Printable File (PDF)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Table S1.Xlsx
Bone type Bone type Taxonomy Order/series Family Valid binomial Outdated binomial Notes Reference(s) (skeletal bone) (scales) Actinopterygii Incertae sedis Incertae sedis Incertae sedis †Birgeria stensioei cellular this study †Birgeria groenlandica cellular Ørvig, 1978 †Eurynotus crenatus cellular Goodrich, 1907; Schultze, 2016 †Mimipiscis toombsi †Mimia toombsi cellular Richter & Smith, 1995 †Moythomasia sp. cellular cellular Sire et al., 2009; Schultze, 2016 †Cheirolepidiformes †Cheirolepididae †Cheirolepis canadensis cellular cellular Goodrich, 1907; Sire et al., 2009; Zylberberg et al., 2016; Meunier et al. 2018a; this study Cladistia Polypteriformes Polypteridae †Bawitius sp. cellular Meunier et al., 2016 †Dajetella sudamericana cellular cellular Gayet & Meunier, 1992 Erpetoichthys calabaricus Calamoichthys sp. cellular Moss, 1961a; this study †Pollia suarezi cellular cellular Meunier & Gayet, 1996 Polypterus bichir cellular cellular Kölliker, 1859; Stéphan, 1900; Goodrich, 1907; Ørvig, 1978 Polypterus delhezi cellular this study Polypterus ornatipinnis cellular Totland et al., 2011 Polypterus senegalus cellular Sire et al., 2009 Polypterus sp. cellular Moss, 1961a †Scanilepis sp. cellular Sire et al., 2009 †Scanilepis dubia cellular cellular Ørvig, 1978 †Saurichthyiformes †Saurichthyidae †Saurichthys sp. cellular Scheyer et al., 2014 Chondrostei †Chondrosteiformes †Chondrosteidae †Chondrosteus acipenseroides cellular this study Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae Acipenser baerii cellular Leprévost et al., 2017 Acipenser gueldenstaedtii -
Constraints on the Timescale of Animal Evolutionary History
Palaeontologia Electronica palaeo-electronica.org Constraints on the timescale of animal evolutionary history Michael J. Benton, Philip C.J. Donoghue, Robert J. Asher, Matt Friedman, Thomas J. Near, and Jakob Vinther ABSTRACT Dating the tree of life is a core endeavor in evolutionary biology. Rates of evolution are fundamental to nearly every evolutionary model and process. Rates need dates. There is much debate on the most appropriate and reasonable ways in which to date the tree of life, and recent work has highlighted some confusions and complexities that can be avoided. Whether phylogenetic trees are dated after they have been estab- lished, or as part of the process of tree finding, practitioners need to know which cali- brations to use. We emphasize the importance of identifying crown (not stem) fossils, levels of confidence in their attribution to the crown, current chronostratigraphic preci- sion, the primacy of the host geological formation and asymmetric confidence intervals. Here we present calibrations for 88 key nodes across the phylogeny of animals, rang- ing from the root of Metazoa to the last common ancestor of Homo sapiens. Close attention to detail is constantly required: for example, the classic bird-mammal date (base of crown Amniota) has often been given as 310-315 Ma; the 2014 international time scale indicates a minimum age of 318 Ma. Michael J. Benton. School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, U.K. [email protected] Philip C.J. Donoghue. School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, U.K. [email protected] Robert J. -
Contributions in BIOLOGY and GEOLOGY
MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM Contributions In BIOLOGY and GEOLOGY Number 51 November 29, 1982 A Compendium of Fossil Marine Families J. John Sepkoski, Jr. MILWAUKEE PUBLIC MUSEUM Contributions in BIOLOGY and GEOLOGY Number 51 November 29, 1982 A COMPENDIUM OF FOSSIL MARINE FAMILIES J. JOHN SEPKOSKI, JR. Department of the Geophysical Sciences University of Chicago REVIEWERS FOR THIS PUBLICATION: Robert Gernant, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee David M. Raup, Field Museum of Natural History Frederick R. Schram, San Diego Natural History Museum Peter M. Sheehan, Milwaukee Public Museum ISBN 0-893260-081-9 Milwaukee Public Museum Press Published by the Order of the Board of Trustees CONTENTS Abstract ---- ---------- -- - ----------------------- 2 Introduction -- --- -- ------ - - - ------- - ----------- - - - 2 Compendium ----------------------------- -- ------ 6 Protozoa ----- - ------- - - - -- -- - -------- - ------ - 6 Porifera------------- --- ---------------------- 9 Archaeocyatha -- - ------ - ------ - - -- ---------- - - - - 14 Coelenterata -- - -- --- -- - - -- - - - - -- - -- - -- - - -- -- - -- 17 Platyhelminthes - - -- - - - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- -- --- - - - - - - 24 Rhynchocoela - ---- - - - - ---- --- ---- - - ----------- - 24 Priapulida ------ ---- - - - - -- - - -- - ------ - -- ------ 24 Nematoda - -- - --- --- -- - -- --- - -- --- ---- -- - - -- -- 24 Mollusca ------------- --- --------------- ------ 24 Sipunculida ---------- --- ------------ ---- -- --- - 46 Echiurida ------ - --- - - - - - --- --- - -- --- - -- - - --- -
Leptolepis Nevadensis, a New Cretaceous Fish Author(S): Lore David Source: Journal of Paleontology, Vol
Leptolepis nevadensis, a New Cretaceous Fish Author(s): Lore David Source: Journal of Paleontology, Vol. 15, No. 3 (May, 1941), pp. 318-321 Published by: SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1298900 Accessed: 09-08-2021 23:07 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Paleontology This content downloaded from 131.215.71.167 on Mon, 09 Aug 2021 23:07:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms JOURNAL OF PALEONTOLOGY, VOL. 15, No. 3, PP. 318-321, 2 TEXT FIGS., MAY, 1941 LEPTOLEPIS NEVADENSIS, A NEW CRETACEOUS FISH LORE DAVID California Institute of Technology ABsTRACT-Leptolepis nevadensis n. sp., the first known species of the genus from North America, is described from the "Weber conglomerates" east of Eureka, Nevada. The advanced characters of the structure of the fish suggest Cretaceous age. DR. S. A. BERTHIAUME while on field work Family LEPTOLEPIDAE in Nevada during the summer of 1939 LEPTOLEPIS NEVADENSIS David, n. sp. discovered a deposit containing fish and Figures 1, 2 plant fossils in the so-called "Weber con- Holotype.-A specimen 41 +9 =50 mm. -
Late Jurassic) Near Gulgong, New South Wales
DOI: 10.18195/issn.0312-3162.23(1).2006.043-076 Records of the Western Australian Museum 23: 43-76 (2006). The leptolepid fish Cavenderichthys talbragarensis (Woodward, 1895) from the Talbragar Fish Bed (Late Jurassic) near Gulgong, New South Wales 1. B. Bean Dept of Earth and Marine Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia e-mail: [email protected] Abstract - "Leptolepis" talbragarensis Woodward, 1895, is the most common fish species in the Talbragar Fish Bed near Gulgong, New South Wales. The genus Cavenderichthys Arratia, 1997, has this species as its type. The three species originally proposed by Woodward (1895) for "Leptolepis" are a single species. A detailed comparison of Cavenderichthys talbragarensis with members of the genus Leptolepis, and also with the Late Jurassic forms Tharsis dubius and Leptolepides sprattiformis, indicates that Cavenderichthys talbragarensis is most closely related to Late Jurassic members of the Family Leptolepididae. Analysis of zircons for geochronology showed that the sediment just below the richest fish layer has a youngest component of 151.55 ± 4.27 Ma, corresponding to the Kimmeridgian Stage of the Late Jurassic. Thin sections of the upper prolific fish layer show preservation in tuffaceous sediments, indicating that the fish population was killed by ash falls of felsic tuff that filled the pond they inhabited. INTRODUCTION partly on his own observations, but also on the Fossil fishes were first discovered at Talbragar work of Cavender (1970) who compared about 30 km northeast of Gulgong by Arthur Lowe coregonines and other salmonids with some of the of Wilbertree, NSW in 1889 (Woodward 1895). -
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). -
A Synoptic Review of the Vertebrate Fauna from the “Green Series
