DOCSLIB.ORG

Novitates PUBLISHED by the AMERICAN MUSEUM of NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST at 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Novitates PUBLISHED by the AMERICAN MUSEUM of NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST at 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y AMERICAN MUSEUM Novitates PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY CENTRAL PARK WEST AT 79TH STREET, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10024 Number 3124, 10 pp., 1 table April 5, 1995 Crania of Apidium: Primitive Anthropoidean (Primates, Parapithecidae) from the Egyptian Oligocene ELWYN L. SIMONS' ABSTRACT Cranial remains ofparapithecid primates found anthropoidean cranial characteristics had been de- in Oligocene deposits of the Fayum badlands veloped in the African parapithecids by Oligocene southwest ofCairo, Egypt, are assigned to two spe- times, 34 million years ago. Parapithecoidea may cies of the genus Apidium. A new partial skull be a sister group to Catarrhini. One partial cra- confirms reference of an earlier described frontal nium discussed here belongs to a new species de- bone to the genus and species Apidiumphiomense. scribed below. Together these two finds demonstrate that several INTRODUCTION In 1959, I published on a primate frontal covered by Markgraf in 1908 in an area 1 or with anthropoidean characteristics that had 2 km to the northwest ofthe quarries named been collected in the Fayum badlands in 1908 A and B and worked in 1906 and 1907 by by Richard Markgraf and sent to the Amer- an AMNH expedition. This would presum- ican Museum of Natural History (AMNH), ably put it in or near quarries I, P, or J. Be- New York, in early 1909 (figs. 1, 2). The exact cause there were no other fragments associ- location site of this fossil frontal, numbered ated with this nearly complete frontal, it seems AMNH 14456, is not indicated on the field that it must have been deposited in river sands label. The attached matrix appeared to be as a separate bone. identical with that on other small fossils re- Although this specimen was early identi- ' Research Associate, Department of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History; James B. Duke Pro- fessor, Department of Biological Anthropology and Anatomy, Duke University, Durham, NC 27705. Copyright © American Museum of Natural History 1995 ISSN 0003-0082 / Price $1.60 2 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO. 3124 fied as a "primate," it was not announced to be primate. The specimens of the then scientifically other than in a passing reference apparent association were described by Gin- by Gregory (1922). His sole observation was gerich (1973). Much later Cartmill et al. (1981) that the frontal closely resembles the corre- reviewed additional material that included sponding bone in some of the smaller Old four isolated primate petrosals from quarry World monkeys. When I first noticed the I. These are YPM 25972, YPM 25973, YPM frontal in 1956, its importance seemed clear. 25974, and YPM 23968. The first of these is It gave the first clue that postorbital closure, about 25% larger than the remaining three, a fundamental characteristic of higher pri- which Cartmill et al. (1981) considered to mates, had been achieved by Oligocene times. belong to Apidium phiomense. In reviewing Prior to this frontal's description (Simons, the anatomy ofthe petrosal in the three spec- 1959), there was no evidence, other than imens of Apidium, the latter authors noted through relationships suggested by dental fea- that Gingerich (1973) was correct in con- tures, that any Oligocene primate had reached cluding that the carotid canal lacks a stapedial the anthropoidean grade of organization. branch, resembles Anthropoidea in this re- Reference of this isolated frontal to a par- gard, and differs from early tarsioids as well ticular Fayum primate species was not pos- as most other prosimians, although they re- sible because it is about the size expected for marked that (p. 9): "certain grooves running the type species of two different genera: Api- from the carotid canal across the promon- dium and Parapithecus, Simons (1959). Since tory's ventral surface may have contained then, a series of expeditions to the Fayum caroticotympanic arteries ... one of which badlands originating first from Yale (between may represent a vestige ofthe stapedial stem." 1961 and 1968) and then from Duke (from The detailed discussion of Cartmill et al. 1977 to date) has resulted in the discovery (1981) emphasizes that the anatomy of sev- of hundreds of mandibles, maxillae, and po- eral isolated petrosals is anthropoid-like and stcranials of small primates, the commonest does not reveal any particular resemblance of which is Apidium phiomense, Osbom to the tarsiero-momyid group. They also show (1908). The