DOCSLIB.ORG

Phylonyms; a Companion to the Phylocode

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phylonyms; a Companion to the Phylocode Pan-Lepidosauria J. A. Gauthier and K. de Queiroz, new clade name Registration Number: 118 2009; Evans and Borsuk-Bialylicka, 2009; Evans and Jones, 2010; but see Müller, 2004; De!nition: !e total clade of the crown clade Jones et al., 2013). More recently, kuehneosaurs Lepidosauria. !is is a crown-based total-clade have been inferred to be stem archosaurs close de"nition. Abbreviated de"nition: total ∇ of to Trilophosaurus buettneri by Pritchard and Lepidosauria. Nesbitt (2017), although Simões et al. (2018) placed them as either stem saurians or stem Etymology: Derived from pan (Greek), here archosaurs depending on the analysis, but in referring to “pan-monophylum,” another term either case only distantly related to T. buettneri. for “total clade,” and Lepidosauria, the name !e Early Triassic Sophineta cracoviensis and the of the corresponding crown clade; hence, “the Middle Jurassic Marmoretta oxoniensis have been total clade of Lepidosauria.” more consistently regarded as stem lepidosaurs, although that inference depends upon cor- Reference Phylogeny: Gauthier et al. (1988) rect association among disarticulated remains Figure 13, where the clade in question is named (Evans, 1991; Waldman and Evans, 1994; Lepidosauromorpha and is hypothesized to Evans, 2009; Evans and Borsuk-Bialylicka, include Younginiformes, which is no longer con- 2009; Evans and Jones, 2010; Jones et al., 2013; sidered part of the clade (see Composition). Renesto and Bernardi, 2014). Depending on the analysis, Simões et al. (2018) inferred S. Composition: Pan-Lepidosauria is composed cracoviensis to be either a stem lepidosaurian of Lepidosauria (Pan-Sphenodon plus Pan- or a stem squamatan, but they consistently Squamata, see entry in this volume) and all inferred M. oxoniensis as sister to Megachirella extinct species (stem lepidosaurs) that share a wachtleri on the squamate stem. Renesto and more recent common ancestor with the species Bernardi (2014) previously placed the Middle of Lepidosauria than they do with any other Triassic Megachirella wachtleri either inside or extant amniotes (Aves, Testudines, Crocodylia, outside of the lepidosaurian crown. !e Early and Mammalia). !e Late Permian fossils or Middle Jurassic Tamaulipasaurus morenoi Saurosternon bainii and Lanthanolania ivakh- may be a stem or a crown lepidosaur, but its nenkoi, as well as the Permo-Triassic fossils relationships are di#cult to assess because of Paliguana whitei and Palaeagama vielhaueri, its high degree of modi"cation for head-"rst have sometimes been inferred to be stem lepido- burrowing (Clark and Hernandez, 1994). !e saurs (e.g., Gauthier et al., 1988; Modesto and highly modi"ed Late Triassic drepanosaurs Reisz, 2002; Evans and Jones, 2010) but other have sometimes been inferred to be stem archo- times to be stem saurians (e.g., Modesto and saurs (Laurin, 1991; Simões et al., 2018) or stem Reisz, 2002; Müller, 2004). !e Upper Triassic lepidosaurs (Evans, 2009), but most authors Kuehneosauridae and its inferred Early Triassic have inferred drepanosaurs to be stem sauri- relative Pamelina polonica (but see Simões et ans that must accordingly have diverged much al., 2018) have often been inferred to be stem earlier than the fossil record currently indicates lepidosaurs (Gauthier et al., 1988; Evans, 1988, (i.e., by the Mid-Permian; Guadalupian) (e.g., Pan-Lepidosauria Müller, 2004; Senter, 2004; Renesto et al., Synonyms: Lepidosauria Haeckel 1866 of vari- 2010; Pritchard and Nesbitt, 2017; Simões et al., ous authors (e.g., Romer, 1933, 1945, 1956, 2018). !e authors of several early phylogenetic 1966; Gardiner, 1982) and Lepidosauromorpha analyses inferred that Younginiformes are stem Gauthier in Benton 1983 of Benton (1983, lepidosaurs (e.g., Benton, 1985; Evans, 1988; 1985) and Evans (1984) are approximate syn- Gauthier et al., 1988); however, more recent onyms. Eosuchia (e.g., of Romer, 1933, 1945, analyses have placed Younginiformes, either as a 1956, 