DOCSLIB.ORG

Lungfishes, Tetrapods, Paleontology, and Plesiomorphy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

LUNGFISHES, TETRAPODS, PALEONTOLOGY, AND PLESIOMORPHY DONN E. ROSEN Curator, Department of Ichthyology American Museum of Natural History Adjunct Professor, City University of New York PETER L. FOREY Principal Scientific Officer, Department of Palaeontology British Museum (Natural History) BRIAN G. GARDINER Reader in Zoology, SirJohn Atkins Laboratories Queen Elizabeth College, London COLIN PATTERSON Research Associate, Department of Ichthyology American Museum of Natural History Senior Principal Scientyifc Officer, Department of Palaeontology British Museum (Natural History) BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY VOLUME 167: ARTICLE 4 NEW YORK: 1981 BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY Volume 167, article 4, pages 159-276, figures 1-62, tables 1,2 Issued February 26, 1981 Price: $6.80 a copy ISSN 0003-0090 Copyright © American Museum of Natural History 1981 CONTENTS Abstract ........................................ 163 Introduction ...................... ........................ 163 Historical Survey ...................... ........................ 166 Choana, Nostrils, and Snout .............................................. 178 (A) Initial Comparisons and Inferences .......................................... 178 (B) Nasal Capsule ............. ................................. 182 (C) Choana and Nostril in Dipnoans ............................................ 184 (D) Choana and Nostril in Rhipidistians ........................................ 187 (E) Choana and Nostril in Tetrapods ........................................... 195 Nasolacrimal Duct, Labial Cavity, Rostral Organ, and Jacobson's Organ .... ......... 196 Paired Fins and Girdles ...................... ........................ 202 (A) Paired Fin Skeleton .................... .......................... 202 (B) Pectoral Girdle .............. ................................ 216 Dermal Bones of the Skull ....................................................... 221 Palate and Jaw Suspension .............................................. 227 (A) Historical ......................................................... 227 (B) Dermal Bones of Palate .............................................. 227 (C) Palatoquadrate .............. ................................ 232 (D) Relation Between Palate and Braincase .................. ................... 233 Hyoid and Gill Arches ...................... ........................ 235 Ribs and Vertebrae ............. ................................. 242 (A) Ribs ....................................... 242 (B) Interpretation of Gnathostome Vertebrae ................ .................... 246 (C) Heterospondyly in Caturus furcatus, and Vertebral Homologies ..... .......... 249 (D) Vertebrae of Rhipidistians, Lungfishes, and Tetrapods .......... .............. 249 Dermal Skeleton ...................... ........................ 252 (A) Cosmine ......................................................... 252 (B) Folded Teeth ............. ................................. 254 Synapomorphy Scheme ...................... ........................ 255 Conclusions ...................................... 262 Acknowledgments ......................................................... 264 Literature Cited ...................... ........................ 264 ABSTRACT We conclude that the internal (excurrent) nos- hypothesize, in agreement with most nineteenth- tril of Recent lungfishes is a true choana, as and many twentieth-century biologists, and in dis- judged by its comparison with (1) the internal nos- agreement with the current paleontological view, tril of a Devonian lungfish species which opens that lungfishes are the sister group of tetrapods, through the bony palate internal to an arcade of and further that actinistians are the sister group maxillary and premaxillary teeth; (2) the choana of those two, and that Eusthenopteron is the sister of the Devonian ichthyostegid amphibians, and group of those three. We also conclude that the (3) nostril development in Recent urodeles. The characters used formerly to link Eusthenopteron idea that lungfishes might therefore be the sister with tetrapods either (1) are primitive for all bony group of tetrapods is compared with the compet- fishes (including cladistians and actinopterygians) ing, deeply entrenched theory that rhipidistian or for living gnathostomes (including chondrich- fishes and eusthenopterids in particular include thyans); (2) are convergent with those of several the ancestor of tetrapods. Our own theory, de- groups of gnathostomes; (3) only justify the inclu- rived from study of Recent and fossil material, sion of Eusthenopteron in a group with actinis- and an analysis of literature spanning 140 years, tians, dipnoans and tetrapods; or (4) are