type specimen ofA. phiomense, that the association ofApidium material cata- a mandible with a fourth premolar and three loged under the number YPM 23968 con- molars was, like the frontal, also found by tained a squamosal that must belong to a Markgraf but somewhat earlier. The original nonprimate, that had erroneously been la- field label of this type said: "NW of Quarry beled as part of Apidium. Because of this [A] ... new genus ?primate, Feb. 17, 1907, squamosal not being primate, the conclusion collr. R. Markgraf." of Gingerich (1973) that Apidium had an ec- Apidium phiomense occurs (principally) in totympanic that was "free and intrabullar" the upper sequence ofthe Fayum deposits at now lacks proof. If the isolated petrosals in- quarries I and M, and quarry I lies in a NW deed are of Apidium then the ectotympanic direction from quarry A. Over the years, sev- is a simple annulus like that of ceboids and eral other isolated small primate frontals re- of Aegyptopithecus, fused to the squamosal sembling that described in 1959 have been at both ends. discovered in quarry I. The first ofthese was Although Apidium phiomense is the com- reported, Simons (1967), as probably being monest small mammal in the upper sequence referable to A. phiomense. Simons subse- ofthe Jebel Qatrani Formation, Parapithecus quently (1971) described another frontal fraasi, another similarly sized primate spe- fragment found associated with separate teeth cies described from the Fayum early in this of A. phiomense. This find appeared to in- century by Schlosser (1911), has continued dicate, with some certainty, that the AMNH to be known only from the type specimen. frontal and other small frontals subsequently Meanwhile, Simons (1974) proposed a sec- recovered at quarry I belonged to A. phio- ond species of the genus, Parapithecus gran- mense. Even so, a temporal fragment found geri, and this species occurs with A. phio- at the same spot with the upper teeth and the mense at quarries I and M. Although their piece of frontal bone from the region of the molar structure is quite different, certain sim- interorbital septum, subsequently proved not ilarities in the dentition, such as, among an- 1995 SIMONS: CRANIA OF APIDIUM thropoideans, a unique central cusp on the upper premolars, show that Apidium and Parapithecus belong in the same family. In comparable parts, Parapithecus grangeri is about 20% larger than A. phiomense and, consequently, would have a frontal distinctly larger than that described in 1959 (AMNH 14456). No specimen ofParapithecusfraasi has ever been found in the upper sequence localities of the Fayum and therefore the type surely came from a different, presumably lower, part of the section. Because it is both larger than would be expected for P. fraasi and appar- ently younger, the frontal described in 1959 could not belong to the type species of Para- pithecus. The only other common larger pri- mates at the quarry I-M level are Parapithe- 0 1 2 cus grangeri, Aegyptopithecus zeuxis, and L,.1ll.LLLLLLLL llJ Propliopithecus chirobates, all of which have frontals larger than that ofAMNH 14456. At quarry M there is an additional small para- pithecid-known from a single mandible- Fig. 1. Cranial remains ofApidiumphiomense, Qatraniafleaglei, but this animal is too small dorsal view. Left, Duke specimen, DPC 9867; right, to relate to this frontal. Eliminating all these American Museum specimen, AMNH 14556. other species that differed in size and/or level ofoccurrence strengthens, but does not prove, the conclusion that AMNH 14456 belongs to of attached partial parietals that on grounds A. phiomense. of size are assignable to P. grangeri. These In 1989, after 27 years ofcollecting at quar- new specimens are described below. ry I, a partial cranium ofApidium phiomense, DUPC 9867, with five attached upper molars ACKNOWLEDGMENTS was discovered (figs. 1, 2). This specimen has I thank the frontal largely intact and it definitely es- Friderun Ankel-Simons and Tho- tablishes that the frontal discovered by Mark- mas M. Bown for helpful criticism during AMNH preparation of the manuscript together with graf, 14456, indeed belongs to Api- H. H. Covert and P. D. Gingerich for re- dium phiomense (see fig. 1). Regrettably, viewer's comments. This research was sup- DUPC 9867 does not preserve the petrosal ported by several NSF grants in Anthropol- on either side and, consequently, the earlier the found petrosals ofApidium must still be re- ogy, most recent of which are BNS-85- ferred only provisionally. 