DOCSLIB.ORG

373390A0.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
373390A0.Pdf NEWS AND VIEWS -DAEDALUS---------, Rolling foam Tulerpeton 363 Ventastega 1 THE hovercraft supports itself on a c ~ Acanthostf ga lcht'}fostega 1 cushion of air that leaks away so rapidly Ill that it has to be replaced all the time by '2 I ~-' c 'I I ,' ,,' continuous fast pumping. Daedalus now Gl . E Hynerpeton proposes a hovercraft pumped not with Metaxygnathus ' ' ~, ~ '\ ' ,' air, but with detergentfoam. ' ,,, I',, Foam, he reckons, acts like a gas that I .. I can sustain a pressure gradient. Every & \ I film wall in the foam has a pressure 368 Elglnerpetontldae \ I \ ,, difference across it; the sharper the film I \ ) curvature the greater this pressure drop. \ I A foam of many small bubbles is a \ I \I multitude of sharply curved films in Eusthenopteron Panderichthys ," series, and can contain quite a large pressure. Special detergentfoams have already been proposed to impede rioters 377 ' \ \\ I '~============~========~=== \ \ I and reduce the force of terrorist bombs. \ \ I With a little development, they should be \ \I able to support a hovercraft. ' \ I , Daedalus's foam craft will be \ I \ I essentially a flat platform with a hole in \ I the middle. Into the hole will be pumped, \I not pure air, but detergentfoam. Under 381 \ the craft, it will spread out into a soft FIG . 2 The fish-amphibian transition. Temporal distribution of advanced osteolepiform fish and supporting cushion which will leak out Devonian amphibians. Circles indicate time of occurrence of known fossils; dashed lines show round the edges only slowly. A very small possible relationships as discussed by Ahlberg\ and the numbers indicate ages in millions pump will keep the vehicle foamborne. of years. The foam craft could drive itself along in several ways. It could use the usual indicate that skeletal features that were The increase of information on the inefficientairscrews. A seagoing once thought to be unique to land verte­ fish-amphibian transition emphasizes the foam craft could project a propeller shaft brates appeared stepwise in a succession continued lack of knowledge of the next down through the foam into the water. On of aquatic, semiaquatic and semiterrest­ crucial step in the evolution of land verte­ land it might use wheels or a caterpillar rial vertebrates, while features commonly brates. In contrast to the variety of well­ track, touching the ground but not attributed to fis h were retained in animals known Upper Devonian tetrapods, no loading it with much weight. While fitting classified as amphibians. This point is amphibians have yet been described from the craft for its most obvious use­ highlighted by evidence, provided by the succeeding 20 million years, during moving heavy loads over rough or Coates and Clack8 , that important fea­ which time all the main groups of later marshy country-this would destroy tures of the tetrapod hands and feet in land vertebrates diverged. 0 much of its elegance. But Daedalus Acanthostega may have evolved among hopes that the foam itself can be made to primarily aquatic animals. The distribu­ Robert Carroll is in the Department of exert a tractive force. By angling the jets tion of primitive and derived characters Biology, McGill University, 1205 Dr Penfield delivering the foam, or spinning small differs from lineage to lineage, showing Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A paddle-wheels within it, it might be given that many features were evolved or lost 181. a rotatory swirl which would turn it into a convergently. As in the case of other sortoffluid caterpillar track. The more major transitions in vertebrates, such as 1. Ahlberg, P E. Nature 373, 420- 425 (1995). 2. Ahlberg, P. E. Nature 354, 298- 301 (1991). viscous the foam, the greater traction it 12 13 the origin of birds and mammals • , the 3. Vorobyeva . E. I. Trudypaleont. lnst. 163, 1-239 could exert, but at the cost of higher convergent origin of derived features in (1977) 4. Vorobyeva. E. l. & Schultze. H.-P. in Orig!n ofHigher viscous losses. Careful optimization wil different lineages makes it difficult to Groups of Tetrapods: Controversy and Consensus (eds be needed. establish specific relationships, or to agree Schultze, H.-P. & Trueb, L.) 68-109 (Cornell Univ. Press, Atfirst Daedalus imagined that his Ithaca, 1991). on objective criteria to differentiate tetra­ 5. Clack,J. A. Nature 369, 392- 394 (1994). foam craft would leave a glistening trail of pods from their fish ancestors. 6. Coates, M.l. &Clack. J. A. Nature 347, 66-69 foam behind it, like some giant mollusc. Although all these new data make it (1990). 