The Nature of Aspidin and the Evolutionary Origin of Bone
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Polskaakademianauk Instytutpaleobiologii
POLSKA AKADEMIA NAUK INSTYTUT PALEOBIOLOGII im. Romana Kozłowskiego SILURIAN AND DEVONIAN HETEROSTRACI FROM POLAND AND HYDRODYNAMIC PERFORMANCE OF PSAMMOSTEIDS Sylurskie i dewońskie Heterostraci z Polski oraz efektywność hydrodynamiczna psammosteidów Marek Dec Dissertation for degree of doctor of Earth and related environmental sciences, presented at the Institute of Paleobiology of Polish Academy of Sciences Rozprawa doktorska wykonana w Instytucie Paleobiologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk pod kierunkiem prof. dr hab. Magdaleny Borsuk-Białynickiej w celu uzyskania stopnia doktora w dyscyplinie Nauki o Ziemi oraz środowisku Warszawa 2020 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………………………….….... 3 STRESZCZENIE………………………………………………………………….....….. 4 SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………….…….. 8 CHAPTER I…………………………………………………………………………….. 13 TRAQUAIRASPIDIDAE AND CYATHASPIDIDAE (HETEROSTRACI) FROM LOWER DEVONIAN OF POLAND CHAPTER II……………………………………………………………………….…… 24 A NEW TOLYPELEPIDID (AGNATHA, HETEROSTRACI) FROM THE LATE SILURIAN OF POLAND CHAPTER III…………………………………………………………………………... 41 REVISION OF THE EARLY DEVONIAN PSAMMOSTEIDS FROM THE “PLACODERM SANDSTONE” - IMPLICATIONS FOR THEIR BODY SHAPE RECONSTRUCTION CHAPTER IV……………………………………………………………………….….. 82 NEW MIDDLE DEVONIAN (GIVETIAN) PSAMMOSTEID FROM HOLY CROSS MOUNTAINS (POLAND) CHAPTER V……………………………………………………………………………109 HYDRODYNAMIC PERFORMANCE OF PSAMMOSTEIDS: NEW INSIGHTS FROM COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS SIMULATIONS 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost I would like to say thank you to my supervisor Magdalena -
UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Los Angeles
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Evolution of the boxfish carapace: functional consequences of shape A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biology by Tina Ashley Marcroft 2015 ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS Evolution of the boxfish carapace: functional consequences of shape by Tina Ashley Marcroft Master of Science in Biology University of California, Los Angeles, 2015 Professor Michael Edward Alfaro, Chair Boxfishes are a group of heavily armored Tetraodontiform fishes that are highly variable in shape. Disparification of shape could be driven by a simple performance trade-off between its two hypothesized primary functions: protection from predation and maneuverability. Alternatively, disparification could be driven by many-to-one mapping of shape to performance, where a relaxation in morphological constraint where many of morphologies have the same performance. We tested this by isolating the major features of the boxfish carapace shape and tested for their correlation to performance, as well as for a negative correlation between performances. We found that some features were correlated but very weakly, and that the two performances did trade-off but also weakly. This weak correlation primarily suggests that many- to-one mapping of shape to performance is driving disparification, which was unobserved in continuous 3D shape systems until this study. ii The thesis of Tina Ashley Marcroft is approved. Blaire Van Valkenburgh David K. Jacobs Michael Edward Alfaro, Committee Chair University of California, Los Angeles 2015 iii I dedicate this thesis to Carrie Umetsu, Joseph Aprill, Mai Nguyen, Princess Gilbert, Francisca Wufu, Deb Pires, Jonathan Chang, Herbert Icasiano, and many others, without whose unwavering emotional and professional support I would not have completed this text. -
Categorical Versus Geometric Morphometric Approaches To