46024, BNS-88-09776, and BNS-91-08445. In 1984 at about 78 m Abbreviations: YPM = Yale Peabody Mu- quarry V, below the seum; AMNH = American Museum ofNat- I/M level, Dr. Thomas Bown of the U.S. = Geological Survey, Denver, quarried out an ural History; CGM Cairo Geological Mu- associated frontal, partial face, and upper seum; DUPC = Duke University Primate dentition of a new small species of Apidium Center. Photographic illustrations have been (DPC 5264). During the 1980s, cranial parts prepared by R. L. Usery, Duke Audiovisual of Parapithecus grangeri were also being Services, and by the author. This is Duke found. At quarry I, in 1986, an associated left Primate Center Publication No. 550. maxilla and frontal of Parapithecus grangeri (DPC 6641) were collected. Earlier at I in DESCRIPTION 1978, we had also recovered another perti- The partial cranium, DPC 9867, is slight- nent specimen (DPC 1098), which consists ly larger than that ofthe common marmoset, 4 AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES NO.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Threads of Evolutionary, Behavioural and Conservation Research
    Taxonomic Tapestries The Threads of Evolutionary, Behavioural and Conservation Research Taxonomic Tapestries The Threads of Evolutionary, Behavioural and Conservation Research Edited by Alison M Behie and Marc F Oxenham Chapters written in honour of Professor Colin P Groves Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at http://press.anu.edu.au National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Title: Taxonomic tapestries : the threads of evolutionary, behavioural and conservation research / Alison M Behie and Marc F Oxenham, editors. ISBN: 9781925022360 (paperback) 9781925022377 (ebook) Subjects: Biology--Classification. Biology--Philosophy. Human ecology--Research. Coexistence of species--Research. Evolution (Biology)--Research. Taxonomists. Other Creators/Contributors: Behie, Alison M., editor. Oxenham, Marc F., editor. Dewey Number: 578.012 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design and layout by ANU Press Cover photograph courtesy of Hajarimanitra Rambeloarivony Printed by Griffin Press This edition © 2015 ANU Press Contents List of Contributors . .vii List of Figures and Tables . ix PART I 1. The Groves effect: 50 years of influence on behaviour, evolution and conservation research . 3 Alison M Behie and Marc F Oxenham PART II 2 . Characterisation of the endemic Sulawesi Lenomys meyeri (Muridae, Murinae) and the description of a new species of Lenomys . 13 Guy G Musser 3 . Gibbons and hominoid ancestry . 51 Peter Andrews and Richard J Johnson 4 .
    [Show full text]
  • 8. Primate Evolution
    8. Primate Evolution Jonathan M. G. Perry, Ph.D., The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Stephanie L. Canington, B.A., The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Learning Objectives • Understand the major trends in primate evolution from the origin of primates to the origin of our own species • Learn about primate adaptations and how they characterize major primate groups • Discuss the kinds of evidence that anthropologists use to find out how extinct primates are related to each other and to living primates • Recognize how the changing geography and climate of Earth have influenced where and when primates have thrived or gone extinct The first fifty million years of primate evolution was a series of adaptive radiations leading to the diversification of the earliest lemurs, monkeys, and apes. The primate story begins in the canopy and understory of conifer-dominated forests, with our small, furtive ancestors subsisting at night, beneath the notice of day-active dinosaurs. From the archaic plesiadapiforms (archaic primates) to the earliest groups of true primates (euprimates), the origin of our own order is characterized by the struggle for new food sources and microhabitats in the arboreal setting. Climate change forced major extinctions as the northern continents became increasingly dry, cold, and seasonal and as tropical rainforests gave way to deciduous forests, woodlands, and eventually grasslands. Lemurs, lorises, and tarsiers—once diverse groups containing many species—became rare, except for lemurs in Madagascar where there were no anthropoid competitors and perhaps few predators. Meanwhile, anthropoids (monkeys and apes) emerged in the Old World, then dispersed across parts of the northern hemisphere, Africa, and ultimately South America.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence for an Asian Origin of Stem Anthropoids
    Evidence for an Asian origin of stem anthropoids Richard F. Kay1 Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-03083 n PNAS, Chaimanee et al. (1) report Genetic, embryological, and anatomical We are not there yet. Recent comprehen- a previously undescribed species of evidence demonstrates that the sister sive phylogenetic analyses stemming from I primate, Afrasia, from the late Middle group of Anthropoidea is the south Asian virtually the same datasets yield somewhat Eocene of Burma. They identify tarsier, with the two forming the crown different cladograms that reflect sensitivity Afrasia as the sister taxon to the African group Haplorhini (6–8). The other clade of to which taxa are included in the analysis genus Afrotarsius but slightly more primitive extant primates is the lemurs and lorises, and which sets of analytical assumptions are than it and allied with stem Anthropoidea called Strepsirrhini. Eocene Holarctic selected. Pertinent to the biogeographic of south Asia. Anthropoidea is the taxo- Omomyoidea are generally considered as conclusions of Chaimanee et al. (1), Seiffert nomic group that today includes New and stem haplorhines, although the precise et al. (11) conclude that Afrotarsius cha- Old World monkeys, apes, and humans. If relationship of omomyoids to tarsiers and trathi [a younger species than the one that upheld, the biogeographic significance of anthropoids is uncertain (8). Tarsius often Chaimanee et al. (1) describe] is an African these results is profound: If Afrasia and is considered to be a relictual omomyoid tarsioid. If Seiffert et al. (11) are correct, Afrotarsius are as closely related as Chai- in south Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Old World Monkeys
    2003. 5. 23 Dr. Toshio MOURI Old World monkey Although Old World monkey, as a word, corresponds to New World monkey, its taxonomic rank is much lower than that of the New World Monkey. Therefore, it is speculated that the last common ancestor of Old World monkeys is newer compared to that of New World monkeys. While New World monkey is the vernacular name for infraorder Platyrrhini, Old World Monkey is the vernacular name for superfamily Cercopithecoidea (family Cercopithecidae is limited to living species). As a side note, the taxon including Old World Monkey at the same taxonomic level as New World Monkey is infraorder Catarrhini. Catarrhini includes Hominoidea (humans and apes), as well as Cercopithecoidea. Cercopithecoidea comprises the families Victoriapithecidae and Cercopithecidae. Victoriapithecidae is fossil primates from the early to middle Miocene (15-20 Ma; Ma = megannum = 1 million years ago), with known genera Prohylobates and Victoriapithecus. The characteristic that defines the Old World Monkey (as synapomorphy – a derived character shared by two or more groups – defines a monophyletic taxon), is the bilophodonty of the molars, but the development of biphilophodonty in Victoriapithecidae is still imperfect, and crista obliqua is observed in many maxillary molars (as well as primary molars). (Benefit, 1999; Fleagle, 1999) Recently, there is an opinion that Prohylobates should be combined with Victoriapithecus. Living Old World Monkeys are all classified in the family Cercopithecidae. Cercopithecidae comprises the subfamilies Cercopithecinae and Colobinae. Cercopithecinae has a buccal pouch, and Colobinae has a complex, or sacculated, stomach. It is thought that the buccal pouch is an adaptation for quickly putting rare food like fruit into the mouth, and the complex stomach is an adaptation for eating leaves.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 9 - LOWER PRIMATES and MONKEYS We Humans Are Classified As Members of Order Primates
    CHAPTER 9 - LOWER PRIMATES AND MONKEYS We humans are classified as members of Order Primates. In the Linnaean system, Primates are commonly broken down into subgroups as follows. Visual ORDER PRIMATES # 9-1 Suborder Prosimii Suborder Anthropoidea (Strepsirrhines) (Haplorrhines) Lemurs/Lorises Aye-ayes Adapoids Tarsiers Omomyids Platyrrhines Catarrhines (extinct) (extinct) (nostrils nostrils facing facing sideways) down or front) New World Old World Apes Humans monkeys monkeys (after Perelman et al., 2011) There are obviously similarities between humans, monkeys, and apes. There are contradictory explanations: (1) Common design, and (2) Common ancestry with later evolution. Each is a matter of faith and cannot be tested. Initial Complexity leads us to believe that humans and each primate kind were directly created Visual # 9-2 and have varied only within definite genetic limits. By contrast, Initial Disorganization leads us to believe that each type of primate has evolved from some lower type, starting with something similar to lagomorphs (rabbits and hares). Perelman, Johnson et al. (2011) give the most common scenario, that one of these evolved to something like tree shrews (Scandentia), which in turn evolved into Dermoptera (colugos or “flying lemurs”), then primates. In order for us to tell which is more likely to be correct, we can look at the available fossils. • If Initial Complexity is correct, there should be a complete absence of transitional forms between any of the groups shown above. There should also be a resistance to basic change in each of the primate groups. They may exhibit variation within a kind, but there should be no traces of evolution from one kind to another.
    [Show full text]
  • Kingdom =Animalia Phylum =Chordata Subphylum =Vertebrata Class =Mammalia Order =Primates I. PARTIAL
    Kingdom =Animalia '' Phylum =Chordata '' Subphylum =Vertebrata '' Class =Mammalia '' Order =Primates 130-132 I. PARTIAL TAXONOMIC CLASSIFICATION OF PREHISTORIC AND CONTEMPORARY PRIMATES 176-187 197-198/Lab 7.II. Suborder Infraorder Superfamily Family Genus Species Common Name Prosimii [tree shrew = insectivore] (Strepsirhini) lemur 132-134 aye-aye 188-191 loris and bush baby tarsier Anthropoidea Platyrrhini *Parapithecus (basal anthropoid) (Haplorhini) 134-136 *Apidium (basal anthropoid) 134-138 Ceboidea New World monkey 188-191 Catarrhini *Propliopithecus (basal catarrhine) 136-138 *Aegyptopithecus (basal catarrhine) Cercopithecoidea Cercopithecidae Old World monkey 124-126 Macaca macaque Papio baboon Colobidae Colobus colobus monkey Presbytis langur Hominoidea *Proconsulidae *Proconsul 138-143 191-193 Lab 7. II. D. *Oreopithecidea *Oreopithecus Hylobatidae Hylobates gibbon *Pliopithecidae *Pliopithecus Pongidae *Dryopithecus *dryopithecus *Sivapithecus *ramapithecus *kenyapithecus *ouranopithecus *Gigantopithecus Pongo orangutan Panidae Pan traglodytes chimpanzee Pan paniscus bonobo (“pygmy chimpanzee”) Pan ? Gorilla gorilla Mountain gorilla Gorilla Western lowland g. 202-204 Hominidae *Ardipithecus *ramidus 213-218 1 228-237 *Australopithecus *anamensis 241-245 *afarensis Lucy / First Family Lab 8 *africanus southern ape *garhi *[aka Paranthropus]1 *aethiopicus *boisei Zinj *robustus *Kenyanthropus *platyops 1 237-238 Homo *rudolfensis ER-1470 245-247 *habilis human Ch. 11 *erectus Java / Peking “Man” Lab 10 sapiens Mary / John Chs. 12-13 Lab 12 An * marks groups known only through fossils. Compare: FIGURE 6-7 Primate taxonomic classification, p. 131 FIGURE 6-8 Revised partial classification of the primates, p. 132 FIGURE 8-1 Classification chart, modified from Linnaeus p. 177 FIGURE 8-15 Major events in early primate evolution, p. 191 Virtual Lab 1, section II, parts A-D Primate Classification 1(Note: Australopithecus and Paranthropus make up a “Subfamily” called Australopithecinae, more commonly known as Australopithecines.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Laurasian Diversification of a Pantropical Bird Family During The
    Ibis (2020), 162, 137–152 doi: 10.1111/ibi.12707 Rapid Laurasian diversification of a pantropical bird family during the Oligocene–Miocene transition CARL H. OLIVEROS,1,2* MICHAEL J. ANDERSEN,3 PETER A. HOSNER,4,7 WILLIAM M. MAUCK III,5,6 FREDERICK H. SHELDON,2 JOEL CRACRAFT5 & ROBERT G. MOYLE1 1Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Biodiversity Institute, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA 2Museum of Natural Science and Department of Biological Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA 3Department of Biology and Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA 4Division of Birds, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC, USA 5Department of Ornithology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY, USA 6New York Genome Center, New York, NY, USA 7Natural History Museum of Denmark and Center for Macroecology, Evolution, and Climate; University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark Disjunct, pantropical distributions are a common pattern among avian lineages, but dis- entangling multiple scenarios that can produce them requires accurate estimates of his- torical relationships and timescales. Here, we clarify the biogeographical history of the pantropical avian family of trogons (Trogonidae) by re-examining their phylogenetic rela- tionships and divergence times with genome-scale data. We estimated trogon phylogeny by analysing thousands of ultraconserved element (UCE) loci from all extant trogon gen- era with concatenation and coalescent approaches. We then estimated a time frame for trogon diversification using MCMCTree and fossil calibrations, after which we performed ancestral area estimation using BioGeoBEARS. We recovered the first well-resolved hypothesis of relationships among trogon genera.