7. Coates. M. I. & Clack. J. A. Nature 352, 234- 235 But he is now designing a simple foam­ more difficult to classify species involved (1991). sucker atthe back to scoop up this trail in the transition between fish and amphi­ 8. Coates. M. l. &Clack, J. A. 1nProc. VII• Symposium International Etude des Vertebres lnff!fieurs (in the and recycle it. This would almost bians, they greatly illuminate the evol­ press). eliminate losses of water and detergent, utionary processes involved. They dem­ 9. Daeschler. E. B.. Shubin, N.H., Thomson, making the craft nearly self-contained. K. s. T. &Amaral, W. W. Science 265, 639--642 onstrate that the complete transition, (1994). Calmly and smoothly, with no blasts of air from early osteolepiform sarcopterygians 10. Lebedev. 0 . A. &Clack, J. A. Palaeontology36. 721- 734 and no roaring, foamcraft will glide to primarily terrestrial amphibians may (1993). 11. Thomson, K. S. T. in MajorFeaturesofVertebrate across water, along beaches, over marsh have extended over at least 15 million Evolution (ed . Spencer, R.) 85-107 (Paleontological and moor and even along ordinary roads. years. The fossil record is not yet well Society, Dept Geol. Sci .. Univ. Tennessee. Knoxville, 1994). Their cushion of churning detergent enough known to establish rates of evol­ 12. Ostrom,J. H. in MajorFeaturesofVertebrateEvolution foam could make them ideal for street ution, but the observed changes may be (ed . Spencer. R. ).160- 177 (Pa leontological cleaning duties. Pedestrians run over by Society. Dept Geol. Sci. , Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville, attributed to progressive adaptation to 1994). a foamcraftwould not be injured, but increasingly shallow water, accompanied 13. Hopson, J. A. in Major Features ofVertebrate Evolution merely subjected to a brisk Jacuzzi by repeated cladogenesis (branching of (ed. Spencer. R. ) 190-219 (Paleontological Society, DeptGeol. Sci., Univ. Tennessee, Knoxville, experience. David Jones evolutionary lineages). 1994). 390 NATURE · VOL 373 · 2 FEBRUARY 1995 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On the Pelvic Girdle and Pin of Eusthenopteron. by Edwin S
    PELVIC GIRDLE AND D'lN . OF EUSTHKNOPfERON. 311 On the Pelvic Girdle and Pin of Eusthenopteron. By Edwin S. Goodrich, M.A., Fellow of Mertoa College, Oxford. With Plate 16. 1 THROUGH the kindness of Mr. A. Smith Woodward, I have recently had the opportunity of looking through the fossil fish acquired by the British Museum since the Cata- logue was published. Amongst these was found a specimen of Eusthenopteron foordi, Whit., showing the endo- skeleton of the pelvic girdle and fin, of which I here give a description. The interest attaching to this fossil is con- siderable, since, of all the numerous extinct fish usually included in the group " Crossopterygii," it is the first and only one in which the parts of the skeleton of the pelvic girdle and its fin have been found complete and in their natural relations.2 The specimen (P. 6794) of which both the slab and the counterslab have been preserved, comes from the Upper Devonian of Canada. In it can be made out the skeleton of the pelvic girdle and fin of the right side, in a fairly com- plete and well-preserved condition, as represented in PI. 16, fig. 1, natural size. 1 To Mr. Smith Woodward I am also indebted for constant help when working in his Department. a The skeleton of the pelvic fin of Megalichthys has to some extent been made known by Cope, Miall, and Wellburn (2, 5, and 9), and the essential structure of that of Eusthenopteron has been briefly described by Traquair (7). VOL. 45, FART 2.—NEW SKKIES.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Osteolepidid Fish From
    Rea. West. Aust. MU8. 1985, 12(3): 361-377 ANew Osteolepidid Fish from the Upper Devonian Gogo Formation, Western Australia J.A. Long* Abstract A new osteolepidid crossopterygian, Gogonasus andrewsi gen. et sp. nov., is des­ cribed from a single fronto-ethmoidal shield and associated ethmosphenoid, from the Late Devonian (Frasnian) Gogo Formation, Western Australia. Gogonasus is is distinguished from other osteolepids by the shape and proportions of the fronto­ ethmoidal shield, absence of palatal fenestrae, well developed basipterygoid pro­ cesses and moderately broad parasphenoid. The family Osteolepididae is found to be paraphyletic, with Gogonasus being regarded as a plesiomorphic osteolepidid at a similar level of organisation to Thursius. Introduction Much has been published on the well-preserved Late Devonian fish fauna from the Gogo Formation, Western Australia, although to date all the papers describing fish have been on placoderms (Miles 1971; Miles and Dennis 1979; Dennis and Miles 1979-1983; Young 1984), palaeoniscoids (Gardiner 1973, 1984; Gardiner and Bartram 1977) or dipnoans (Miles 1977; Campbell and Barwick 1982a, 1982b, 1983, 1984a). This paper describes the only osteolepiform from the fauna (Gardiner and Miles 1975), a small snout with associated braincase, ANU 21885, housed in the Geology Department, Australian National University. The specimen, collected by the Australian National University on the 1967 Gogo Expedition, was prepared by Dr S.M. Andrews (Royal Scottish Museum) and later returned to the ANU. Onychodus is the only other crossopterygian in the fauna. In its proportions and palatal structure the new specimen provides some additional new points of the anatomy of osteolepiforms. Few Devonian crossopte­ rygians are known from Australia, and so the specimen is significant in having resemblances to typical Northern Hemisphere species.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Tetrapod Relationships Revisited
    Biol. Rev. (2003), 78, pp. 251–345. f Cambridge Philosophical Society 251 DOI: 10.1017/S1464793102006103 Printed in the United Kingdom Early tetrapod relationships revisited MARCELLO RUTA1*, MICHAEL I. COATES1 and DONALD L. J. QUICKE2 1 The Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy, The University of Chicago, 1027 East 57th Street, Chicago, IL 60637-1508, USA ([email protected]; [email protected]) 2 Department of Biology, Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire SL57PY, UK and Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW75BD, UK ([email protected]) (Received 29 November 2001; revised 28 August 2002; accepted 2 September 2002) ABSTRACT In an attempt to investigate differences between the most widely discussed hypotheses of early tetrapod relation- ships, we assembled a new data matrix including 90 taxa coded for 319 cranial and postcranial characters. We have incorporated, where possible, original observations of numerous taxa spread throughout the major tetrapod clades. A stem-based (total-group) definition of Tetrapoda is preferred over apomorphy- and node-based (crown-group) definitions. This definition is operational, since it is based on a formal character analysis. A PAUP* search using a recently implemented version of the parsimony ratchet method yields 64 shortest trees. Differ- ences between these trees concern: (1) the internal relationships of aı¨stopods, the three selected species of which form a trichotomy; (2) the internal relationships of embolomeres, with Archeria
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of Basal Tetrapoda
    Stuart S. Sumida Biology 342 Phylogeny of Basal Tetrapoda The group of bony fishes that gave rise to land-dwelling vertebrates and their descendants (Tetrapoda, or colloquially, “tetrapods”) was the lobe-finned fishes, or Sarcopterygii. Sarcoptrygii includes coelacanths (which retain one living form, Latimeria), lungfish, and crossopterygians. The transition from sarcopterygian fishes to stem tetrapods proceeded through a series of groups – not all of which are included here. There was no sharp and distinct transition, rather it was a continuum from very tetrapod-like fishes to very fish-like tetrapods. SARCOPTERYGII – THE LOBE-FINNED FISHES Includes •Actinista (including Coelacanths) •Dipnoi (lungfishes) •Crossopterygii Crossopterygians include “tetrapods” – 4- legged land-dwelling vertebrates. The Actinista date back to the Devonian. They have very well developed lobed-fins. There remains one livnig representative of the group, the coelacanth, Latimeria chalumnae. A lungfish The Crossopterygii include numerous representatives, the best known of which include Eusthenopteron (pictured here) and Panderichthyes. Panderichthyids were the most tetrapod-like of the sarcopterygian fishes. Panderichthyes – note the lack of dorsal fine, but retention of tail fin. Coelacanths Lungfish Rhizodontids Eusthenopteron Panderichthyes Tiktaalik Ventastega Acanthostega Ichthyostega Tulerpeton Whatcheeria Pederpes More advanced amphibians Tiktaalik roseae – a lobe-finned fish intermediate between typical sarcopterygians and basal tetrapods. Mid to Late Devonian; 375 million years old. The back end of Tiktaalik’s skull is intermediate between fishes and tetrapods. Tiktaalik is a fish with wrist bones, yet still retaining fin rays. The posture of Tiktaalik’s fin/limb is intermediate between that of fishes an tetrapods. Coelacanths Lungfish Rhizodontids Eusthenopteron Panderichthyes Tiktaalik Ventastega Acanthostega Ichthyostega Tulerpeton Whatcheeria Pederpes More advanced amphibians Reconstructions of the basal tetrapod Ventastega.
