DOCSLIB.ORG

2Phylogenetic Systematics and the Origins of Amphibians and Reptiles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. The region of a organisms, usually presented in the form of a branching phylogeny between two nodes is called a stem. The stem is diagram. Phylogenies, sometimes called cladograms or an important concept because the term is often used when phylogenetic trees, are similar to human family trees in discussing extinct lineages. Depending on the type of anal- that they show the splitting of an ancestor and its de- ysis used to infer the phylogeny, the length of branches may scendants through time, but instead of several familial represent the amount of genetic change or be scaled with generations, these splitting events cover millions to hun- time and accompanied by a timescale. Such a timescale is dreds of millions of years. usually depicted in terms of the geological eras and periods The appearance in 1966 of an English translation of of Earth’s evolutionary history (Table 2.1; Figure 2.2). the work of the German biologist Willi Hennig was the A phylogeny is one of the most powerful tools in biology. start of a revolution in the way evolutionary relationships With knowledge of a group’s phylogeny, we can track the are analyzed. Hennig’s method, known as phylogenetic evolution of morphology, behavior, and ecology among the systematics or cladistics, emphasizes the importance of organisms in that group. For example, both the mantellid monophyletic groups and shared derived characters. The frogs of Madagascar and the dendrobatid frogs of Central many terms used in phylogenetic systematics can be con- and South America are small, leaf-litter dwelling anurans fusing, but the concept of monophyly (from the Greek that are brightly colored and have evolved the ability to mono, “one” or “single,” + phylon, “tribe”) is critical to secrete powerful defensive alkaloid toxins in their skin understanding any discussion of modern phylogeny and (see Chapter 15). Both groups sequester many of the same taxonomy. types of alkaloids (Clark et al. 2005), and both groups de- uncorrected page proofs © 2015 Sinauer Associates, Inc. This material cannot be copied, reproduced, manufactured or disseminated in any form without express written permission from the publisher. 20 Chapter 2 Phylogenetic Systematics and the Origins of Amphibians and Reptiles Figure 2.1 Common formats and termi- (A) Taxon 1 nology for presenting a phylogeny (clado- Node gram). This simple phylogeny of four hypo- Clade Sister taxa thetical taxa is shown in three different styles. B Taxa 1 and 2 form a clade, as do Taxa 3 and Taxon 2 4 and all four taxa together. Not shown are A numerous stem lineages between nodes A and Taxon 3 B (and others between A and C). These lin- C eages may be extinct or simply were not sam- Clade Sister branches pled in the phylogenetic analysis. (A) Squared (lineages) Stem branch Taxon 4 horizontal presentation, read from left to right with terminal taxa on the right. This is the style used most frequently in this book. (B) Squared vertical presentation, with terminal (B) (C) taxa at the top. (C) Diagonal presentation. Taxon 1 Taxon 2 Taxon 3 Taxon 4 Taxon 1 Taxon 2 Taxon 3 Taxon 4 B C rive these alkaloids from their prey, usually B C ants. With no phylogenetic information, A we would assume that these two groups are more closely related to each other than A to other frog groups, and that the ability to sequester defensive alkaloids from ar- thropod prey evolved once in their com- mon ancestor. However, phylogenetic analysis shows that atics, Reptilia without birds is paraphyletic (from the Greek mantellids and dendrobatids are only distantly related, and para, “beside” or “except”) because it contains only some, that both groups have close relatives that do not secrete de- not all, of the descendants of the common ancestor of the fensive alkaloids (Figure 2.3). Thus, sequestration of toxins traditional reptiles (Figure 2.4). evolved independently in mantellids and dendrobatids, a A similar concept is polyphyly (from the Greek poly, phenomenon known as convergent evolution. “many”), the situation in which a taxonomic group does not In phylogenetic systematics, only clades—monophyletic contain the most recent common ancestor of all the mem- taxa—are formally recognized and given names. Follow- bers of that group. For example, a hypothetical taxonomic ing this convention produces taxonomic groups that also group comprising the endothermal (“warm-blooded”) ver- represent evolutionary history. For example, precladistic tebrates—mammals and birds—would be polyphyletic be- taxonomy recognized birds and reptiles as separate taxa. cause it would not include the most recent common ances- However, modern phylogenetic analysis has shown that tor of each group, birds and mammals having arisen from birds share a common ancestor with all the other reptile different common ancestors (diapsids and synapsids; see taxa (crocodiles, lizards, snakes, tuatara, and turtles). In Section 2.5). Paraphyletic and polyphyletic groups are not other words, if we exclude birds from Reptilia, then Reptilia given formal taxonomic names