spurious. is framed in the context of a classification of the We attribute the century of confusion about the main groups of fossil and living gnathostomes: structure and position of lungfishes to the tradi- acanthodians, chondrichthyans, cladistians, ac- tional paleontological preoccupation with the tinopterygians, rhipidistians, actinistians, dip- search for ancestors, to the interpretation of Eus- noans, and tetrapods. In formulating our proposal thenopteron in the light of tetrapods and the re- we have reviewed the anatomy of the nasal cap- ciprocal interpretation of fossil amphibians in the sule, nostrils and related structures, paired fins light of Eusthenopteron, and to the paleontologi- and their girdles, dermal bones of the skull, palate cal predilection for using plesiomorphous char- and jaw suspension, hyoid and gill arches, ribs acters to formulate schemes of relationships. and vertebrae, and scale and tooth structure. We "The convictions of our palaeontological colleagues are very real to them, and under the drive of these convictions they have quite honestly contended for their theories. The colour-blind man sees the scarlet robe and the green lawn the same colour, to him they are the same colour, but he is wrong." Kesteven, 1950, p. 99 INTRODUCTION Miles's (1977) descriptions and illustra- ture of the two outermost lip folds discussed tions of the head of the Devonian lungfish, by Allis, our attention was drawn to a large Griphognathus, caused the independent re- opening in the outermost fold of Neocerat- alization in London (BGG) and New York odus near the corner of the mouth that was (DER) that the internal nostrils of lungfishes first described by Gunther (1871, p. 515): are true choanae. This conviction meant to "At the angle of the mouth, and hidden be- us that the only synapomorphy of Miles's low a duplicature of the skin, there is an (1977, p. 316) Choanata (tetrapods and rhip- opening wide enough to admit an ordinary idistians; cf. Gaffney, 1979b, p. 93) is also quill (pl. XXX, fig. 2, a); it leads into a spa- present in lungfishes. It also meant to us that cious cavity (b), irregular in shape, clothed Allis's (1919, 1932a, 1932b) arguments for with a mucous membrane, and containing rejecting the internal lungfish naris as a coagulated mucous in which an immense choana, based partly on the interpretation of number of mucous corpuscles are deposited. certain folds of soft tissue as primary, sec- This cavity is separated from the cavity of ondary, and tertiary upper lips, might be the mouth by the membrana mucosa only, faulty. With the idea of reviewing the struc- and there is no direct communication be- 163 164 BULLETIN AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY VOL. 167 tween them; a branch cavity runs forward tians, and osteolepiforms in particular, are into the interior of the upper lip." the closest relatives, or direct ancestors, of The extent of this rostral structure, which tetrapods. This doctrine is so pervasive that Gunther called the labial cavity, is from the a researcher seeking the primitive tetrapod anterior wall of the orbit forward to the an- condition of some structure turns automati- terolateral part of the nasal capsule (fig. 18). cally to the rhipidistians, usually to Eusthe- It is subtriangular, narrow anteriorly near the nopteron, forgetting that Eusthenopteron has nasal capsule and wider posteriorly in front been interpreted in the light of tetrapods and of the orbit where the internal wall of the that tetrapods have been interpreted in the cavity is thrown into a series of folds. The reciprocal light of Eusthenopteron. Our as- opening of the labial cavity to the outside is sault on the "rhipidistian barrier" begins through a short and broad tube that leads with an account of the history of opinion on directly to the pore in the outermost acces- lungfishes, tetrapods, rhipidistians and other sory lip (fig. 19). Visual examination of the crossopterygian fishes. We believe that this same region of the snout in premetamorphic account shows that current beliefs about Neoceratodus of about 2 cm. in total length rhipidistians have grown up among a thicket (prior to development of pelvic fins) revealed of preconceptions and wishful thinking, es- neither a pore nor a labial cavity, but, in pecially the belief that processes can be dem- larger young, serial sections show these onstrated in the fossil record. To give one structures (fig. 20). The presence in larger classic example, Watson, in his Croonian young and adults of an apparently mucous- lecture on amphibian origins, wrote (1926, p. secreting organ extending between the nasal 189) "It is possible to view the problem as capsule and the orbit and its opening to the one of purely formal morphology, the estab- outside on the side of the
Recommended publications
  • This Content Downloaded from 157.193.10.229 on Tue, 07 Jul

