At the Gray Fossil Site Northeastern TN
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 8-2011 Extreme Variation in the Sagittal Crest of Tapirus polkensis (Mammalia Perissodactyla) at the Gray Fossil Site Northeastern TN. Aaron Randall Abernethy East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the Paleobiology Commons, and the Paleontology Commons Recommended Citation Abernethy, Aaron Randall, "Extreme Variation in the Sagittal Crest of Tapirus polkensis (Mammalia Perissodactyla) at the Gray Fossil Site Northeastern TN." (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1348. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1348 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Extreme Variation in the Sagittal Crest of Tapirus polkensis (Mammalia, Perissodactyla) at the Gray Fossil Site, Northeastern TN ___________________ A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of Biological Sciences East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Biology ___________________ by Aaron Randall Abernethy August 2011 ___________________ Steven C. Wallace, Chair Jim I. Mead Blaine W. Schubert ___________________ Keywords: Tapirs, Sexual Dimorphism, Intraspecific Variation, Pathology, Ontogeny ABSTRACT Extreme Variation in the Sagittal Crest of Tapirus polkensis (Mammalia, Perissodactyla) at the Gray Fossil Site, Northeastern TN by Aaron Randall Abernethy The preservation and quantity of fossil tapirs (Tapirus polkensis) from the Gray Fossil Site in northeastern Tennessee provides a unique opportunity for comparison and analysis of skeletal characters. Intraspecifically, modern tapirs show little to no variation in the morphology of the sagittal crest. However, several different morphologies exist within the sample at Gray. No osteological evidence of sexual dimorphism exists for tapirs, and no correlation between crest shape and sex was observed. Several juveniles display well defined crests, while some adults have only minor thickening of the temporal ridges; therefore, no distinct correlation between age and crest state could be established. Three different patterns of wear exist within the sample, but there is no correlation between these and crest morphology. No cranial pathologies were found to be associated with a crest type. Despite some correlations the sagittal crest could simply be a variable character due to intraspecific variation. 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would first like to thank S. Wallace, who besides being my advisor, has been a great mentor and good friend. This project would have been impossible without his guidance, input, and introduction to the overall concept. I also thank my graduate committee (J. Mead and B. Schubert) for all their help, input, critique, and patience. They were an integral part in both my thesis and my education in the field. I would like to thank R. Hulbert Jr. of the Florida Museum of Natural History collections for allowing me access to important specimens vital for comparison, his evaluation of my work, his input for several concepts, and his background knowledge of tapirs. His excitement on the subject helped spur my own. I thank my fellow graduate assistant P. Hawkins who was always there to be critical of my work, lend helpful ideas, and discuss everything on tapirs. I also thank my fellow graduate assistant M. Gibson who helped create many of the outline figures in the methods section and whose knowledge on computer software continued to be a huge help throughout my work. Matt was also always there to help no matter what and I will forever be in debt to him for his friendship and assistance. Thanks to A. Nye and B. Woodward of the GFS collections for all their patience, time, and assistance with specimens. I also thank E. Westwig of the AMNH vertebrate zoological collections for access and extreme helpfulness and friendliness during my visit to the collections. I would like to thank W. Gelnaw for his edits of early drafts, his analysis of my work, and his critique of my grammar. I would also like to thank M. Whitelaw of the ETSU Dept. of Geosciences for his mentoring in my work, teaching, and for always being there when I needed help in any facet of the project and my life as a graduate student. I would like to thank L.T. Holbrook of the Department of Biological Sciences at Rowan University and M. Mihlbachler of the Department of Anatomy at NYIT for their valuable input towards my project. I thank K. Jensen and K. Bauer for information on modern specimens. I would also like to thank everyone in the Department of Geosciences at ETSU for their guidance and support of this project and my professional career. 3 CONTENTS Title Page ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ 3 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 6 LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 8 Background...................................................................................................................... 11 Sexual Dimorphism ................................................................................................... 11 Ontogeny .................................................................................................................... 12 Pathological Response ............................................................................................... 13 Multiple Species ........................................................................................................ 13 Preferential Feeding ................................................................................................... 13 Intraspecific Variation ............................................................................................... 15 2. METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 16 Sexual Dimorphism ......................................................................................................... 16 Ontogeny .......................................................................................................................... 17 Pathological Response ..................................................................................................... 17 Multiple Species .............................................................................................................. 17 Preferential Feeding ......................................................................................................... 27 3. RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 28 Sexual Dimorphism ......................................................................................................... 35 Ontogeny .......................................................................................................................... 35 Pathological Response ..................................................................................................... 41 Preferential Feeding ......................................................................................................... 44 Random Intraspecific Variation ....................................................................................... 46 4 4. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................... 48 Sexual Dimorphism………………………………………………………………………48 Ontogeny. .......................................................................................................................... 50 Pathological Response ...................................................................................................... 51 Preferential Feeding .......................................................................................................... 52 Intraspecific Variation ...................................................................................................... 54 5. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................... 56 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 58 VITA ............................................................................................................................................. 64 5 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Measurements of Sexual Dimorphism ..................................................................................... 26 2. Sagittal Crest Classification Scheme for all Gray Fossil Site Specimens