but are sometimes named is not monophyletic; in the context of phylogenetic system- informally, in which case the taxonomic name is put in quo- Paleozoic Mesozoic Cenozoic Cambrian Ordovician Silurian Devonian CarboniferousPough 4ePermian Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Tertiary Sinauer Associates 541 500 450 400 350 Morales300 Studio 250 200 150 100 50 Pough4e_02.01.ai 02-22-15 Million years ago (mya) Quaternary: Holocene Pleistocene Pliocene Figure 2.2 The geological time scale. Paleocene Eocene Oligocene Miocene This graphic rendering of the time scale in Table 2.1 will be used with time-scaled 66 60 50 40 30 20 10 Present cladograms throughout this book. Million years ago (mya) uncorrected page proofs © 2015 Sinauer Associates, Inc. This material cannot be copied, reproduced, manufactured or disseminated in any form without express written permission from the publisher. Pough 4e Sinauer Associates Morales Studio Pough4e_02.02.ai 03-10-15 2.1 Principles of Phylogenetics and Taxonomy 21 Other ranoid frogs Ranoidea Mantellidae (taxon origin ~65 mya) Rhacophoridae Microhylidae Common Other ranoid frogs ancestor Other hyloid frogs Mantella laevigata Lineages Dendrobatidae diverge Hyloidea (taxon origin ~65 mya) ~170 mya Mesozoic Cenozoic Jurassic Cretaceous Tertiary 200 150 100 50 Present Millions of years ago (mya) Dendrobates tinctorius Figure 2.3 Phylogeny reveals convergent evolution. ability evolved a single time in their common ancestor. How- Both the Neotropical Dendrobatidae and the Madagascan ever, phylogeny reveals that these frogs belong to two distinct Mantellidae comprise small, brightly colored frogs that live evolutionary lineages—Hyloidea and Ranoidea—that sepa- in leaf litter on the tropical forest floor, as seen in these photos rated some 170 mya, and the defensive use of toxins evolved of typical species. Both dendrobatids and mantellids obtain independently in the two taxa. Solid triangles are shorthand alkaloid toxins from the insects they eat and sequester these for multiple taxa; the complete anuran phylogeny is shown toxins in their skin as a defense against predators. These in Figure 3.22. (Photographs: Mantella © All Canada Photos/ similarities could logically lead to the hypothesis that dendro- Alamy; Dendrobates © Dirk Ercken/Alamy.) batids and mantellids are sister taxa, and that sequestration a tation marks (as “Reptilia” in Figure 2.4B). Many research- TABLE 2.1 The geological time scale ers do not make a distinction between para- and polyphy- Era Period Epoch letic and simply use the term non-monophyletic. Holocene ~11 kya Because only monophyletic groups are given formal tax- Quaternary 2.6 mya onomic names, many changes in the names of taxonomic Pleistocene 2.6 mya groups such as genera and species are the results of phy- Pliocene 5.3 mya logenetic analysis showing that an existing named taxon Cenozoic Miocene 23.0 mya is not monophyletic. As with all scientific hypotheses, the 66.0 mya relationships depicted by a phylogenetic tree are subject to Tertiary 66.0 mya Oligocene 33.9 mya falsification by new evidence or a better analysis of existing Eocene 56.0 mya evidence. Alternative hypotheses about evolutionary rela- Paleocene 66.0 mya tionships are common, as we will see in this and the next two chapters.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Taxon Ordering in Phylogenetic Trees by Means of Evolutionary Algorithms Francesco Cerutti1,2, Luigi Bertolotti1,2, Tony L Goldberg3 and Mario Giacobini1,2*
    Cerutti et al. BioData Mining 2011, 4:20 http://www.biodatamining.org/content/4/1/20 BioData Mining RESEARCH Open Access Taxon ordering in phylogenetic trees by means of evolutionary algorithms Francesco Cerutti1,2, Luigi Bertolotti1,2, Tony L Goldberg3 and Mario Giacobini1,2* * Correspondence: mario. Abstract [email protected] 1 Department of Animal Production, Background: In in a typical “left-to-right” phylogenetic tree, the vertical order of taxa Epidemiology and Ecology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University is meaningless, as only the branch path between them reflects their degree of of Torino, Via Leonardo da Vinci similarity. To make unresolved trees more informative, here we propose an 44, 10095, Grugliasco (TO), Italy innovative Evolutionary Algorithm (EA) method to search the best graphical Full list of author information is available at the end of the article representation of unresolved trees, in order to give a biological meaning to the vertical order of taxa. Methods: Starting from a West Nile virus phylogenetic tree, in a (1 + 1)-EA we evolved it by randomly rotating the internal nodes and selecting the tree with better fitness every generation. The fitness is a sum of genetic distances between the considered taxon and the r (radius) next taxa. After having set the radius to the best performance, we evolved the trees with (l + μ)-EAs to study the influence of population on the algorithm. Results: The (1 + 1)-EA consistently outperformed a random search, and better results were obtained setting the radius to 8. The (l + μ)-EAs performed as well as the (1 + 1), except the larger population (1000 + 1000).