    This Content Downloaded from 157.193.10.229 on Tue, 07 Jul

    This content downloaded from 157.193.10.229 on Tue, 07 Jul 2015 14:17:10 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions CLEMENT and BOISVERT-DEVONIAN LUNGFISH FROM BELGIUM 277 tra. In addition to his incorrect taxonomic attribution, Lohest idae Berg, 1940 (including Fleurantia and Jarvikia); and Rhyn- misinterpreted the operculum as a scapula, the cleithrum as a chodipteridae Moy-Thomas, 1939 (including Rhynchodipterus, coracoid, and the E bone as an isolated rib (Fig. 2A, B). How- Griphognathus, and Soederberghia). Schultze (1993) defined the ever, he accurately identified a pleural rib (Fig. 2A, B). Rhynchodipteridae as including at least Soederberghia, Jarvikia, and Fleurantia. Later, Schultze (2001) presented a cladogram of SYSTEMATIC PALEONTOLOGY Devonian dipnoans that included a radiation of denticulated forms: Barwickia [Fleurantia + Rhynchodipteridae], in which included SARCOPTERYGII Romer, 1955 Rhynchodipteridae Griphognathus [Rhynchodipterus + The and affinities of the DIPNOMORPHA Ahlberg, 1991 [Soederberghia Jarvikia]]. monophyly DIPNOI 1845 Rhynchodipteridae have been reviewed by Ahlberg et al. (2001), Muiller, who that be unrelated RHYNCHODIPTERIDAE Moy-Thomas, 1939 tentatively suggested Griphognathus may to Rhynchodipterus and Soederberghia, but regarded Rhyncho- Remarks-Campbell and Barwick (1990) proposed that the dipterus and Soederberghia as most closely related to each other. denticulated lungfish lineage should be recognized as suborder However, Friedman (2003b) considered this suggestion prema- Uranolophina which incorporates four families: Uranolophidae ture and suggested that the Rhynchodipteridae, if defined as Miles, 1977; Holodontidae Gorizdro-Kulczycka, 1950; Fleuranti- including only Soederberghia, Rhynchodipterus, and Griphogna- FIGURE 2. Soederberghiasp. indet. Modave, Liege Province, Belgium, upper Famennian,Upper Devonian. Liege University, paleontology collection no. 5390a,b. A, no.
  • BONY FISHES 602 Bony Fishes

    BONY FISHES 602 Bony Fishes

    click for previous page BONY FISHES 602 Bony Fishes GENERAL REMARKS by K.E. Carpenter, Old Dominion University, Virginia, USA ony fishes constitute the bulk, by far, of both the diversity and total landings of marine organisms encoun- Btered in fisheries of the Western Central Atlantic.They are found in all macrofaunal marine and estuarine habitats and exhibit a lavish array of adaptations to these environments. This extreme diversity of form and taxa presents an exceptional challenge for identification. There are 30 orders and 269 families of bony fishes presented in this guide, representing all families known from the area. Each order and family presents a unique suite of taxonomic problems and relevant characters. The purpose of this preliminary section on technical terms and guide to orders and families is to serve as an introduction and initial identification guide to this taxonomic diversity. It should also serve as a general reference for those features most commonly used in identification of bony fishes throughout the remaining volumes. However, I cannot begin to introduce the many facets of fish biology relevant to understanding the diversity of fishes in a few pages. For this, the reader is directed to one of the several general texts on fish biology such as the ones by Bond (1996), Moyle and Cech (1996), and Helfman et al.(1997) listed below. A general introduction to the fisheries of bony fishes in this region is given in the introduction to these volumes. Taxonomic details relevant to a specific family are explained under each of the appropriate family sections. The classification of bony fishes continues to transform as our knowledge of their evolutionary relationships improves.
  • Breviceps Adspersus” Documents B

    Breviceps Adspersus” Documents B

    Herpetology Notes, volume 14: 397-406 (2021) (published online on 22 February 2021) Phylogenetic analysis of “Breviceps adspersus” documents B. passmorei Minter et al., 2017 in Limpopo Province, South Africa Matthew P. Heinicke1,*, Mohamad H. Beidoun1, Stuart V. Nielsen1,2, and Aaron M. Bauer3 Abstract. Recent systematic work has shown the Breviceps mossambicus species group to be more species-rich than previously documented and has brought into question the identity of many populations, especially in northeastern South Africa. We obtained genetic data for eight specimens originally identified as B. adspersus from Limpopo Province, South Africa, as well as numerous specimens from the core range of B. adspersus in Namibia and Zimbabwe. Phylogenetic analysis shows that there is little genetic variation across the range of B. adspersus. However, most of our Limpopo specimens are not B. adspersus but rather B. passmorei, a species previously known only from the immediate vicinity of its type locality in KwaZulu-Natal. These new records extend the known range of B. passmorei by 360 km to the north. Our results emphasize the need to obtain fine- scale range-wide genetic data for Breviceps to better delimit the diversity and biogeography of the genus. Keywords. Brevicipitidae, cryptic species, Microhylidae, rain frog, systematics, Transvaal Introduction Breviceps adspersus, with a lectotype locality listed as “Damaraland” [= north-central Namibia], and other The genus Breviceps Merrem, 1820 includes 18 or 19 syntypes from both Damaraland and “Transvaal” [= described species of rain frogs distributed across eastern northeastern South Africa], has a southern distribution, and southern Africa (AmphibiaWeb, 2020; Frost, 2020). ranging from Namibia across much of Botswana, The genus includes two major clades: the gibbosus Zimbabwe, and South Africa to western Mozambique.
  • Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-17944-8 — Evolution And

    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-17944-8 — Evolution And

    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-17944-8 — Evolution and Development of Fishes Edited by Zerina Johanson , Charlie Underwood , Martha Richter Index More Information Index abaxial muscle,33 Alizarin red, 110 arandaspids, 5, 61–62 abdominal muscles, 212 Alizarin red S whole mount staining, 127 Arandaspis, 5, 61, 69, 147 ability to repair fractures, 129 Allenypterus, 253 arcocentra, 192 Acanthodes, 14, 79, 83, 89–90, 104, 105–107, allometric growth, 129 Arctic char, 130 123, 152, 152, 156, 213, 221, 226 alveolar bone, 134 arcualia, 4, 49, 115, 146, 191, 206 Acanthodians, 3, 7, 13–15, 18, 23, 29, 63–65, Alx, 36, 47 areolar calcification, 114 68–69, 75, 79, 82, 84, 87–89, 91, 99, 102, Amdeh Formation, 61 areolar cartilage, 192 104–106, 114, 123, 148–149, 152–153, ameloblasts, 134 areolar mineralisation, 113 156, 160, 189, 192, 195, 198–199, 207, Amia, 154, 185, 190, 193, 258 Areyongalepis,7,64–65 213, 217–218, 220 ammocoete, 30, 40, 51, 56–57, 176, 206, 208, Argentina, 60–61, 67 Acanthodiformes, 14, 68 218 armoured agnathans, 150 Acanthodii, 152 amphiaspids, 5, 27 Arthrodira, 12, 24, 26, 28, 74, 82–84, 86, 194, Acanthomorpha, 20 amphibians, 1, 20, 150, 172, 180–182, 245, 248, 209, 222 Acanthostega, 22, 155–156, 255–258, 260 255–256 arthrodires, 7, 11–13, 22, 28, 71–72, 74–75, Acanthothoraci, 24, 74, 83 amphioxus, 49, 54–55, 124, 145, 155, 157, 159, 80–84, 152, 192, 207, 209, 212–213, 215, Acanthothoracida, 11 206, 224, 243–244, 249–250 219–220 acanthothoracids, 7, 12, 74, 81–82, 211, 215, Amphioxus, 120 Ascl,36 219 Amphystylic, 148 Asiaceratodus,21
  • Identifying Heterogeneity in Rates of Morphological Evolution: Discrete Character Change in the Evolution of Lungfish (Sarcopterygii; Dipnoi)

    Identifying Heterogeneity in Rates of Morphological Evolution: Discrete Character Change in the Evolution of Lungfish (Sarcopterygii; Dipnoi)

    ORIGINAL ARTICLE doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01460.x IDENTIFYING HETEROGENEITY IN RATES OF MORPHOLOGICAL EVOLUTION: DISCRETE CHARACTER CHANGE IN THE EVOLUTION OF LUNGFISH (SARCOPTERYGII; DIPNOI) Graeme T. Lloyd,1,2 Steve C. Wang,3 and Stephen L. Brusatte4,5 1Department of Palaeontology, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom 2E-mail: [email protected] 3Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania 19081 4Division of Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, New York 10024 5Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Columbia University, New York, New York 10025 Received February 9, 2010 Accepted August 15, 2011 Data Archived: Dryad: doi:10.5061/dryad.pg46f Quantifying rates of morphological evolution is important in many macroevolutionary studies, and critical when assessing possible adaptive radiations and episodes of punctuated equilibrium in the fossil record. However, studies of morphological rates of change have lagged behind those on taxonomic diversification, and most authors have focused on continuous characters and quantifying patterns of morphological rates over time. Here, we provide a phylogenetic approach, using discrete characters and three statistical tests to determine points on a cladogram (branches or entire clades) that are characterized by significantly high or low rates of change. These methods include a randomization approach that identifies branches with significantly high rates and likelihood ratio tests that pinpoint either branches or clades that have significantly higher or lower rates than the pooled rate of the remainder of the tree. As a test case for these methods, we analyze a discrete character dataset of lungfish, which have long been regarded as “living fossils” due to an apparent slowdown in rates since the Devonian.
  • Sequencing of Mitochondrial DNA with Long Repetitive Regions and Detection of the Frog Lineages of Large Mt Genome Showing Reduction of Purifying Selection

    Sequencing of Mitochondrial DNA with Long Repetitive Regions and Detection of the Frog Lineages of Large Mt Genome Showing Reduction of Purifying Selection

    Prime Archives in Genetics: 2nd Edition Book Chapter Sequencing of Mitochondrial DNA with Long Repetitive Regions and Detection of the Frog Lineages of Large mt Genome Showing Reduction of Purifying Selection Ryosuke Kakehashi1, Keitaro Hemmi2, Chiaki Kambayashi1 and Atsushi Kurabayashi1* 1Faculty of Bio-Science, Nagahama Institute of Bio-Science and Technology, Japan 2Amphibian Research Center, Hiroshima University, Japan *Corresponding Author: Atsushi Kurabayashi, Faculty of Bio- Science, Nagahama Institute of Bio-Science and Technology, Japan Published July 12, 2021 This Book Chapter is a republication of an article published by Atsushi Kurabayashi, et al. at International Journal of Genomics in January 2020. (Keitaro Hemmi, Ryosuke Kakehashi, Chiaki Kambayashi, Louis Du Preez, Leslie Minter, Nobuaki Furuno, Atsushi Kurabayashi. Exceptional Enlargement of the Mitochondrial Genome Results from Distinct Causes in Different Rain Frogs (Anura: Brevicipitidae: Breviceps). International Journal of Genomics. Volume 2020, Article ID 6540343, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6540343) How to cite this book chapter: Ryosuke Kakehashi, Keitaro Hemmi, Chiaki Kambayashi, Atsushi Kurabayashi. Sequencing of Mitochondrial DNA with Long Repetitive Regions and Detection of the Frog Lineages of Large mt Genome Showing Reduction of Purifying Selection. In: Fekadu Gadissa, editor. Prime Archives in Genetics: 2nd Edition. Hyderabad, India: Vide Leaf. 2021. 1 www.videleaf.com Prime Archives in Genetics: 2nd Edition © The Author(s) 2021. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract The mitochondrial (mt) genome of the bushveld rain frog (Breviceps adspersus, family Brevicipitidae, Afrobatrachia) is the largest (28.8 kbp) among the vertebrates investigated to date.
  • Lecture 6 – Integument ‐ Scale • a Scale Is a Small Rigid Plate That Grows out of an Animal’ S Skin to Provide Protection

    Lecture 6 – Integument ‐ Scale • a Scale Is a Small Rigid Plate That Grows out of an Animal’ S Skin to Provide Protection

    Lecture 6 – Integument ‐ Scale • A scale is a small rigid plate that grows out of an animal’s skin to provide protection. • Scales are quite common and have evolved multiple times with varying structure and function. • Scales are generally classified as part of an organism's integumentary system. • There are various types of scales according to shape and to class of animal. • Although the meat and organs of some species of fish are edible by humans, the scales are usually not eaten. Scale structure • Fish scales Fish scales are dermally derived, specifically in the mesoderm. This fact distinguishes them from reptile scales paleontologically. Genetically, the same genes involved in tooth and hair development in mammals are also involved in scale development. Earliest scales – heavily armoured thought to be like Chondrichthyans • Fossil fishes • ion reservoir • osmotic control • protection • Weighting Scale function • Primary function is protection (armor plating) • Hydrodynamics Scales are composed of four basic compounds: ((gmoving from inside to outside in that order) • Lamellar bone • Vascular or spongy bone • Dentine (dermis) and is always associated with enamel. • Acellular enamel (epidermis) • The scales of fish lie in pockets in the dermis and are embeded in connective tissue. • Scales do not stick out of a fish but are covered by the Epithelial layer. • The scales overlap and so form a protective flexible armor capable of withstanding blows and bumping. • In some catfishes and seahorses, scales are replaced by bony plates. • In some other species there are no scales at all. Evolution of scales Placoid scale – (Chondricthyes – cartilagenous fishes) develop in dermis but protrude through epidermis.
  • Blackchin Tilapia (Sarotherodon Melanotheron) Ecological Risk Screening Summary

    Blackchin Tilapia (Sarotherodon Melanotheron) Ecological Risk Screening Summary

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Blackchin Tilapia (Sarotherodon melanotheron) Ecological Risk Screening Summary Web Version – 10/01/2012 Photo: © U.S. Geological Survey From Nico and Neilson (2014). 1 Native Range and Nonindigenous Occurrences Native Range From Nico and Neilson (2014): “Tropical Africa. Brackish estuaries and lagoons from Senegal to Zaire (Trewavas 1983).” Nonindigenous Occurrences From Nico and Neilson (2014): “Established in Florida and Hawaii. Evidence indicates it is spreading rapidly in both fresh and salt water around island of Oahu, Hawaii (Devick 1991b).” “The first documented occurrence of this species in Florida was a specimen gillnetted by commercial fishermen in Hillsborough Bay near Tampa, Hillsborough County, in 1959 (Springer and Finucane 1963). Additional records for the western part of the state indicate that this species is established in brackish and freshwaters in eastern Tampa Bay and in adjoining drainages in Hillsborough County, ranging from the Alafia River south to Cockroach Bay. The species has been recorded from the Alafia River from its mouth up to Lithia Springs; from the Hillsborough River, Bullfrog Creek, the Palm River, and the Little Manatee River; and from various western drainage and irrigation ditches (Springer and Finucane 1963; Finucane and Rinckey 1967; Buntz Sarotherodon melanotheron Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Web Version – 10/01/2012 and Manooch 1969; Lachner et al. 1970; Courtenay et al. 1974; Courtenay and Hensley 1979; Courtenay and Kohler 1986; Lee et al. 1980 et seq.; Courtenay and Stauffer 1990; DNR collections; UF museum specimens). There are two records of this species from the west side of Tampa Bay, in Pinellas County: a collection from Lake Maggiore in St.
  • Evolutionary Relations of Hexanchiformes Deep-Sea Sharks Elucidated by Whole Mitochondrial Genome Sequences