[Palaeontology, 2020, pp. 1–16] CATEGORICAL VERSUS GEOMETRIC MORPHOMETRIC APPROACHES TO CHARACTERIZING THE EVOLUTION OF MORPHOLOGICAL DISPARITY IN OSTEOSTRACI (VERTEBRATA, STEM GNATHOSTOMATA) by HUMBERTO G. FERRON 1,2* , JENNY M. GREENWOOD1, BRADLEY DELINE3,CARLOSMARTINEZ-PEREZ 1,2,HECTOR BOTELLA2, ROBERT S. SANSOM4,MARCELLORUTA5 and PHILIP C. J. DONOGHUE1,* 1School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Life Sciences Building, Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TQ, UK; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 2Institut Cavanilles de Biodiversitat i Biologia Evolutiva, Universitat de Valencia, C/ Catedratic Jose Beltran Martınez 2, 46980, Paterna, Valencia, Spain; [email protected], [email protected] 3Department of Geosciences, University of West Georgia, Carrollton, GA 30118, USA; [email protected] 4School of Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PT, UK; [email protected] 5School of Life Sciences, University of Lincoln, Riseholme Hall, Lincoln, LN2 2LG, UK; [email protected] *Corresponding authors Typescript received 2 October 2019; accepted in revised form 27 February 2020 Abstract: Morphological variation (disparity) is almost aspects of morphology. Phylomorphospaces reveal conver- invariably characterized by two non-mutually exclusive gence towards a generalized ‘horseshoe’-shaped cranial mor- approaches: (1) quantitatively, through geometric morpho- phology and two strong trends involving major groups of metrics; -
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. -
THE CLASSIFICATION and EVOLUTION of the HETEROSTRACI Since 1858, When Huxley Demonstrated That in the Histological Struc
ACTA PALAEONT OLOGICA POLONICA Vol. VII 1 9 6 2 N os. 1-2 L. BEVERLY TARLO THE CLASSIFICATION AND EVOLUTION OF THE HETEROSTRACI Abstract. - An outline classification is given of the Hetero straci, with diagnoses . of th e following orders and suborders: Astraspidiformes, Eriptychiiformes, Cya thaspidiformes (Cyathaspidida, Poraspidida, Ctenaspidida), Psammosteiformes (Tes seraspidida, Psarnmosteida) , Traquairaspidiformes, Pteraspidiformes (Pte ras pidida, Doryaspidida), Cardipeltiformes and Amphiaspidiformes (Amphiaspidida, Hiber naspidida, Eglonaspidida). It is show n that the various orders fall into four m ain evolutionary lineages ~ cyathaspid, psammosteid, pteraspid and amphiaspid, and these are traced from primitive te ssellated forms. A tentative phylogeny is pro posed and alternatives are discussed. INTRODUCTION Since 1858, when Huxley demonstrated that in the histological struc ture of their dermal bone Cephalaspis and Pteraspis were quite different from one another, it has been recognized that there were two distinct groups of ostracoderms for which Lankester (1868-70) proposed the names Osteostraci and Heterostraci respectively. Although these groups are generally considered to be related to on e another, Lankester belie ved that "the Heterostraci are at present associated with the Osteostraci because they are found in the same beds, because they have, like Cepha laspis, a large head shield, and because there is nothing else with which to associate them". In 1889, Cop e united these two groups in the Ostracodermi which, together with the modern cyclostomes, he placed in the Class Agnatha, and although this proposal was at first opposed by Traquair (1899) and Woodward (1891b), subsequent work has shown that it was correct as both the Osteostraci and the Heterostraci were agnathous. -
Using Information in Taxonomists' Heads to Resolve Hagfish And
This article was downloaded by: [Max Planck Inst fuer Evolutionsbiologie] On: 03 September 2013, At: 07:01 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Historical Biology: An International Journal of Paleobiology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ghbi20 Using information in taxonomists’ heads to resolve hagfish and lamprey relationships and recapitulate craniate–vertebrate phylogenetic history Maria Abou Chakra a , Brian Keith Hall b & Johnny Ricky Stone a b c d a Department of Biology , McMaster University , Hamilton , Canada b Department of Biology , Dalhousie University , Halifax , Canada c Origins Institute, McMaster University , Hamilton , Canada d SHARCNet, McMaster University , Hamilton , Canada Published online: 02 Sep 2013. To cite this article: Historical Biology (2013): Using information in taxonomists’ heads to resolve hagfish and lamprey relationships and recapitulate craniate–vertebrate phylogenetic history, Historical Biology: An International Journal of Paleobiology To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2013.825792 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. -