    [Show full text]
  • Transformations of Lamarckism Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology Gerd B
    Transformations of Lamarckism Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology Gerd B. M ü ller, G ü nter P. Wagner, and Werner Callebaut, editors The Evolution of Cognition , edited by Cecilia Heyes and Ludwig Huber, 2000 Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Development and Evolutionary Biology , edited by Gerd B. M ü ller and Stuart A. Newman, 2003 Environment, Development, and Evolution: Toward a Synthesis , edited by Brian K. Hall, Roy D. Pearson, and Gerd B. M ü ller, 2004 Evolution of Communication Systems: A Comparative Approach , edited by D. Kimbrough Oller and Ulrike Griebel, 2004 Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems , edited by Werner Callebaut and Diego Rasskin-Gutman, 2005 Compositional Evolution: The Impact of Sex, Symbiosis, and Modularity on the Gradualist Framework of Evolution , by Richard A. Watson, 2006 Biological Emergences: Evolution by Natural Experiment , by Robert G. B. Reid, 2007 Modeling Biology: Structure, Behaviors, Evolution , edited by Manfred D. Laubichler and Gerd B. M ü ller, 2007 Evolution of Communicative Flexibility: Complexity, Creativity, and Adaptability in Human and Animal Communication , edited by Kimbrough D. Oller and Ulrike Griebel, 2008 Functions in Biological and Artifi cial Worlds: Comparative Philosophical Perspectives , edited by Ulrich Krohs and Peter Kroes, 2009 Cognitive Biology: Evolutionary and Developmental Perspectives on Mind, Brain, and Behavior , edited by Luca Tommasi, Mary A. Peterson, and Lynn Nadel, 2009 Innovation in Cultural Systems: Contributions from Evolutionary Anthropology , edited by Michael J. O ’ Brien and Stephen J. Shennan, 2010 The Major Transitions in Evolution Revisited , edited by Brett Calcott and Kim Sterelny, 2011 Transformations of Lamarckism: From Subtle Fluids to Molecular Biology , edited by Snait B.
    [Show full text]
  • A General Criterion for Translating Phylogenetic Trees Into Linear Sequences
    A general criterion for translating phylogenetic trees into linear sequences Proposal (474) to South American Classification Committee In most of the books, papers and check-lists of birds (e.g. Meyer de Schauensee 1970, Stotz et al. 1996; and other taxa e.g. Lewis et al. 2005, Haston et al. 2009, for plants), at least the higher taxa are arranged phylogenetically, with the “oldest” groups (Rheiformes/Tinamiformes) placed first, and the “modern” birds (Passeriformes) at the end. The molecular phylogenetic analysis of Hackett et al. (2008) supports this criterion. For this reason, it would be desirable that in the SACC list not only orders and families, but also genera within families and species within genera, are phylogenetically ordered. In spite of the SACC’s efforts in producing an updated phylogeny-based list, it is evident that there are differences in the way the phylogenetic information has been translated into linear sequences, mainly for node rotation and polytomies. This is probably one of the reasons why Douglas Stotz (Proposal #423) has criticized using sequence to show relationships. He considers that we are creating unstable sequences with little value in terms of understanding of relationships. He added, “We would be much better served by doing what most taxonomic groups do and placing taxa within the hierarchy in alphabetical order, making no pretense that sequence can provide useful information on the branching patterns of trees. This would greatly stabilize sequences and not cost much information about relationships”. However, we encourage creating sequences that reflect phylogeny as much as possible at all taxonomic levels (although we agree with Douglas Stotz that the translation of a phylogenetic tree into a simple linear sequence inevitably involves a loss of information about relationships that is present in the trees on which the sequence is based).