    [Show full text]
  • 30 Tejedor.Pmd
    Arquivos do Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, v.66, n.1, p.251-269, jan./mar.2008 ISSN 0365-4508 THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF NEOTROPICAL PRIMATES 1 (With 4 figures) MARCELO F. TEJEDOR 2 ABSTRACT: A significant event in the early evolution of Primates is the origin and radiation of anthropoids, with records in North Africa and Asia. The New World Primates, Infraorder Platyrrhini, have probably originated among these earliest anthropoids morphologically and temporally previous to the catarrhine/platyrrhine branching. The platyrrhine fossil record comes from distant regions in the Neotropics. The oldest are from the late Oligocene of Bolivia, with difficult taxonomic attribution. The two richest fossiliferous sites are located in the middle Miocene of La Venta, Colombia, and to the south in early to middle Miocene sites from the Argentine Patagonia and Chile. The absolute ages of these sedimentary deposits are ranging from 12 to 20 Ma, the oldest in Patagonia and Chile. These northern and southern regions have a remarkable taxonomic diversity and several extinct taxa certainly represent living clades. In addition, in younger sediments ranging from late Miocene through Pleistocene, three genera have been described for the Greater Antilles, two genera in eastern Brazil, and at least three forms for Río Acre. In general, the fossil record of South American primates sheds light on the old radiations of the Pitheciinae, Cebinae, and Atelinae. However, several taxa are still controversial. Key words: Neotropical Primates. Origin. Evolution. RESUMO: Origem e evolução dos primatas neotropicais. Um evento significativo durante o início da evolução dos primatas é a origem e a radiação dos antropóides, com registros no norte da África e da Ásia.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Age Estimates for the Later Paleogene Mammal Faunas of Egypt and Oman
    Revised age estimates for the later Paleogene mammal faunas of Egypt and Oman Erik R. Seiffert* Department of Earth Sciences and Museum of Natural History, University of Oxford, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PW, United Kingdom Communicated by Elwyn L. Simons, Duke University, Durham, NC, January 30, 2006 (received for review January 3, 2006) The Jebel Qatrani Formation of northern Egypt has produced available from the Formation itself is the magnetostratigraphy Afro-Arabia’s primary record of Paleogene mammalian evolution, developed by Kappelman et al. (17) (Fig. 1A), but there remain including the world’s most complete remains of early anthropoid multiple possible correlations of that magnetostratigraphy to the primates. Recent studies of Fayum mammals have assumed that geomagnetic polarity time scale (GPTS). the Jebel Qatrani Formation contains a significant Eocene compo- The Jebel Qatrani Formation is divided into upper and lower nent (Ϸ150 of 340 m), and that most taxa from that succession are sequences (15), with the boundary between these units being the between 35.4 and 33.3 million years old (Ma), i.e., latest Eocene to 4- to 10-m-thick cliff-forming ‘‘Barite Sandstone’’ that uncon- earliest Oligocene in age. Reanalysis of the chronological evidence formably overlies the upper red sandstone of the lower sequence. shared by later Paleogene strata exposed in Egypt and Oman Rasmussen et al. (16) suggested that the approximate position of (Taqah and Thaytiniti areas, Dhofar Province) reveals that this the EOB is probably marked by this unconformity,
    [Show full text]
  • New Eocene Primate from Myanmar Shares Dental Characters with African Eocene Crown Anthropoids
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11295-6 OPEN New Eocene primate from Myanmar shares dental characters with African Eocene crown anthropoids Jean-Jacques Jaeger1, Olivier Chavasseau 1, Vincent Lazzari1, Aung Naing Soe2, Chit Sein 3, Anne Le Maître 1,4, Hla Shwe5 & Yaowalak Chaimanee1 Recent discoveries of older and phylogenetically more primitive basal anthropoids in China and Myanmar, the eosimiiforms, support the hypothesis that Asia was the place of origins of 1234567890():,; anthropoids, rather than Africa. Similar taxa of eosimiiforms have been discovered in the late middle Eocene of Myanmar and North Africa, reflecting a colonization event that occurred during the middle Eocene. However, these eosimiiforms were probably not the closest ancestors of the African crown anthropoids. Here we describe a new primate from the middle Eocene of Myanmar that documents a new clade of Asian anthropoids. It possesses several dental characters found only among the African crown anthropoids and their nearest rela- tives, indicating that several of these characters have appeared within Asian clades before being recorded in Africa. This reinforces the hypothesis that the African colonization of anthropoids was the result of several dispersal events, and that it involved more derived taxa than eosimiiforms. 