between species, the assignment of cranium has extensive variational modularity, consisting of seven single bones to a certain module can vary, too, often showing a to eight semi-independent regions evolving in a mosaic pattern9. left-right asymmetry within a species. In many taxa, for instance, However, when compared to their non-avian theropod ancestors, the premaxilla represents its own module on the one side, while it the number of modules is significantly reduced10. Although less is integrated with the maxilla, nasal and lacrimal into the pre- drastic, a similar relationship was found for the connectivity orbital module on the other side (see Supplementary information; modularity in the skull of the non-avian theropod Tyrannosaurus Supplementary Fig. 1). rex and crown bird Gallus gallus, which based on anatomical In contrast, adult crown birds possess usually a suborbital, network analysis (AnNA)11 (Fig. 1a, b). braincase, and a single mandibular module. The bones forming The cranial and mandibular bone fusion that characterizes the the beak are either integrated into the suborbital or braincase skull of adult crown birds mainly occurs during postnatal module. The suborbital module, however, can be independent development, when existing sutures between neighbouring bones (e.g., Gyps fulvus, Milvus milvus, Ptychoramphus aleuticus, Rhea are fully closed12,13. Consequently, the skull bone configuration of americana) or partly integrated into the braincase module (e.g., extant bird hatchlings resembles, to a certain degree, that of non- Bubulcus ibis, Phoenicopterus ruber). In extreme cases, the skull avian theropods, implying a less integrated skull network with consists of only two modules, one represented by the mandible high connectivity modularity (Fig. 1c). To test this hypothesis, we and the other by the cranium (e.g., Nycticorax nycticorax, Platalea investigated the contact and fusion patterns of skull bones and leucorodia). As in their ancestors, module integration of some their impact on modularity during ontogeny in 41 extant birds crown birds shows a left-right asymmetry, but to a lesser degree and compared them with those of non-avian archosaurs (see Supplementary information). (including 15 adult and two juvenile non-avian dinosaurs and an All three juvenile non-avian archosaurs (Alligator mississip- ontogenetic pair of Alligator mississippiensis; see Supplementary piensis, Tarbosaurus bataar, and Scipionyx samniticus) fall into Data 1 and 2 file), using AnNA and phylogenetic comparative the range of adult non-avian archosaurs, indicating only minor analyses (see the “Methods” section). changes in bone contacts, fusion patterns, and modularity during Our analyses show that early juvenile crown birds have less ontogeny. Interestingly, the early juvenile theropod S. samniticus integrated skulls than adult birds in terms of connectivity due to and the early Avialae A. lithographica show a very similar the greater number of bones and bone contacts, but integration distribution of skull modularity (Fig. 3). Furthermore, T. bataar increases continuously with the net reduction of bones during shows an ontogenetic shift in the module identity of skull roof maturation due to fusion. The skulls of early juvenile crown birds, and temporal bones, which is in concert with the fusion of the however, resemble those of non-avian theropods, including frontal bones and a reduction of the number of modules. Archaeopteryx lithographica and Ichthyornis dispars. In this With the exception of connectivity (C), all network parameters context, phylogenetic comparisons indicate that the highly inte- of juvenile crown bird skulls fall between those of non-avian grated adult bird skull evolved late during avian evolution, at the archosaurs and adult crown birds. Although juveniles differ origin of crown-birds, and are a result of a peramorphosis significantly from the latter two groups (see Table 1), the network (developmental exaggeration of the ancestral adult trait), which parameters correlate significantly with relative skull size, shifting might be related to the origin of cranial kinesis. The sequential towards the adult condition with increasing skull size (see occurrence of oppositional heterochronies (i.e., a trended skull Supplementary Fig. 2). In other words, hatchlings and early shape paedomorphosis within Coelurosauria followed by per- juveniles are closer to non-avian theropods/archosaurs, while amorphic skull bone fusion in the last common ancestor of crown subadults are closer to adult crown birds. As the same parameters birds) reflects the mosaic complexity of avian skull evolution, (except for parameter D) fail to correlate with relative skull size in facilitating shape and ecological diversity. adult crown birds (see Supplementary Fig. 2; Table 2), these correlations represent a true ontogenetic signal. Due to their different ontogenetic growth stages, the modular organization of Results juvenile bird skulls is not uniform. However, some general Anatomical network analysis. The skulls of adult non-avian patterns can be extracted. In many cases, premaxilla, maxilla, archosaurs, including Archaeopteryx and Ichthyornis, differ sig- nasal, lacrimal, and ectethemoid/mesethmoid form a preorbital nificantly from adult crown birds in the number of bones (N) and module, while the skull roof and the temporal bones form a single bone contacts (K), density of connections (D), mean shortest path braincase module. The