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Cladistics
    Understanding Cladistics Activity for Grades 5–8 Introduction Objective At the American Museum of Natural History, In this activity, students will explore cladistics and scientists use a method called cladistics to group create a cladogram of their own. animals. They look for unique features, such as a hole in the hip socket, that the animals share. Materials Animals with like features are grouped together. A • Understanding Cladistics chart, called a cladogram, shows these relationships. • A penny, nickel, dime, and quarter for each pair Using cladistics, scientists can reconstruct genealogi- of students cal relationships and can show how animals are • 6-8 dinosaurs pictures duplicated for each group, linked to one another through a long and complex downloadable from history of evolutionary changes. amnh.org/resources/rfl/pdf/dino_16_illustrations.pdf Procedure 1. Write lion, elephant, zebra, kangaroo, koala, buffalo, raccoon, and alligator. Ask students how the animals are related and what might be a good way of grouping them into sets and subsets. Discuss students responses. Tyrannosaurus rex Apatosaurus excelsus 2. Explain to students that scientists use a method extinct extinct called cladistics to determine evolutionary relation- ships among animals. They look for features that animals share, such as four limbs, hooves, or a hole in the hip socket. Animals with like features are grouped together. Scientists make a chart called a cladogram to show these relationships. 3. Tell students that they will examine the features of various coins to determine how they are related. Remind students that cladistics is used to determine relationships among organisms, and Theropoda Sauropoda Foot with three main At least 11 or more not necessarily objects.
    [Show full text]
  • Controle Cardiovascular Autonômico E Metabolismo Em Embriões De Lagartos (Reptilia; Lepidosauria)
    UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL PAULISTA “JÚLIO DE MESQUITA FILHO” unesp INSTITUTO DE BIOCIÊNCIAS – RIO CLARO PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM CIÊNCIAS BIOLÓGICAS ÁREA DE ZOOLOGIA (DOUTORADO) Controle cardiovascular autonômico e metabolismo em embriões de lagartos (Reptilia; Lepidosauria) MARINA RINCON SARTORI Tese apresentada ao Instituto de Biociências do Câmpus de Rio Claro, Universidade Estadual Paulista, como parte dos requisitos para obtenção do título de Doutora em Ciências Biológicas (Área de Zoologia). Setembro - 2016 Controle cardiovascular autonômico e metabolismo em embriões de lagartos (Reptilia; Lepidosauria) MARINA RINCON SARTORI Tese apresentada ao Instituto de Biociências do Câmpus de Rio Claro, Universidade Estadual Paulista, como parte dos requisitos para obtenção do título de Doutora em Ciências Biológicas (Área de Zoologia). Orientador: Augusto Shinya Abe Setembro - 2016 598.1 Sartori, Marina Rincon S251c Controle cardiovascular autonômico e metabolismo em embriões de lagartos (Reptilia; Lepidosauria) / Marina Rincon Sartori. - Rio Claro, 2016 141 f. : il., figs., gráfs., tabs., fots. Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual Paulista, Instituto de Biociências de Rio Claro Orientador: Augusto Shinya Abe 1. Réptil. 2. Regulação cardiovascular. 3. Desenvolvimento embrionário. 4. Iguana. 5. Squamata. 6. Frequência cardíaca. I. Título. Ficha Catalográfica elaborada pela STATI - Biblioteca da UNESP Campus de Rio Claro/SP Agradecimentos Um doutorado se resume a anos de dedicação e aprendizado. Nesse período há um grande amadurecimento, pessoal e profissional. E não é possível chegar até o fim sem o apoio e suporte de diversas pessoas, tanto as diretamente quanto as indiretamente envolvidas. Muitas não serão citadas nesta breve seção de agradecimentos mas a todos os que compartilharam comigo muitos desses momentos gostaria de deixar o meu sentimento de gratidão.