    Evolutionary Relations of Hexanchiformes Deep-Sea Sharks Elucidated by Whole Mitochondrial Genome Sequences

    Hindawi Publishing Corporation BioMed Research International Volume 2013, Article ID 147064, 11 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/147064 Research Article Evolutionary Relations of Hexanchiformes Deep-Sea Sharks Elucidated by Whole Mitochondrial Genome Sequences Keiko Tanaka,1 Takashi Shiina,1 Taketeru Tomita,2 Shingo Suzuki,1 Kazuyoshi Hosomichi,3 Kazumi Sano,4 Hiroyuki Doi,5 Azumi Kono,1 Tomoyoshi Komiyama,6 Hidetoshi Inoko,1 Jerzy K. Kulski,1,7 and Sho Tanaka8 1 Department of Molecular Life Science, Division of Basic Medical Science and Molecular Medicine, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa 259-1143, Japan 2 Fisheries Science Center, The Hokkaido University Museum, 3-1-1 Minato-cho, Hakodate, Hokkaido 041-8611, Japan 3 Division of Human Genetics, Department of Integrated Genetics, National Institute of Genetics, 1111 Yata, Mishima, Shizuoka 411-8540, Japan 4 Division of Science Interpreter Training, Komaba Organization for Education Excellence College of Arts and Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 3-8-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan 5 Shimonoseki Marine Science Museum, 6-1 Arcaport, Shimonoseki, Yamaguchi 750-0036, Japan 6 Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Division of Basic Clinical Science and Public Health, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa 259-1143, Japan 7 Centre for Forensic Science, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6008, Australia 8 Department of Marine Biology, School of Marine Science and Technology, Tokai University, 3-20-1 Orido, Shimizu, Shizuoka 424-8610, Japan Correspondence should be addressed to Takashi Shiina; [email protected] Received 1 March 2013; Accepted 26 July 2013 Academic Editor: Dietmar Quandt Copyright © 2013 Keiko Tanaka et al.
  • Tartu, 26.-27. September 2003 Elga Mark-Kurik Ja Jйri Nemliher Tallinna

    Tartu, 26.-27. September 2003 Elga Mark-Kurik Ja Jйri Nemliher Tallinna

    Eesti geoloogia uue sajandi kiinnisel 38 Tartu, 26.-27. september 2003 VEEL KORD КESK-DEVONI АВА V А КIНТIDEST Elga Mark-Kurik ja Jйri Nemliher Tallinna Tehnikatilikooli Geoloogia Instituut, Estonia pst. 7, 10143 Tallinn ([email protected]; [email protected]) Abava kihid on kauaaegse asendi tottu Kesk- ja Ulem-Devoni piiril pohjustanud rohkem vaidlusi kui mбni teine stratigraafiline tiksus Baltikumi Нibiloigetes. Selle asendiga seoses on neid kihte kasitletud kord iseseisva tiksusena (Liepins 1960, Mark-Kurik 1991), marksa sagedamini aga lasuva, Gauja lademe osana (Kurss et al. 1981, Mark-Kurik 1981) vбi lamava, Burtnieki lademe osana (Kleesment 1995, Kleesment & Mark-Kurik 1997, Vingisaar 1997). Abava kihtide kui Uksuse liitmist selle vбi teise kбrgemat jarku Uksusega on pбhjustanud antud Uksuse piiride, eriti Ulemise piiri ebamaarasus ning halb jalgitavus geoloogilisel kaш·distamisel (Kurik et al. 1989). Viimatimainitud asjaolu tottu loobus Kurss hiljem ( 1992) Abava kui iseseisva stratigraafilise tiksuse kasutamisest. Siiski ei saa mainimata jatta Abava kihtidele spetsiifilist kalafaunat, samuti selle tiksikelementide.laia levikut Ida­ Euroopa platvormil ning naaberaladel ja kaugemalgi ning nimetatud kihtide tllhtsust regioonidevahelise korrelatsiooni aspektist (Mark-Kurik 1991, Ahlberg et al. 1999, Mark-Kurik et al. 1999). Eestis kuuluvad Abava kihid Givet' ladejargu Burtnieki lademesse, moodustades selle kolmanda ehk Ulemise kihikompleksi. Кihtide paksus on 15,1-32 m. Need koosnevad heledavarvilisest peeneteralisest pбimjaskihilisest liivakivist, ka peeneteralisest hallist, rohekas- voi lillakashallist aleuroliidist. Aleuroliiti on antud Uksuses enam kui 25 %. Samuti esineb selles halli voi punakaspruuni savi. Kagu-Eesti puurstidamikes on Abava tasemelt leitud dolokivi ning domeriiti. Mineraloogiliselt on meie Vбhandu jбе aarsed paljandid ning Latis paiknev Lejeji paljand sarnased (Kleesment 1995). Eelpool mainitud paljand (stratottiiip) asub Kuramaal Venta jбgikonnas Abava jбе vasakul kaldal (suudmest 4 km Ulesvoolu) Lejeji talu vastas.
  • Morphology, Phylogeny, and Evolution of Diadectidae (Cotylosauria: Diadectomorpha)

    Morphology, Phylogeny, and Evolution of Diadectidae (Cotylosauria: Diadectomorpha)

    Morphology, Phylogeny, and Evolution of Diadectidae (Cotylosauria: Diadectomorpha) by Richard Kissel A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy Graduate Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto © Copyright by Richard Kissel 2010 Morphology, Phylogeny, and Evolution of Diadectidae (Cotylosauria: Diadectomorpha) Richard Kissel Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto 2010 Abstract Based on dental, cranial, and postcranial anatomy, members of the Permo-Carboniferous clade Diadectidae are generally regarded as the earliest tetrapods capable of processing high-fiber plant material; presented here is a review of diadectid morphology, phylogeny, taxonomy, and paleozoogeography. Phylogenetic analyses support the monophyly of Diadectidae within Diadectomorpha, the sister-group to Amniota, with Limnoscelis as the sister-taxon to Tseajaia + Diadectidae. Analysis of diadectid interrelationships of all known taxa for which adequate specimens and information are known—the first of its kind conducted—positions Ambedus pusillus as the sister-taxon to all other forms, with Diadectes sanmiguelensis, Orobates pabsti, Desmatodon hesperis, Diadectes absitus, and (Diadectes sideropelicus + Diadectes tenuitectes + Diasparactus zenos) representing progressively more derived taxa in a series of nested clades. In light of these results, it is recommended herein that the species Diadectes sanmiguelensis be referred to the new genus
  • Geological Survey of Ohio

    Geological Survey of Ohio

    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF OHIO. VOL. I.—PART II. PALÆONTOLOGY. SECTION II. DESCRIPTIONS OF FOSSIL FISHES. BY J. S. NEWBERRY. Digital version copyrighted ©2012 by Don Chesnut. THE CLASSIFICATION AND GEOLOGICAL DISTRIBUTION OF OUR FOSSIL FISHES. So little is generally known in regard to American fossil fishes, that I have thought the notes which I now give upon some of them would be more interesting and intelligible if those into whose hands they will fall could have a more comprehensive view of this branch of palæontology than they afford. I shall therefore preface the descriptions which follow with a few words on the geological distribution of our Palæozoic fishes, and on the relations which they sustain to fossil forms found in other countries, and to living fishes. This seems the more necessary, as no summary of what is known of our fossil fishes has ever been given, and the literature of the subject is so scattered through scientific journals and the proceedings of learned societies, as to be practically inaccessible to most of those who will be readers of this report. I. THE ZOOLOGICAL RELATIONS OF OUR FOSSIL FISHES. To the common observer, the class of Fishes seems to be well defined and quite distin ct from all the other groups o f vertebrate animals; but the comparative anatomist finds in certain unusual and aberrant forms peculiarities of structure which link the Fishes to the Invertebrates below and Amphibians above, in such a way as to render it difficult, if not impossible, to draw the lines sharply between these great groups.