Fish and Amphibians
Fish and Amphibians Geology 331 Paleontology Phylum Chordata: Subphyla Urochordata, Cephalochordata, and: Subphylum Vertebrata Class Agnatha: jawless fish, includes the hagfish, conodonts, lampreys, and ostracoderms (armored jawless fish) Gnathostomates: jawed fish Class Chondrichthyes: cartilaginous fish Class Placoderms: armored fish Class Osteichthyes: bony fish Subclass Actinopterygians: ray-finned fish Subclass Sarcopterygians: lobe-finned fish Order Dipnoans: lung fish Order Crossopterygians: coelocanths and rhipidistians Class Amphibia Urochordates: Sea Squirts. Adults have a pharynx with gill slits. Larval forms are free-swimming and have a notochord. Chordates are thought to have evolved from the larval form by precocious sexual maturation. Chordate evolution Cephalochordate: Branchiostoma, the lancelet Pikaia, a cephalochordate from the Burgess Shale Yunnanozoon, a cephalochordate from the Lower Cambrian of China Haikouichthys, agnathan, Lower Cambrian of China - Chengjiang fauna, scale is 5 mm A living jawless fish, the lamprey, Class Agnatha Jawless fish do have teeth! A fossil jawless fish, Class Agnatha, Ostracoderm, Hemicyclaspis, Silurian Agnathan, Ostracoderm, Athenaegis, Silurian of Canada Agnathan, Ostracoderm, Pteraspis, Devonian of the U.K. Agnathan, Ostracoderm, Liliaspis, Devonian of Russia Jaws evolved by modification of the gill arch bones. The placoderms were the armored fish of the Paleozoic Placoderm, Dunkleosteus, Devonian of Ohio Asterolepis, Placoderms, Devonian of Latvia Placoderm, Devonian of Australia Chondrichthyes: A freshwater shark of the Carboniferous Fossil tooth of a Great White shark Chondrichthyes, Great White Shark Chondrichthyes, Carcharhinus Sphyrna - hammerhead shark Himantura - a ray Manta Ray Fish Anatomy: Ray-finned fish Osteichthyes: ray-finned fish: clownfish Osteichthyes: ray-finned fish, deep water species Lophius, an Eocene fish showing the ray fins. This is an anglerfish. -
Epilogue: Pattern Cladistics from Goethe to Brady
Epilogue: Pattern Cladistics From Goethe to Brady Most, if not all, ideas in science are recycled, rediscovered, or rehashed, either sur- reptitiously, through rereading and rediscovering old works, or simply (commonly?) through lack of knowledge of past achievements. The idea of transformation—that things might change, transform, convert into other things—for instance, has been proposed many times, by both evolutionists and non-evolutionists alike. Yet the notion of transformation is really a myth, a story which many scientists embrace, a story that tells of living things transforming into other living things, with their role to interpret its meaning and mechanism: The fall of Paradise to the untamed wild, the tamed landscape to the Biblical flood, the reigns of monarchs, a kingdom to a republic and the pastoral to the industrial—of transformations there are plenty. A deep desire to uncover what mechanism(s) lie behind these transformations has provided many explanations, from the acquisition of sin after the fall from grace, to God’s will, to progress, however construed. The belief that every transformation neatly fits a law or model by which nature abides has shaped our way of thinking. Yet concomitant with such thoughts is the recognition that Nature is complex, and that Nature’s complexity obeys no single law or theory that places it neatly into a box. For every law and theory, we are told, there are exceptions, which are given ad hoc explanations. Man may have toiled the soil to shape nature into his or her image of Eden, but complexity does not fit any man-made law. -
