East Tennessee State University Digital Commons@ East
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 5-2011 On The rC anial Osteology of Eremiascincus and Its Use For Identification. William B. Gelnaw East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the Paleontology Commons Recommended Citation Gelnaw, William B., "On The rC anial Osteology of Eremiascincus and Its Use For Identification." (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1294. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1294 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]. On the Cranial Osteology of Eremiascincus, and Its Use for Identification ________________________________________ 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 Sciences in Biology _______________________________________ by William B. Gelnaw May 2011 _______________________________________ James Mead, Chair Blaine Schubert Stephen Wallace Keywords: Squamata, Morphometrics, Lizards, Skull ABSTRACT On the Cranial Osteology of Eremiascincus, and Its Use for Identification by William B. Gelnaw A persistent problem for Australian paleontology has been a lack of diagnostic characters for identifying lizard fossils. Eremiascincus is one of the most widespread genera in Australia, so it was examined for distinguishing features and how it fits into a model of skink evolution. Skulls of Eremiascincus were examined within five separate contexts: 1) a description of the cranial osteology, 2) a qualitative comparison of individual cranial elements of Eremiascincus to closely related Ctenotus, 3) a description of the cranial allometry in Eremiascincus using linear morphometrics, 4) using cranial morphometrics of skinks to deduce their phylogeny, and 5) using geometric morphometrics to distinguish between individual elements of Eremiascincus and Ctenotus. Although linear morphometrics is adept at describing allometric changes to the skull during ontogeny, it only displayed a phylogenetic signal for small, closely related groups. Also, geometric morphometrics was just as capable distinguishing Eremiascincus from Ctenotus as qualitative characters. 2 CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................. 2 LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ 6 LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 9 A Historical Review of Australian Fossil Skinks and the Systematic Status of Eremiascincus (Squamata: Scincidae) .................................................................................. 9 2. THE CRANIAL OSTEOLOGY OF EREMIASCINCUS ................................................................ 18 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 18 Materials and Methods .............................................................................................................. 21 Results .............................................................................................................................................. 24 Skull Roof and Suspensorium ......................................................................................... 24 Palatal Complex .................................................................................................................... 47 Neurocranium ....................................................................................................................... 56 Teeth ......................................................................................................................................... 64 Lower Jaw ............................................................................................................................... 66 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 78 Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... 79 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 80 3. COMPARING THE CRANIAL OSTEOLOGY OF TWO AUSTRALIAN SPHENOMORPHUS GROUP SKINKS: EREMIASCINCUS AND CTENOTUS .......................................................... 83 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 84 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................................. 86 Results ............................................................................................................................................. 110 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 120 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 122 4. ANALYZING SKULL SHAPE THROUGH ONTOGENY IN EREMIASCINCUS USING TRADITIONAL MORPHOMETRICS ........................................................................................... 124 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 124 Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 126 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................. 129 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 135 5. ASSESSING THE PHYLOGENETIC SIGNAL OF SKULL SHAPE IN SKINKS FROM A MORPHOMETRIC DATASET ..................................................................................................... 138 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 138 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................................. 142 Results ............................................................................................................................................. 148 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 164 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 168 6. USING GEOMETRIC MORPHOMETRICS TO DISTINGUISH INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTS OF EREMIASCINCUS FROM CTENOTUS .......................................................................................... 174 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 174 Materials and Methods ............................................................................................................. 176 Landmark Placement ......................................................................................................... 177 Statistical Analyses ............................................................................................................. 189 Results ............................................................................................................................................. 191 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 205 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................... 213 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 216 APPENDIXES…............................................................................................................................................. 227 APPENDIX A: Key to Abbreviations ............................................................................................ 227 APPENDIX B: Dataset Used in the Cladistic Analysis ........................................................... 231 APPENDIX C: Linear Measurements of Lizard Skulls .......................................................... 236 VITA……………. .............................................................................................................................................