    [Show full text]
  • From Sea to Slime: Evolution of Amphibians Late Devonian: Rhipidistians an Important Link: Tooth Structure Skeletal Modification
    Late Devonian: Rhipidistians From Sea to Slime: Evolution of Amphibians Lungs were developed in two groups of lobe-finned fishes - Rhipidistians and lungfishes . The Rhipidistians are considered to be the ultimate ancestors of later land animals. Rhipidistians such as Eusthenopteron had evolved "land animal-like features": Eusthenopteron Skeletal Modifications An Important Link: Tooth Structure Labyrinthodont tooth Labyrinthodont tooth of Rhipidistian fish of early amphibian (Eusthenopteron) (Archegosaurus) Labyrinthodont tooth structure (with complexly infolded enamel) is shared between Rhipidistian fishes and the earliest amphibians. This strongly supports a close relationship between the two groups. 1 Late Devonian: Ichthyostega and Acanthostega -Ichthyostega was a cross between a fish and an amphibian -Ichthyostega had legs and walked and was a true tetrapod. -With true legs, it could live on land for extended periods. -The primitive amphibians like Ichthyostega had a special kind of skin that helped them retain bodily fluids and deter desiccation. -Stronger skeletons allowed the primitive amphibians to live more comfortably with the increased gravity on land. -Animals like Ichthyostega used their limbs for locomotion and their tails for balance. Ichthyostega Carboniferous to Permian Evolution of neck and ear · Amphibian nostrils became increasingly functional for breathing air. · Amphibians evolved "hands" and "feet" with five digits. · Amphibian tails became reduced in size. · Amphibian backbones grew stronger (this enabled amphibian bodies to grow bigger). · Amphibians obtained eardrums. -Fishes need limbs to support bodies and ears to hear sounds in the air. -Fins changed to limbs -Several bones of the skull changed to the shoulder bones -Tongue cartilage (part of the jaw in fish) became an ear bone.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting a Leg up on Land
    GETTING A LEG UP in the almost four billion years since life on earth oozed into existence, evolution has generated some marvelous metamorphoses. One of the most spectacular is surely that which produced terrestrial creatures ON bearing limbs, fingers and toes from water-bound fish with fins. Today this group, the tetrapods, encompasses everything from birds and their dinosaur ancestors to lizards, snakes, turtles, frogs and mammals, in- cluding us. Some of these animals have modified or lost their limbs, but their common ancestor had them—two in front and two in back, where LAND fins once flicked instead. Recent fossil discoveries cast The replacement of fins with limbs was a crucial step in this transfor- mation, but it was by no means the only one. As tetrapods ventured onto light on the evolution of shore, they encountered challenges that no vertebrate had ever faced be- four-limbed animals from fish fore—it was not just a matter of developing legs and walking away. Land is a radically different medium from water, and to conquer it, tetrapods BY JENNIFER A. CLACK had to evolve novel ways to breathe, hear, and contend with gravity—the list goes on. Once this extreme makeover reached completion, however, the land was theirs to exploit. Until about 15 years ago, paleontologists understood very little about the sequence of events that made up the transition from fish to tetrapod. We knew that tetrapods had evolved from fish with fleshy fins akin to today’s lungfish and coelacanth, a relation first proposed by American paleontologist Edward D.
    [Show full text]
  • I Ecomorphological Change in Lobe-Finned Fishes (Sarcopterygii
    Ecomorphological change in lobe-finned fishes (Sarcopterygii): disparity and rates by Bryan H. Juarez A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Ecology and Evolutionary Biology) in the University of Michigan 2015 Master’s Thesis Committee: Assistant Professor Lauren C. Sallan, University of Pennsylvania, Co-Chair Assistant Professor Daniel L. Rabosky, Co-Chair Associate Research Scientist Miriam L. Zelditch i © Bryan H. Juarez 2015 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the Rabosky Lab, David W. Bapst, Graeme T. Lloyd and Zerina Johanson for helpful discussions on methodology, Lauren C. Sallan, Miriam L. Zelditch and Daniel L. Rabosky for their dedicated guidance on this study and the London Natural History Museum for courteously providing me with access to specimens. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii LIST OF FIGURES iv LIST OF APPENDICES v ABSTRACT vi SECTION I. Introduction 1 II. Methods 4 III. Results 9 IV. Discussion 16 V. Conclusion 20 VI. Future Directions 21 APPENDICES 23 REFERENCES 62 iv LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES TABLE/FIGURE II. Cranial PC-reduced data 6 II. Post-cranial PC-reduced data 6 III. PC1 and PC2 Cranial and Post-cranial Morphospaces 11-12 III. Cranial Disparity Through Time 13 III. Post-cranial Disparity Through Time 14 III. Cranial/Post-cranial Disparity Through Time 15 v LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A. Aquatic and Semi-aquatic Lobe-fins 24 B. Species Used In Analysis 34 C. Cranial and Post-Cranial Landmarks 37 D. PC3 and PC4 Cranial and Post-cranial Morphospaces 38 E. PC1 PC2 Cranial Morphospaces 39 1-2.