Copyrighted Material
06_250317 part1-3.qxd 12/13/05 7:32 PM Page 15 Phylum Chordata Chordates are placed in the superphylum Deuterostomia. The possible rela- tionships of the chordates and deuterostomes to other metazoans are dis- cussed in Halanych (2004). He restricts the taxon of deuterostomes to the chordates and their proposed immediate sister group, a taxon comprising the hemichordates, echinoderms, and the wormlike Xenoturbella. The phylum Chordata has been used by most recent workers to encompass members of the subphyla Urochordata (tunicates or sea-squirts), Cephalochordata (lancelets), and Craniata (fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals). The Cephalochordata and Craniata form a mono- phyletic group (e.g., Cameron et al., 2000; Halanych, 2004). Much disagree- ment exists concerning the interrelationships and classification of the Chordata, and the inclusion of the urochordates as sister to the cephalochor- dates and craniates is not as broadly held as the sister-group relationship of cephalochordates and craniates (Halanych, 2004). Many excitingCOPYRIGHTED fossil finds in recent years MATERIAL reveal what the first fishes may have looked like, and these finds push the fossil record of fishes back into the early Cambrian, far further back than previously known. There is still much difference of opinion on the phylogenetic position of these new Cambrian species, and many new discoveries and changes in early fish systematics may be expected over the next decade. As noted by Halanych (2004), D.-G. (D.) Shu and collaborators have discovered fossil ascidians (e.g., Cheungkongella), cephalochordate-like yunnanozoans (Haikouella and Yunnanozoon), and jaw- less craniates (Myllokunmingia, and its junior synonym Haikouichthys) over the 15 06_250317 part1-3.qxd 12/13/05 7:32 PM Page 16 16 Fishes of the World last few years that push the origins of these three major taxa at least into the Lower Cambrian (approximately 530–540 million years ago). -
Plant Invasions in Rhode Island Riparian Zones ✴Paleostratigraphy in B Y S U Z a N N E M
Volume 12 • Number 2 • November 2005 What’s Inside… Plant Invasions in Rhode Island Riparian Zones ✴Paleostratigraphy in B Y S U Z A N N E M . L U S S I E R A N D S A R A N . D A S I L V A the Campus Freezer ✴Wandering Hooded Riparian zones opportunistic, they are often the first Methods Seals are the corridors plants to colonize disturbed patches of Selecting the Study Sites ✴Bringing Watershed of land adjacent soil and forest edges. Several research- Health and Land to streams, riv- ers have found that riparian zones sup- By using hydrographical and land Use History into the use/land cover data from the Rhode Classroom ers, and other port a greater abundance and diversity Island Geographic Information System ✴ surface waters, of invasive plants than other habitats The Paleozoology (RIGIS, http://www.edc.uri.edu/rigis/), Collection of the which serve as (Brown and Peet 2003, Burke and Museum of Natural transitional areas Grime 1996, Gregory et al. 1991). we characterized eight subwatersheds History, Roger Wil- between terres- by their percentage of residential land liams Park trial and aquatic Streams within urban and suburban use (4–59%). Stream corridors were de- ✴“The Invasives Beat” systems. Their watersheds characteristically carry lineated using orthophotos and verified ✴Bioblitz 2005 vegetation pro- higher nutrient loads following storm with on-site latitude/longitude readings ✴and lots more... vides valuable events as the first flush of overland run- from a Geographic Positioning System wildlife habitat off transports nonpoint-source (nutri- (GPS). We also calculated the edge- while enhancing ent) pollution into the stream corridors to-area ratio for each riparian zone to instream habitat (Burke and Grime 1996). -