1966), characterized as being composed clade or a paraphylum, on the stem of a more of “primitive lepidosaurians” and “direct ances- inclusive crown clade composed of (in addi- tors of the lizards and snakes”, and Holapsida tion to lepidosaurs) archosaurs and sometimes Underwood 1957, composed of “Eosuchia and also turtles (e.g., Laurin, 1991; Gauthier, 1994; Rhynchocephalia”, are partial (and approximate) Caldwell, 1996; deBraga and Rieppel, 1997; synonyms. Eolacertilia Romer 1966 (often Müller, 2004; Evans and Borsuk-Bialylicka, incorrectly attributed to Robinson, 1967) sensu 2009; Renesto and Bernardi, 2014; Bever et al., Carroll (1975, 1977) and Estes (1983) is a par- 2015; Pritchard and Nesbitt, 2017; Simões et al., tial (and approximate) synonym in the context 2018). See Evans and Jones (2010) for other taxa of phylogenies that place all of the included taxa that are no longer considered stem lepidosaurs. in the lepidosaur stem group (see Composition). Lepidosauromorpha Gauthier in Benton 1983 Diagnostic Apomorphies: As a total clade of Gauthier et al. (1988) is an unambiguous (and therefore also a maximum clade), Pan- synonym. Lepidosauria is not necessarily expected to have diagnostic apomorphies (characters that Comments: Although the name Lepidosauro- arose simultaneously with the split of lepido- morpha has previously been de"ned phylogeneti- saur stem lineage from that of archosaurs; see cally as applying to the total clade of Lepidosauria de Queiroz, 2007); however, any of the apo- (Gauthier et al., 1988), we have chosen instead morphies that originated along the lepidosaur to apply the name Pan-Lepidosauria to that clade stem lineage (see Diagnostic Apomorphies for in the interest of promoting a standardized form Lepidosauria, this volume), as well as those diag- for the names of total clades (e.g., de Queiroz and nosing various side branches, would allow refer- Gauthier, 1992; Gauthier and de Queiroz, 2001; ral of a specimen or species to Pan-Lepidosauria. de Queiroz, 2007). If the name Lepidosauromor- Uncertainty in placement of several incomplete, pha is to be retained, it could be applied to a deep and often highly modi"ed, fossils further com- node within Pan-Lepidosauria, although that plicates the question. If, as we suspect, the Early would require careful formulation of the (non- Triassic Sophineta cracoviensis is a stem lepido- standard) de"nition, given the uncertain status of saur, it shares the following apomorphies with many of its potential early members (see Compo- the crown: (1) maxilla participates broadly in sition). Alternatively, the name could be applied ventral orbital margin; (2) postfrontal wraps to a clade coinciding with the origin of one of the around fronto-parietal suture; (3) lacrimal early-evolving lepidosaur apomorphies. reduced, con"ned largely to orbital rim; (4) In the context of phylogenies in which marginal teeth attached super"cially to lingual Sphenodon punctatus is more closely related to margin of jaw (pleurodont dentition); and (5), turtles, crocodilians, and birds than to Squamata a weak zygosphene-zygantrum accessory inter- (e.g., Hedges and Poling, 1999; Zardoya and vertebral articulation. Meyer, 2000), the names Lepidosauria (this 1076 Pan-Lepidosauria volume) and Reptilia (this volume) are syn- Clark, J. M., and R. Hernandez. 1994. A new bur- onyms, and Reptilia is to be granted precedence rowing diapsid from the Jurassic La Boca (see Lepidosauria in this volume). In the context Formation of Tamaulipas, Mexico. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 14:180–195. of such phylogenies, the name Pan-Lepidosauria Estes, R. 1983. Sauria terrestria, Amphisbaenia. should not be applied to any clade (ICPN Art. Handbuch der Paläoherpetologie. Teil 10A. 14.5; Cantino and de Queiroz, 2020). Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart. Sophineta cracoviensis and possibly Pamelina Evans, S. E. 1984. !e classi"cation of the polonica (see Composition) are the earliest known Lepidosauria. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 82:87–100. pan-lepidosaurs (~245Ma, late Olenekian, Early Evans, S. E. 1988. !e early history and relation- Triassic; Evans, 2009; Evans and Borsuk− ships of the Diapsida. Pp. 221–260 in !e Białynicka, 2009). But the initial divergence Phylogeny and Classi"cation of the Tetrapods. of Pan-Lepidosauria from Pan-Archosauria (this Vol. 1: Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds (M. J. Benton, ed.). Systematics Association Special volume) is likely older ( 265 Ma), based on the ~ Volume No. 35A. Clarendon Press, Oxford. age of the earliest-known putative pan-archo- Evans, S. E. 1991. A new lizard-like reptile (Diapsida: saur, Aenigmastropheus parringtoni (Capitanian, Lepidosauromorpha) from the Middle Jurassic mid-Late Permian; Ezcurra et al., 2014). of England. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 103:391–412. Evans, S. E. 2009. An early kuehneosaurid reptile (Reptilia: Diapsida) from the Early Triassic of Literature Cited Poland. Palaeontol. Pol. 65:145–178. Evans, S. E., and M. Borsuk−Białynicka. 2009. A Benton, M. 1983. !e Triassic reptile Hyperodapedon small lepidosauromorph reptile from the Early from Elgin: functional morphology and rela- Triassic of Poland. Palaeontol. Pol. 65:179–202. tionships. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Evans, S. E., and M. E. H. Jones. 2010. !e origin, Sci. 302:605–717. early history and diversi"cation of lepidosau- Benton, M. 1985. Classi"cation and phylogeny of the romorph reptiles. Pp. 27–44 in New Aspects of diapsid reptiles. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 84:97–164. Mesozoic Biodiversity (S. Bandyopadhyay, ed.). Bever, G. S., T. R. Lyson, D. J. Field, and B.-A. S. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences 132. Bhullar. 2015. Evolutionary origin of the turtle Ezcurra, M. D., T. M. Scheyer, and R. J. Butler. skull. Nature 525:239–242. 2014. !e origin and early evolution of Sauria: deBraga, M., and O. Rieppel. 1997. Reptile phylog- reassessing the Permian saurian fossil record eny and the interrelationships of turtles. Zool. and the timing of the crocodile-lizard diver- J. Linn. Soc. 120:281–354. gence. PLOS ONE 9(2):e89165. Caldwell, M. 1996. Ichthyosauria: a preliminary phy- Gardiner, B. G. 1982. Tetrapod classi"cation. Zool. logenetic analysis of diapsid a#nities. Neues J. Linn. Soc. 74:207–232. Jahrb. Geol. Paläontol. Abh. 200:361–386. Gauthier, J. A. 1994.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dinosaur Wars Program Transcript
    Page 1 Dinosaur Wars Program Transcript Narrator: For more than a century, Americans have had a love affair with dinosaurs. Extinct for millions of years, they were barely known until giant, fossil bones were discovered in the mid-nineteenth century. Two American scientists, Edward Drinker Cope and Othniel Charles Marsh, led the way to many of these discoveries, at the forefront of the young field of paleontology. Jacques Gauthier, Paleontologist: Every iconic dinosaur every kid grows up with, apatosaurus, triceratops, stegosaurus, allosaurus, these guys went out into the American West and they found that stuff. Narrator: Cope and Marsh shed light on the deep past in a way no one had ever been able to do before. They unearthed more than 130 dinosaur species and some of the first fossil evidence supporting Darwin’s new theory of evolution. Mark Jaffe, Writer: Unfortunately there was a more sordid element, too, which was their insatiable hatred for each other, which often just baffled and exasperated everyone around them. Peter Dodson, Paleontologist: They began life as friends. Then things unraveled… and unraveled in quite a spectacular way. Narrator: Cope and Marsh locked horns for decades, in one of the most bitter scientific rivalries in American history. Constantly vying for leadership in their young field, they competed ruthlessly to secure gigantic bones in the American West. They put American science on the world stage and nearly destroyed one another in the process. Page 2 In the summer of 1868, a small group of scientists boarded a Union Pacific train for a sightseeing excursion through the heart of the newly-opened American West.
    [Show full text]
  • H17 the Descent of Birds < Neornithines, Archaeopteryx
    LIFE OF THE MESOZOIC ERA 465 h17 The descent of birds < neornithines, Archaeopteryx, Solnhofen Lms > Alfred, Lord Tennyson / once solved an enigma: When is an / eider [a seaduck] most like a merganser [a lake and river duck]? / He lived long enough to forget the answer. —an anonymous clerihew.1 All eighteen species of penguin live in the Southern Hemisphere. ... The descendants of a common ancestor, sharing common ground. ... ‘This bond, on my [Darwin’s] theory, is simple inheritance.’2 Bird evolution during the Cenozoic has been varied and rapid in the beak but not in the body. For example, Hawaiian Island bird arrivals beginning 5 Ma (million years ago) have evolved to new species with beaks specialized to feed on various flowers and seeds but their bodies have changed so little that the various pioneer-bird stocks are easy to identify. With that perspective, bird varieties distinctive in the beak as owls, hawks, penguins, ducks, flamingos, and parrots, are likely to have diverged in very ancient times. Ducks, albeit primitive ones such as web footed Presbyornis, which could wade but not paddle, already existed in the bird diversity of the Eocene when giant “terror birds,” such as Diatrema, patrolled the ground. Feathers are made mostly of beta keratin, a strong light-weight material. Bird feathers are modified scales which extrude from cells that line skin follicles. The shape and color of the feather so formed can change during the birds growth (say, a downy feather in youth and a stiff feather in adulthood) and by seasonal molts (say, a white feather in the winter and a colored feather for times of courting).3 All birds of the Cenozoic (30 orders) are characterized by toothless jaws and have a pair of elongated foot bones that are partially fused from the bottom up.
    [Show full text]
  • A Phylogenomic Analysis of Turtles ⇑ Nicholas G
    Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 83 (2015) 250–257 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev A phylogenomic analysis of turtles ⇑ Nicholas G. Crawford a,b,1, James F. Parham c, ,1, Anna B. Sellas a, Brant C. Faircloth d, Travis C. Glenn e, Theodore J. Papenfuss f, James B. Henderson a, Madison H. Hansen a,g, W. Brian Simison a a Center for Comparative Genomics, California Academy of Sciences, 55 Music Concourse Drive, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA b Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA c John D. Cooper Archaeological and Paleontological Center, Department of Geological Sciences, California State University, Fullerton, CA 92834, USA d Department of Biological Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA e Department of Environmental Health Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA f Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA g Mathematical and Computational Biology Department, Harvey Mudd College, 301 Platt Boulevard, Claremont, CA 9171, USA article info abstract Article history: Molecular analyses of turtle relationships have overturned prevailing morphological hypotheses and Received 11 July 2014 prompted the development of a new taxonomy. Here we provide the first genome-scale analysis of turtle Revised 16 October 2014 phylogeny. We sequenced 2381 ultraconserved element (UCE) loci representing a total of 1,718,154 bp of Accepted 28 October 2014 aligned sequence. Our sampling includes 32 turtle taxa representing all 14 recognized turtle families and Available online 4 November 2014 an additional six outgroups. Maximum likelihood, Bayesian, and species tree methods produce a single resolved phylogeny.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sclerotic Ring: Evolutionary Trends in Squamates
    The sclerotic ring: Evolutionary trends in squamates by Jade Atkins A Thesis Submitted to Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, Nova Scotia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Applied Science July, 2014, Halifax Nova Scotia © Jade Atkins, 2014 Approved: Dr. Tamara Franz-Odendaal Supervisor Approved: Dr. Matthew Vickaryous External Examiner Approved: Dr. Tim Fedak Supervisory Committee Member Approved: Dr. Ron Russell Supervisory Committee Member Submitted: July 30, 2014 Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my family, friends, and mentors who helped me get to where I am today. Thank you. ! ii Table of Contents Title page ........................................................................................................................ i Dedication ...................................................................................................................... ii List of figures ................................................................................................................. v List of tables ................................................................................................................ vii Abstract .......................................................................................................................... x List of abbreviations and definitions ............................................................................ xi Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 14 August 2021 Aperto
    AperTO - Archivio Istituzionale Open Access dell'Università di Torino VINCOLI STRUTTURALI ED AMBIENTALI SULLA RIDUZIONE DELLE APPENDICI PARI NEI VERTEBRATI This is the author's manuscript Original Citation: Availability: This version is available http://hdl.handle.net/2318/1703200 since 2019-05-29T10:22:39Z Publisher: Rook, L., & Pandolfi, L. Terms of use: Open Access Anyone can freely access the full text of works made available as "Open Access". Works made available under a Creative Commons license can be used according to the terms and conditions of said license. Use of all other works requires consent of the right holder (author or publisher) if not exempted from copyright protection by the applicable law. (Article begins on next page) 09 October 2021 Paleodays 2019 La Società Paleontologica Italiana a Benevento e Pietraroja Parte 1: Volume dei riassunti XIX Riunione annuale SPI Ente GeoPaleontologico di Pietraroja (21)22-24(25) Maggio 2019 a cura di Rook L. & Pandolfi L. Paleodays 2019. La Società Paleontologica Italiana a Benevento e Pietraroja XIX Riunione annuale della Società Paleontologica Italiana Benevento/Pietraroja, (21)22-24(25) Maggio 2019 Comitato Organizzatore Ente GeoPaleontologico di Pietraroja: G. Santamaria, G. Festinese, P. Forte, G. Lioni, A.V. Maturo, R. Melillo, L. Prencipe, A. Torrillo, F.O. Amore, S. Foresta, C. Dal Sasso, V. Morra, L. Rook Comitato Scientifico F.O. Amore, L. Angiolini, A. Bartiromo, M. Bernardi, G. Carnevale, M. Cherin, M. Chiari, G. Crippa, C. Dal Sasso, A. Ferretti, E. Ghezzo, L. Jaselli,
    [Show full text]
  • HOVASAURUS BOULEI, an AQUATIC EOSUCHIAN from the UPPER PERMIAN of MADAGASCAR by P.J
    99 Palaeont. afr., 24 (1981) HOVASAURUS BOULEI, AN AQUATIC EOSUCHIAN FROM THE UPPER PERMIAN OF MADAGASCAR by P.J. Currie Provincial Museum ofAlberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T5N OM6, Canada ABSTRACT HovasauTUs is the most specialized of four known genera of tangasaurid eosuchians, and is the most common vertebrate recovered from the Lower Sakamena Formation (Upper Per­ mian, Dzulfia n Standard Stage) of Madagascar. The tail is more than double the snout-vent length, and would have been used as a powerful swimming appendage. Ribs are pachyostotic in large animals. The pectoral girdle is low, but massively developed ventrally. The front limb would have been used for swimming and for direction control when swimming. Copious amounts of pebbles were swallowed for ballast. The hind limbs would have been efficient for terrestrial locomotion at maturity. The presence of long growth series for Ho vasaurus and the more terrestrial tan~saurid ThadeosauTUs presents a unique opportunity to study differences in growth strategies in two closely related Permian genera. At birth, the limbs were relatively much shorter in Ho vasaurus, but because of differences in growth rates, the limbs of Thadeosau­ rus are relatively shorter at maturity. It is suggested that immature specimens of Ho vasauTUs spent most of their time in the water, whereas adults spent more time on land for mating, lay­ ing eggs and/or range dispersal. Specilizations in the vertebrae and carpus indicate close re­ lationship between Youngina and the tangasaurids, but eliminate tangasaurids from consider­ ation as ancestors of other aquatic eosuchians, archosaurs or sauropterygians. CONTENTS Page ABREVIATIONS . ..... ... ......... .......... ... ......... ..... ... ..... .. .... 101 INTRODUCTION .
    [Show full text]
  • Dieter Thomas Tietze Editor How They Arise, Modify and Vanish
    Fascinating Life Sciences Dieter Thomas Tietze Editor Bird Species How They Arise, Modify and Vanish Fascinating Life Sciences This interdisciplinary series brings together the most essential and captivating topics in the life sciences. They range from the plant sciences to zoology, from the microbiome to macrobiome, and from basic biology to biotechnology. The series not only highlights fascinating research; it also discusses major challenges associated with the life sciences and related disciplines and outlines future research directions. Individual volumes provide in-depth information, are richly illustrated with photographs, illustrations, and maps, and feature suggestions for further reading or glossaries where appropriate. Interested researchers in all areas of the life sciences, as well as biology enthusiasts, will find the series’ interdisciplinary focus and highly readable volumes especially appealing. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15408 Dieter Thomas Tietze Editor Bird Species How They Arise, Modify and Vanish Editor Dieter Thomas Tietze Natural History Museum Basel Basel, Switzerland ISSN 2509-6745 ISSN 2509-6753 (electronic) Fascinating Life Sciences ISBN 978-3-319-91688-0 ISBN 978-3-319-91689-7 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91689-7 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018948152 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018. This book is an open access publication. Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
    [Show full text]
  • Constraints on the Timescale of Animal Evolutionary History
    Palaeontologia Electronica palaeo-electronica.org Constraints on the timescale of animal evolutionary history Michael J. Benton, Philip C.J. Donoghue, Robert J. Asher, Matt Friedman, Thomas J. Near, and Jakob Vinther ABSTRACT Dating the tree of life is a core endeavor in evolutionary biology. Rates of evolution are fundamental to nearly every evolutionary model and process. Rates need dates. There is much debate on the most appropriate and reasonable ways in which to date the tree of life, and recent work has highlighted some confusions and complexities that can be avoided. Whether phylogenetic trees are dated after they have been estab- lished, or as part of the process of tree finding, practitioners need to know which cali- brations to use. We emphasize the importance of identifying crown (not stem) fossils, levels of confidence in their attribution to the crown, current chronostratigraphic preci- sion, the primacy of the host geological formation and asymmetric confidence intervals. Here we present calibrations for 88 key nodes across the phylogeny of animals, rang- ing from the root of Metazoa to the last common ancestor of Homo sapiens. Close attention to detail is constantly required: for example, the classic bird-mammal date (base of crown Amniota) has often been given as 310-315 Ma; the 2014 international time scale indicates a minimum age of 318 Ma. Michael J. Benton. School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, U.K. [email protected] Philip C.J. Donoghue. School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, U.K. [email protected] Robert J.
    [Show full text]
  • PROGRAMME ABSTRACTS AGM Papers
    The Palaeontological Association 63rd Annual Meeting 15th–21st December 2019 University of Valencia, Spain PROGRAMME ABSTRACTS AGM papers Palaeontological Association 6 ANNUAL MEETING ANNUAL MEETING Palaeontological Association 1 The Palaeontological Association 63rd Annual Meeting 15th–21st December 2019 University of Valencia The programme and abstracts for the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Palaeontological Association are provided after the following information and summary of the meeting. An easy-to-navigate pocket guide to the Meeting is also available to delegates. Venue The Annual Meeting will take place in the faculties of Philosophy and Philology on the Blasco Ibañez Campus of the University of Valencia. The Symposium will take place in the Salon Actos Manuel Sanchis Guarner in the Faculty of Philology. The main meeting will take place in this and a nearby lecture theatre (Salon Actos, Faculty of Philosophy). There is a Metro stop just a few metres from the campus that connects with the centre of the city in 5-10 minutes (Line 3-Facultats). Alternatively, the campus is a 20-25 minute walk from the ‘old town’. Registration Registration will be possible before and during the Symposium at the entrance to the Salon Actos in the Faculty of Philosophy. During the main meeting the registration desk will continue to be available in the Faculty of Philosophy. Oral Presentations All speakers (apart from the symposium speakers) have been allocated 15 minutes. It is therefore expected that you prepare to speak for no more than 12 minutes to allow time for questions and switching between presenters. We have a number of parallel sessions in nearby lecture theatres so timing will be especially important.
    [Show full text]
  • Biomechanical Assessment of Evolutionary Changes in the Lepidosaurian Skull
    Biomechanical assessment of evolutionary changes in the lepidosaurian skull Mehran Moazena,1, Neil Curtisa, Paul O’Higginsb, Susan E. Evansc, and Michael J. Fagana aDepartment of Engineering, University of Hull, Hull HU6 7RX, United Kingdom; bThe Hull York Medical School, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom; and cResearch Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom Edited by R. McNeill Alexander, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom, and accepted by the Editorial Board March 24, 2009 (received for review December 23, 2008) The lepidosaurian skull has long been of interest to functional mor- a synovial joint with the pterygoid, the base resting in a pit (fossa phologists and evolutionary biologists. Patterns of bone loss and columellae) on the dorsolateral pterygoid surface. Thus, the gain, particularly in relation to bars and fenestrae, have led to a question at issue in relation to the lepidosaurian lower temporal variety of hypotheses concerning skull use and kinesis. Of these, one bar is not the functional advantage of its loss (13), but rather of of the most enduring relates to the absence of the lower temporal bar its gain in some rhynchocephalians and, very rarely, in lizards in squamates and the acquisition of streptostyly. We performed a (12, 14). This, in turn, raises questions as to the selective series of computer modeling studies on the skull of Uromastyx advantages of the different lepidosaurian skull morphologies. hardwickii, an akinetic herbivorous lizard. Multibody dynamic anal- Morphological changes in the lepidosaurian skull have been ysis (MDA) was conducted to predict the forces acting on the skull, the subject of theoretical and experimental studies (6, 8, 9, and the results were transferred to a finite element analysis (FEA) to 15–19) that aimed to understand the underlying selective crite- estimate the pattern of stress distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Names in Phylogenetic Nomenclature
    Syst. Biol. 48(4):790–807, 1999 Species Names in Phylogenetic Nomenclature PHILIP D. CANTINO,1* HAROLD N. BRYANT,2 KEVIN DE QUEIROZ,3 MICHAEL J. DONOGHUE,4 TORSTEN ERIKSSON,5 DAVID M. HILLIS,6 AND MICHAEL S. Y. LEE7 1Department of Environmental and Plant Biology, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701, USA; E-mail: [email protected] 2Royal Saskatchewan Museum, 2340 Albert Street, Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 3V7, Canada; E-mail: [email protected] 3Department of Vertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560, USA; E-mail: [email protected] 4Harvard University Herbaria, 22 Divinity Ave., Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA; E-mail: [email protected] 5Bergius Foundation, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Box 50017, 104 05 Stockholm, Sweden; E-mail: [email protected] 6Section of Integrative Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712, USA; E-mail: [email protected] 7Department of Zoology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia; E-mail: [email protected] Abstract.—Linnaean binomial nomenclature is logically incompatible with the phylogenetic nomenclature of de Queiroz and Gauthier (1992, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23:449–480): The former is based on the concept of genus, thus making this rank mandatory, while the latter is based on phylo- genetic definitions and requires the abandonment of mandatory ranks. Thus, if species are to re- ceive names under phylogenetic nomenclature, a different method must be devised to name them. Here, 13 methods for naming species in the context of phylogenetic nomenclature are contrasted with each other and with Linnaean binomials.
    [Show full text]
  • (Diapsida: Saurosphargidae), with Implications for the Morphological Diversity and Phylogeny of the Group
    Geol. Mag.: page 1 of 21. c Cambridge University Press 2013 1 doi:10.1017/S001675681300023X A new species of Largocephalosaurus (Diapsida: Saurosphargidae), with implications for the morphological diversity and phylogeny of the group ∗ CHUN LI †, DA-YONG JIANG‡, LONG CHENG§, XIAO-CHUN WU†¶ & OLIVIER RIEPPEL ∗ Laboratory of Evolutionary Systematics of Vertebrates, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, PO Box 643, Beijing 100044, China ‡Department of Geology and Geological Museum, Peking University, Beijing 100871, PR China §Wuhan Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources, Wuhan, 430223, PR China ¶Canadian Museum of Nature, PO Box 3443, STN ‘D’, Ottawa, ON K1P 6P4, Canada Department of Geology, The Field Museum, 1400 S. Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605-2496, USA (Received 31 July 2012; accepted 25 February 2013) Abstract – Largocephalosaurus polycarpon Cheng et al. 2012a was erected after the study of the skull and some parts of a skeleton and considered to be an eosauropterygian. Here we describe a new species of the genus, Largocephalosaurus qianensis, based on three specimens. The new species provides many anatomical details which were described only briefly or not at all in the type species, and clearly indicates that Largocephalosaurus is a saurosphargid. It differs from the type species mainly in having three premaxillary teeth, a very short retroarticular process, a large pineal foramen, two sacral vertebrae, and elongated small granular osteoderms mixed with some large ones along the lateral most side of the body. With additional information from the new species, we revise the diagnosis and the phylogenetic relationships of Largocephalosaurus and clarify a set of diagnostic features for the Saurosphargidae Li et al.
    [Show full text]