    [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]
  • Character Analysis in Cladistics: Abstraction, Reification, and the Search for Objectivity
    Acta Biotheor (2009) 57:129–162 DOI 10.1007/s10441-008-9064-7 REGULAR ARTICLE Character Analysis in Cladistics: Abstraction, Reification, and the Search for Objectivity Rasmus Grønfeldt Winther Received: 10 October 2008 / Accepted: 17 October 2008 / Published online: 7 January 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract The dangers of character reification for cladistic inference are explored. The identification and analysis of characters always involves theory-laden abstraction—there is no theory-free ‘‘view from nowhere.’’ Given theory-ladenness, and given a real world with actual objects and processes, how can we separate robustly real biological characters from uncritically reified characters? One way to avoid reification is through the employment of objectivity criteria that give us good methods for identifying robust primary homology statements. I identify six such criteria and explore each with examples. Ultimately, it is important to minimize character reification, because poor character analysis leads to dismal cladograms, even when proper phylogenetic analysis is employed. Given the deep and systemic problems associated with character reification, it is ironic that philosophers have focused almost entirely on phylogenetic analysis and neglected character analysis. Keywords Characters Á Cladistics Á Phylogenetics Á Morphology Á Abstraction Á Reification Á Biological theory Á Epistemology Á Causation How are we to recognize the ‘‘true’’ characters of organisms rather than imposing upon them arbitrary divisions that obscure the very processes that we seek to understand? …No issue is of greater importance in the study of biology. –Lewontin 2001, p. xvii Are characters natural units or artifacts of observation and description? In both systematics and ecology, there is often a considerable gulf between observables and the units that play causal roles in our models.
    [Show full text]
  • A Small Lepidosauromorph Reptile from the Early Triassic of Poland
    A SMALL LEPIDOSAUROMORPH REPTILE FROM THE EARLY TRIASSIC OF POLAND SUSAN E. EVANS and MAGDALENA BORSUK−BIAŁYNICKA Evans, S.E. and Borsuk−Białynicka, M. 2009. A small lepidosauromorph reptile from the Early Triassic of Poland. Palaeontologia Polonica 65, 179–202. The Early Triassic karst deposits of Czatkowice quarry near Kraków, southern Poland, has yielded a diversity of fish, amphibians and small reptiles. Two of these reptiles are lepido− sauromorphs, a group otherwise very poorly represented in the Triassic record. The smaller of them, Sophineta cracoviensis gen. et sp. n., is described here. In Sophineta the unspecial− ised vertebral column is associated with the fairly derived skull structure, including the tall facial process of the maxilla, reduced lacrimal, and pleurodonty, that all resemble those of early crown−group lepidosaurs rather then stem−taxa. Cladistic analysis places this new ge− nus as the sister group of Lepidosauria, displacing the relictual Middle Jurassic genus Marmoretta and bringing the origins of Lepidosauria closer to a realistic time frame. Key words: Reptilia, Lepidosauria, Triassic, phylogeny, Czatkowice, Poland. Susan E. Evans [[email protected]], Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Uni− versity College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. Magdalena Borsuk−Białynicka [[email protected]], Institut Paleobiologii PAN, Twarda 51/55, PL−00−818 Warszawa, Poland. Received 8 March 2006, accepted 9 January 2007 180 SUSAN E. EVANS and MAGDALENA BORSUK−BIAŁYNICKA INTRODUCTION Amongst living reptiles, lepidosaurs (snakes, lizards, amphisbaenians, and tuatara) form the largest and most successful group with more than 7 000 widely distributed species. The two main lepidosaurian clades are Rhynchocephalia (the living Sphenodon and its extinct relatives) and Squamata (lizards, snakes and amphisbaenians).
    [Show full text]
  • Tiago Rodrigues Simões
    Diapsid Phylogeny and the Origin and Early Evolution of Squamates by Tiago Rodrigues Simões A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in SYSTEMATICS AND EVOLUTION Department of Biological Sciences University of Alberta © Tiago Rodrigues Simões, 2018 ABSTRACT Squamate reptiles comprise over 10,000 living species and hundreds of fossil species of lizards, snakes and amphisbaenians, with their origins dating back at least as far back as the Middle Jurassic. Despite this enormous diversity and a long evolutionary history, numerous fundamental questions remain to be answered regarding the early evolution and origin of this major clade of tetrapods. Such long-standing issues include identifying the oldest fossil squamate, when exactly did squamates originate, and why morphological and molecular analyses of squamate evolution have strong disagreements on fundamental aspects of the squamate tree of life. Additionally, despite much debate, there is no existing consensus over the composition of the Lepidosauromorpha (the clade that includes squamates and their sister taxon, the Rhynchocephalia), making the squamate origin problem part of a broader and more complex reptile phylogeny issue. In this thesis, I provide a series of taxonomic, phylogenetic, biogeographic and morpho-functional contributions to shed light on these problems. I describe a new taxon that overwhelms previous hypothesis of iguanian biogeography and evolution in Gondwana (Gueragama sulamericana). I re-describe and assess the functional morphology of some of the oldest known articulated lizards in the world (Eichstaettisaurus schroederi and Ardeosaurus digitatellus), providing clues to the ancestry of geckoes, and the early evolution of their scansorial behaviour.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2020 Issue
    THE FROG AND TADPOLE STUDY GROUP NSW Inc. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/FATSNSW/ Email: [email protected] PO Box 296 Rockdale NSW 2216 NEWSLETTER No. 165 FEBRUARY 2020 Frogwatch Helpline 0419 249 728 Website: www.fats.org.au ABN: 34 282 154 794 Photo by Jayden Walsh Crucifix Frog Notaden bennettii You are invited to our FATS meeting. It’s free. Everyone is welcome. Arrive from 6.30 pm for a 7pm start. Friday 7 February 2020 FATS meet at the Education Centre, Bicentennial Pk, Sydney Olympic Park Easy walk from Concord West railway station and straight down Victoria Ave. Take a torch in winter. By car: Enter from Australia Ave at the Bicentennial Park main entrance, turn off to the right and drive through the park. It’s a one way road. Or enter from Bennelong Rd / Parkway. It is a short stretch of two way road. th FATS meeting, Friday 7 February 2020 Park in P10f car park, the last car park before the Bennelong Rd. exit gate. 6.30 pm Lost Green Tree Frogs Litoria caerulea frogs and “friends” seeking forever homes: Priority to new pet frog owners. Please bring your membership card and cash $50 donation. CONTENTS PAGE Sorry, we don’t have EFTPOS. Your NSW NPWS amphibian licence must be sighted on the night. Adopted frogs can never Last meeting 2 be released. Please contact us first if you plan to adopt a frog. Corroboree poem by Giles Watson 3 We will confirm what frogs are ready to rehome. Vale John Diamond 7.00 pm Welcome and announcements Ourimbah FATS field trip, 4 7.45 pm Our main speaker is Jordan Crawford-Ash, from Australian notes from Josie Styles Museum.
    [Show full text]
  • The Making of Calibration Sausage Exemplified by Recalibrating the Transcriptomic Timetree of Jawed Vertebrates
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2019.12.19.882829; this version posted January 5, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license. The making of calibration sausage exemplified by recalibrating the transcriptomic timetree of jawed vertebrates 1 David Marjanović 2 Department of Evolutionary Morphology, Science Programme “Evolution and Geoprocesses”, 3 Museum für Naturkunde – Leibniz Institute for Evolutionary and Biodiversity Research, Berlin, 4 Germany 5 ORCID: 0000-0001-9720-7726 6 Correspondence: 7 David Marjanović 8 [email protected] 9 Keywords: timetree, calibration, divergence date, Gnathostomata, Vertebrata 10 Abstract 11 Molecular divergence dating has the potential to overcome the incompleteness of the fossil record in 12 inferring when cladogenetic events (splits, divergences) happened, but needs to be calibrated by the 13 fossil record. Ideally but unrealistically, this would require practitioners to be specialists in molecular 14 evolution, in the phylogeny and the fossil record of all sampled taxa, and in the chronostratigraphy of 15 the sites the fossils were found in. Paleontologists have therefore tried to help by publishing 16 compendia of recommended calibrations, and molecular biologists unfamiliar with the fossil record 17 have made heavy use of such works (in addition to using scattered primary sources
    [Show full text]