Synchrotron-Aided Reconstruction of the Conodont Feeding Apparatus and Implications for the Mouth of the first Vertebrates
Synchrotron-aided reconstruction of the conodont feeding apparatus and implications for the mouth of the first vertebrates Nicolas Goudemanda,1, Michael J. Orchardb, Séverine Urdya, Hugo Buchera, and Paul Tafforeauc aPalaeontological Institute and Museum, University of Zurich, CH-8006 Zürich, Switzerland; bGeological Survey of Canada, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6B 5J3; and cEuropean Synchrotron Radiation Facility, 38043 Grenoble Cedex, France Edited* by A. M. Celâl Sxengör, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey, and approved April 14, 2011 (received for review February 1, 2011) The origin of jaws remains largely an enigma that is best addressed siderations. Despite the absence of any preserved traces of oral by studying fossil and living jawless vertebrates. Conodonts were cartilages in the rare specimens of conodonts with partly pre- eel-shaped jawless animals, whose vertebrate affinity is still dis- served soft tissue (10), we show that partial reconstruction of the puted. The geometrical analysis of exceptional three-dimensionally conodont mouth is possible through biomechanical analysis. preserved clusters of oro-pharyngeal elements of the Early Triassic Novispathodus, imaged using propagation phase-contrast X-ray Results synchrotron microtomography, suggests the presence of a pul- We recently discovered several fused clusters (rare occurrences ley-shaped lingual cartilage similar to that of extant cyclostomes of exceptional preservation where several elements of the same within the feeding apparatus of euconodonts (“true” conodonts). animal were diagenetically cemented together) of the Early This would lend strong support to their interpretation as verte- Triassic conodont Novispathodus (11). One of these specimens brates and demonstrates that the presence of such cartilage is a (Fig. 2A), found in lowermost Spathian rocks of the Tsoteng plesiomorphic condition of crown vertebrates. -
Download Full Article in PDF Format
Silurian and Devonian strata on the Severnaya Zemlya and Sedov archipelagos (Russia) Peep MÄNNIK Institute of Geology, Tallinn Technical University, Estonia Ave 7, 10143 Tallinn (Estonia) [email protected] Vladimir V. MENNER Institute of Geology and Exploitation of Combustible Fuels (IGIRGI), Fersman Str. 50, 117312 Moscow (Russia) [email protected] [email protected] Rostislav G. MATUKHIN Siberian Research Institute of Geology, Geophysics and Mineral Resources (SNIIGiMS), Krasnyj Ave 67, 630104 Novosibirsk (Russia) [email protected] Visvaldis KURŠS Institute of Geology, University of Latvia, Raina Ave 19, LV-1050 Rīga (Latvia) [email protected] Männik P., Menner V. V., Matukhin R. G. & Kuršs V. 2002. — Silurian and Devonian strata 406 on the Severnaya Zemlya and Sedov archipelagos (Russia). Geodiversitas 24 (1) : 99-122. ABSTRACT Silurian and Devonian strata are widely distributed on the islands of the Severnaya Zemlya and Sedov archipelagos. The Silurian is represented by fossiliferous shallow-water carbonates underlain by variegated sandstones and siltstones of Ordovician age. The Devonian consists mainly of various red sandstones, siltstones and argillites, with carbonates only in some inter- KEY WORDS vals. The best sections available for study are located in the river valleys, and Silurian, in the cliffs along the coastline of islands. Type sections of most of the strati- Devonian, Sedov Archipelago, graphical units identified are located on the Matusevich River, October Severnaya Zemlya Archipelago, Revolution Island. As the Quaternary cover is poorly developed on Russia, lithostratigraphy, Severnaya Zemlya, the Palaeozoic strata can be easily traced also outside the biostratigraphy. sections. GEODIVERSITAS • 2002 • 24 (1) © Publications Scientifiques du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris.