Rapid Communication Morphological Support For
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 23(4):991±996, December 2003 q 2003 by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology RAPID COMMUNICATION MORPHOLOGICAL SUPPORT FOR A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HIPPOS AND WHALES JONATHAN H. GEISLER1 and MARK D. UHEN2 1Department Geology/Geography and Georgia Southern Museum, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, Georgia 30460-8149, [email protected]; 2Cranbrook Institute of Science, 39221 Woodward Avenue, P.O. Box 801, Bloom®eld Hills, Michigan 48303-0801, [email protected] Recent discoveries of the ankles of fossil whales, reported tree for 1,000 iterations of the parsimony ratchet (Nixon, 1999), by Gingerich et al. (2001) and Thewissen et al. (2001b), cor- which was implemented with the command nix*1000. Bremer roborated the molecular hypothesis that Cetacea (whales, dol- support values were calculated using the programs PAUP 3.1.1 phins, and porpoises) are closely related to artiodactyls (even- (Swofford, 1993) and TreeRot (Sorenson, 1996), with modi®- hoofed mammals including hippopotami, pigs, deer, and cam- cations to the TreeRot commands ®le as described in Geisler els); however, major points of disagreement remain. A mor- (2001a). Lists of unequivocal synapomorphies for each node phology-based study incorporating some of these new data were compiled using the apo/ command in NONA 1.9. Where (Thewissen et al., 2001b) supported the exclusion of Cetacea we describe synapomorphies supported by our study, we cite from the clade of living artiodactyls. In contrast, a vast amount previous studies that have reached the same conclusion. of molecular data support placement of Cetacea within Artio- Institutional Abbreviations AMNH, American Museum dactyla, as close relatives to Hippopotamidae (Gatesy et al., of Natural History, Departments of Mammalogy and Vertebrate 1996, 1999; Montgelard et al., 1997; Shimamura et al., 1997, Paleontology (New York); GSM, Georgia Southern Museum, 1999; Nikaido et al., 2001). Here we report that morphological Vertebrate Collection (Statesboro, Georgia); IVPP, Institute of data from extinct and extant taxa support placement of Cetacea Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Acad- within Artiodactyla as the closest relatives of Hippopotamidae emy of Sciences (Beijing, China). (Fig. 1B) and indicate that molecular and morphological evi- dence for the phylogeny of these taxa are now much more con- RESULTS gruent than previously thought. A total of 45 most parsimonious trees of 1,513 steps in length were found (within-taxon polymorphism was not counted as MATERIALS AND METHODS extra steps). All most parsimonious trees have Cetacea deeply Our result is based on a cladistic analysis of a modi®ed ver- nested within Artiodactyla as the sister-group to Hippopotami- sion of the character/taxon matrix of Geisler (2001a). The pre- dae (Fig. 1B), like molecular studies and unlike the most recent sent matrix incorporates new information on the early cetaceans morphological-based analysis (Thewissen et al., 2001b) (Fig. Artiocetus, Rodhocetus (Gingerich et al., 2001), and Pakicetus 1A). The novel morphological result reported here is primarily (Thewissen et al., 2001b); includes some changes in the scoring attributed to recently described cetacean fossils (Gingerich et of Basilosaurus; adds the artiodactyls Amphirhagatherium wei- al., 2001; Thewissen et al., 2001b), because a study with similar gelti (Heller, 1934; Erfurt, 2000; Hooker and Thomas, 2001) characters and taxa, but without the new ankle data, supported and Raoellidae (Kumar and Sahni, 1985; Thewissen et al., the exclusion of Cetacea from Artiodactyla and a close rela- 2001b); includes the mesonychid Ankalagon (AMNH-VP 776, tionship between Cetacea and Mesonychidae (Geisler, 2001a), 777, 2454; O'Leary et al., 2000); adds seven characters from an extinct group of hoofed mammals. We concur with recent Thewissen et al. (2001b), and consists of 195 characters scored authors (Gingerich et al., 2001; Thewissen et al., 2001b) that a for 69 mammalian taxa. The matrix and character list are avail- suite of characters in the ankles of early whales supports a clade able on the internet at http://www.vertpaleo.org/jvp/JVPcon- comprised of Cetacea and Artiodactyla but not mesonychids. tents.html. Of the 195 characters, 121 are binary, 14 are unor- The sister-group to the hippo/whale clade varies among the dered multistate characters, and 60 are ordered multistate char- most parsimonious trees; in 36 trees the sister-group is a clade acters. Although we do not claim to have included every pub- of suiform artiodactyls including Suina (pigs and peccaries), lished character relevant to cetartiodactyl phylogeny, we note Entelodontidae, and Anthracotheriidae (represented