1 Laboratory PALEVOPRIM, UMR CNRS 7262, University of Poitiers, 6 rue Michel Brunet Cedex 9, 86073 Poitiers, France. 2 University of Distance Education, Mandalay 05023, Myanmar. 3 Ministry of Education, Department of Higher Education, Naypyitaw 15011, Myanmar. 4 Department of Theoretical Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, 1090 Vienna, Austria. 5 Department of Archaeology and National Museum, Mandalay Branch, Ministry of Religious Affairs and Culture, Mandalay 05011, Myanmar.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Primate Mandibular Symphyseal Fusion: Function, Integration, and Ontogeny
    UNDERSTANDING PRIMATE MANDIBULAR SYMPHYSEAL FUSION: FUNCTION, INTEGRATION, AND ONTOGENY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY RYAN P. KNIGGE IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DR. KIERAN P. MCNULTY December 2017 @ Ryan P. Knigge 2017 Acknowledgements First, I am deeply indebted to my advisor and mentor, Kieran McNulty, for many years of patience and support. He opened my eyes to exciting and innovative areas of scientific research and has challenged me to become a better student of anthropology, biology, and statistical practices. I am also particularly grateful for my committee members, Martha Tappen, Michael Wilson, and Alan Love, for so many interesting discussions and insights over the years. I thank the Department of Anthropology and my many friends and colleagues within for years of emotional and academic support. Many data collection and field work trips were funded through department block grants. Surely without these contributions, I would not have been able to succeed as a graduate student. I would like thank the previous and current managers of the Evolutionary Anthropology Labs at the University of Minnesota, John Soderberg and Matt Edling, for access to the collections and technical support. Without their help and generosity, data collection and analysis would not have been possible. I thank the University of Minnesota for supporting my research in many ways during my graduate school career. Portions of my data collection were funded through the University of Minnesota Graduate School Thesis Research Travel Grant. Dissertation writing support was provided through the Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary History of New World Monkeys Revealed by Molecular and Fossil Data
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/178111; this version posted August 18, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Evolutionary history of New World monkeys revealed by molecular and fossil data Daniele Silvestro1,2,3,*, Marcelo F. Tejedor4,5,*, Martha L. Serrano-Serrano2, Oriane Loiseau2, Victor Rossier2, Jonathan Rolland2, Alexander Zizka1,3, Alexandre Antonelli1,3,6, Nicolas Salamin2 1 Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, 413 19 Gothenburg, Sweden 2 Department of Computational Biology, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland 3 Gothenburg Global Biodiversity Center, Gothenburg, Sweden 4 CONICET, Centro Nacional Patagonico, Boulevard Almirante Brown 2915, 9120 Puerto Madryn, Chubut, Argentina. 5 Facultad de Ciencias Naturales, Sede Trelew, Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia ‘San Juan Bosco’, 9100 Trelew, Chubut, Argentina. 6 Gothenburg Botanical Garden, Carl Skottsbergs gata 22A, 413 19 Gothenburg, Sweden * Equal contributions 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/178111; this version posted August 18, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Abstract New World monkeys (parvorder Platyrrhini) are one of the most diverse groups of primates, occupying today a wide range of ecosystems in the American tropics and exhibiting large variations in ecology, morphology, and behavior. Although the relationships among the almost 200 living species are relatively well understood, we lack robust estimates of the timing of origin, the ancestral morphology, and the evolution of the distribution of the clade.
    [Show full text]