    [Show full text]
  • A Second Species of Tristichopterus (Sarcopterygii: Tristichopteridae), from the Upper Devonian of the Baltic Region
    Memoirs of the Queensland Museum | Nature 56 (2) © Queensland Museum 2013 PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia Phone 06 7 3840 7555 Fax 06 7 3846 1226 Email [email protected] Website www.qm.qld.gov.au National Library of Australia card number ISSN 0079-8835 NOTE Papers published in this volume and in all previous volumes of the Memoirs of the Queensland Museum may be reproduced for scientific research, individual study or other educational purposes. Properly acknowledged quotations may be made but queries regarding the republication of any papers should be addressed to the Director. Copies of the journal can be purchased from the Queensland Museum Shop. A Guide to Authors is displayed at the Queensland Museum web site www.qm.qld.gov.au A Queensland Government Project Typeset at the Queensland Museum A second species of Tristichopterus (Sarcopterygii: Tristichopteridae), from the Upper Devonian of the Baltic Region Peter J. BISHOP Queensland Museum, Ancient Environments Program, 122 Gerler Rd, Hendra, Qld 4011 Citation: Bishop, P.J. 2012 06 30. A second species of Tristichopterus (Sarcopterygii: Tristichopteridae), from the Upper Devonian of the Baltic Region. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum – Nature 56(2): 305–309. Brisbane. ISSN 0079–8835. Accepted: 14 November 2012. ABSTRACT A review of the osteology of the tristichopterid sarcopterygian Eusthenopteron kurshi Zupiņš, 2008, from the Lower Frasnian of Latvia, indicates that it should be placed in the genus Tristichopterus, and a new combination Tristichopterus kurshi Zupiņš is proposed. The features that support this include: the number of coronoid fangs, proportions of the coronoids and the skull roof, and the relatively small epichordal lobe of the caudal fin.
    [Show full text]
  • Bones, Molecules, and Crown- Tetrapod Origins
    TTEC11 05/06/2003 11:47 AM Page 224 Chapter 11 Bones, molecules, and crown- tetrapod origins Marcello Ruta and Michael I. Coates ABSTRACT The timing of major events in the evolutionary history of early tetrapods is discussed in the light of a new cladistic analysis. The phylogenetic implications of this are com- pared with those of the most widely discussed, recent hypotheses of basal tetrapod interrelationships. Regardless of the sequence of cladogenetic events and positions of various Early Carboniferous taxa, these fossil-based analyses imply that the tetrapod crown-group had originated by the mid- to late Viséan. However, such estimates of the lissamphibian–amniote divergence fall short of the date implied by molecular studies. Uneven rates of molecular substitutions might be held responsible for the mismatch between molecular and morphological approaches, but the patchy quality of the fossil record also plays an important role. Morphology-based estimates of evolutionary chronology are highly sensitive to new fossil discoveries, the interpreta- tion and dating of such material, and the impact on tree topologies. Furthermore, the earliest and most primitive taxa are almost always known from very few fossil localities, with the result that these are likely to exert a disproportionate influence. Fossils and molecules should be treated as complementary approaches, rather than as conflicting and irreconcilable methods. Introduction Modern tetrapods have a long evolutionary history dating back to the Late Devonian. Their origins are rooted into a diverse, paraphyletic assemblage of lobe-finned bony fishes known as the ‘osteolepiforms’ (Cloutier and Ahlberg 1996; Janvier 1996; Ahlberg and Johanson 1998; Jeffery 2001; Johanson and Ahlberg 2001; Zhu and Schultze 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Beznosov Et Al Maintext Pervomayskaya
    Morphology of the earliest reconstructable tetrapod Parmastega aelidae Pavel A. Beznosov1, Jennifer A. Clack2, Ervīns Lukševičs3, Marcello Ruta4, Per Erik Ahlberg5 1 Institute of Geology, Komi Science Centre, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Pervomayskaya st. 54, Syktyvkar, 167982, Russia 2 University Museum of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing St., Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK 3 University of Latvia, Raiņa bulvāris 19, Rīga, LV-1586, Latvia 4 School of Life Sciences, University of Lincoln, Joseph Banks Laboratories, Green Lane, Lincoln LN6 7DL, UK 5 Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University, Norbyvägen 18A, SE-752 36, Uppsala, Sweden The diversity of Devonian tetrapods has increased dramatically in recent decades, but consists mostly of tantalising fragments. The interpretative framework is still dominated by the near-complete Ichthyostega and Acanthostega, with supporting roles for the less complete but partly reconstructable Ventastega and Tulerpeton. All four are of late Famennian age, 10 million years younger than the earliest tetrapod fragments and nearly 30 million years younger than the oldest footprints. Here we describe a tetrapod from the earliest Famennian of Russia, Parmastega aelidae gen. et sp. nov., represented by three-dimensional material that allows reconstruction of the skull and dermal shoulder girdle. Its raised orbits, lateral line canals and weakly ossified postcranial skeleton suggest a largely aquatic, surface-cruising animal. In Bayesian and parsimony-based phylogenetic analyses the majority of trees place Parmastega as sister group to all other tetrapods. The rate of discovery of Devonian tetrapods accelerated greatly during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. The description of Ichthyostega in 1932 was followed by Acanthostega in 1952, Metaxygnathus in 1977 and Tulerpeton in 1984; all other genera (Hynerpeton, Ventastega, Elginerpeton, Obruchevichthys, Densignathus, Sinostega, Jakubsonia, Ymeria, Webererpeton, Tutusius, Umzantsia) have been 1 described or identified as tetrapods since 19941-13.
    [Show full text]
  • Sarcopterygii, Tetrapodomorpha
    Tristichopterids (Sarcopterygii, Tetrapodomorpha) from the Upper Devonian tetrapod-bearing locality of Strud (Belgium, upper Famennian), with phylogenetic and paleobiogeographic considerations Sébastien Olive, Yann Leroy, Edward Daeschler, Jason Downs, S. Ladevèze, Gaël Clément To cite this version: Sébastien Olive, Yann Leroy, Edward Daeschler, Jason Downs, S. Ladevèze, et al.. Tristi- chopterids (Sarcopterygii, Tetrapodomorpha) from the Upper Devonian tetrapod-bearing locality of Strud (Belgium, upper Famennian), with phylogenetic and paleobiogeographic considerations. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, 2020, 40 (1), pp.e1768105. 10.1080/02724634.2020.1768105. hal-03099746 HAL Id: hal-03099746 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03099746 Submitted on 6 Jan 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology: For Review Only Tristichopterids (Sarcopterygii, Tetrapodomorpha) from the Late Devonian tetrapod-bearing locality of Strud (Belgium, late Famennian), with phylogenetic
    [Show full text]
  • Shipman (2006)
    A reprint from American Scientist the magazine of Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society This reprint is provided for personal and noncommercial use. For any other use, please send a request to Permissions, American Scientist, P.O. Box 13975, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, U.S.A., or by electronic mail to [email protected]. ©Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society and other rightsholders Marginalia Missing Links and Found Links Pat Shipman hough missing links are of- sion enhanced by its four-to-nine-foot Tten talked about, it’s the found In and out of the length. Its skeleton differs markedly ones that hold a special place in my from those of crocodiles or alligators, heart. Found links are fossils that il- though, despite the overall resemblance lustrate major transitions during evo- water, transitional in body shape. Tiktaalik’s front fins hold lutionary history. More than that, such the biggest surprise. Each was a sort of creatures offer unexpected glimpses of forms from the fossil half-fin, half-leg containing the bony the never-predictable twists and turns elements found in a limb—with a func- taken by evolution. Their discovery record illuminate tional wrist, elbow and shoulder—and and surprise bring sheer fun to pale- yet retaining the bony “rays” of a fish ontology and biology. the nuts and bolts of fin. According to team member Farish I have always loved the iconic Arch- Jenkins, Jr., of Harvard University, the aeopteryx, a beautiful fossil recognized evolution front fins were sturdy enough to sup- in 1860 that unmistakably combines port the creature in very shallow water features of two major groups of ani- or on land for brief trips.
    [Show full text]