by Elome- that this matrix has substantially more taxa and more morpho- ryx); and in the remaining nine trees it is Raoellidae. The latter logical characters than previous phylogenetic analyses (e.g., trees are interesting because like cetaceans, raoellids possess a Geisler and Luo, 1998; O'Leary, 1998, 2001; Luo and Ginger- P4 paracone that is much higher than those of the succeeding ich, 1999; O'Leary and Geisler, 1999; O'Leary and Uhen, molars. Like pakicetids (Thewissen and Hussain, 1998) and the 1999; Thewissen et al., 2001b). protocetid Artiocetus (Gingerich et al., 2001), raoellids such as The computer program NONA 1.9 (Goloboff, 1994) was Kunmunella kalakotensis (Kumar and Shani, 1985) also have a used to ®nd most parsimonious trees. An initial search was single-rooted P1. Intriguingly, raoellid fossils are abundant in conducted using two commands: mult*100; hold/10, which in- the same Asian sites that produce pakicetids (Thewissen et al., voke 100 iterations of TBR (tree bisection and reconnection) 2001a). Unfortunately, the non-dental anatomy of raoellids is branch swapping and save only 10 trees per iteration. The most undescribed. Discoveries of new raoellid fossils would not only parsimonious tree from the initial search was used as a starting test the hypothesis that they are closely related to hippos and 991 992 JOURNAL OF VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY, VOL. 23, NO. 4, 2003 FIGURE 1. A comparison of the strict consensus tree of Thewissen et al. (2001b) (A) and the strict consensus tree for the present study (B). Note that in the consensus of Thewissen et al. (2001b) the Cetacea are not inside the clade of extant artiodactyls, and the hippopotamus is not closely related to whales. In contrast, the morphological data analyzed in this study support the inclusion of Cetacea within Artiodactyla as the sister-group to Hippopotamidae, as suggested by numerous molecular studies (e.g., Gatesy et al., 1999). To facilitate comparison and to highlight key features, some taxa have been collapsed into higher-level groups. In cases where a higher-level taxon includes three or more taxa, parentheses are used to describe the phylogeny in the strict consensus of the present study: (all taxa with ``*'' are in the current study only): Cameloidea 5 (Eotylops*(Poebrotherium (Llama*, Camelus*))); Entelodontidae (Archaeotherium); Hapalodectes 5 (H. hetangensis*, H. leptognathus*); Me- sonychidae 5 (Dissacus praenuntius*, Dissacus navajovius*, Mongolian Dissacus*(Ankalagon (Sinonyx (Pachyaena gigantea*, Pachyaena ossifraga*, (Mesonyx, Harpagolestes, Synoplotherium))))); Mysticeti 5 (Balaenoptera); Odontoceti 5 (Physeter (Tursiops, Delphinapterus); Or- eodontoidea 5 (Agriochoerus, Merycoidodon*); Perissodactyla 5 ((Equus*, Mesohippus*) (Heptodon*, Hyracotherium*)); Phenacodontidae 5 (Meniscotherium, Phenacodus); Protoceratidae 5 (Leptoreodon*(Heteromeryx*, Protoceras*)); Ruminantia 5 (Hypertragulus*(Leptomeryx* (Tragulus (Bos*(Odocoileus*, Ovis*))))); Suina 5 (Perchoerus*(Sus, Tayassu*)); and Xiphodontoidea 5 (Xiphodon*, Amphimeryx*). In the GEISLER AND UHENÐWHALES AND HIPPOS CLOSELY RELATED 993 tiodactyla has a Bremer support of 3; the Cetacea and Hippo- potamidae clade has a Bremer support of 2. In all most-parsimonious trees, many ``suiform'' artiodactyls (e.g., anthracotheres, entelodontids, suids, tayassuids) are close- ly related to the Hippopotamidae and Cetacea clade. Even though the exact phylogenetic arrangement of the ``suiform'' artiodactyls varies among our shortest trees, their proximity to cetaceans and hippopotamids is supported by an enlarged facial portion of the lacrimal. In Hippopotamus and early whales such as Georgiacetus (Hulbert et al., 1998) and Remingtonocetus (Kumar and Sahni, 1986:®g. 4) the distance between the anter- iormost point of the lacrimal and the anterior edge of the orbit is greater than the anteroposterior diameter of the orbit (Fig. 3A, B). By contrast, mesonychids such as Sinonyx (Zhou et al., 1995) have a much smaller exposure of the lacrimal on the face (Fig. 1C). A large lacrimal also occurs on the face of extant ruminants (e.g., Odocoileus, Ovis, Tragulus); however, this sim- ilarity is interpreted as convergent because the basal ruminants Hypertragulus (e.g., AMNH 53802, 1341) and Leptomeryx (e.g., AMNH 11870) have a small facial portion of the lacrimal. Although our morphological data and molecules agree on a sister-group relationship between Hippopotamidae and Cetacea, FIGURE 2. Posterior view of the left squamosal, petrosal, and tym- molecular data do not support a close relationship between the panic bulla of a juvenile Hippopotamus amphibius (AMNH 130247). cetacean/hippopotamid clade and ``suiform'' artiodactyls. In- Lateral is to the left, dorsal is to the top, and the occipital bones have stead, vastly different