A synoptic review of the vertebrate fauna from the “Green Series” (Toarcian) of northeastern Germany with descriptions of new taxa: A contribution to the knowledge of Early Jurassic vertebrate palaeobiodiversity patterns I n a u g u r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat.) der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald vorgelegt von Sebastian Stumpf geboren am 9. Oktober 1986 in Berlin-Hellersdorf Greifswald, Februar 2017 Dekan: Prof. Dr. Werner Weitschies 1. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Ingelore Hinz-Schallreuter 2. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Paul Martin Sander Tag des Promotionskolloquiums: 22. Juni 2017 2 Content 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 4 2. Geological and Stratigraphic Framework .................................................................................... 5 3. Material and Methods ................................................................................................................... 8 4. Results and Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 9 4.1 Dinosaurs .................................................................................................................................. 10 4.2 Marine Reptiles ....................................................................................................................... -
Body-Shape Diversity in Triassic–Early Cretaceous Neopterygian fishes: Sustained Holostean Disparity and Predominantly Gradual Increases in Teleost Phenotypic Variety
Body-shape diversity in Triassic–Early Cretaceous neopterygian fishes: sustained holostean disparity and predominantly gradual increases in teleost phenotypic variety John T. Clarke and Matt Friedman Comprising Holostei and Teleostei, the ~32,000 species of neopterygian fishes are anatomically disparate and represent the dominant group of aquatic vertebrates today. However, the pattern by which teleosts rose to represent almost all of this diversity, while their holostean sister-group dwindled to eight extant species and two broad morphologies, is poorly constrained. A geometric morphometric approach was taken to generate a morphospace from more than 400 fossil taxa, representing almost all articulated neopterygian taxa known from the first 150 million years— roughly 60%—of their history (Triassic‒Early Cretaceous). Patterns of morphospace occupancy and disparity are examined to: (1) assess evidence for a phenotypically “dominant” holostean phase; (2) evaluate whether expansions in teleost phenotypic variety are predominantly abrupt or gradual, including assessment of whether early apomorphy-defined teleosts are as morphologically conservative as typically assumed; and (3) compare diversification in crown and stem teleosts. The systematic affinities of dapediiforms and pycnodontiforms, two extinct neopterygian clades of uncertain phylogenetic placement, significantly impact patterns of morphological diversification. For instance, alternative placements dictate whether or not holosteans possessed statistically higher disparity than teleosts in the Late Triassic and Jurassic. Despite this ambiguity, all scenarios agree that holosteans do not exhibit a decline in disparity during the Early Triassic‒Early Cretaceous interval, but instead maintain their Toarcian‒Callovian variety until the end of the Early Cretaceous without substantial further expansions. After a conservative Induan‒Carnian phase, teleosts colonize (and persistently occupy) novel regions of morphospace in a predominantly gradual manner until the Hauterivian, after which expansions are rare. -
A Phylogenomic Perspective on the Radiation of Ray-Finned Fishes Based Upon Targeted Sequencing of Ultraconserved Elements
1 A phylogenomic perspective on the radiation of 2 ray-finned fishes based upon targeted sequencing of 3 ultraconserved elements 1;2;∗ 1;2 1 1 4 Michael E. Alfaro , Brant C. Faircloth , Laurie Sorenson , Francesco Santini 1 5 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA 2 6 These authors contributed equally to this work 7 ∗ E-mail: [email protected] arXiv:1210.0120v1 [q-bio.PE] 29 Sep 2012 1 8 Summary 9 Ray-finned fishes constitute the dominant radiation of vertebrates with over 30,000 species. 10 Although molecular phylogenetics has begun to disentangle major evolutionary relationships 11 within this vast section of the Tree of Life, there is no widely available approach for effi- 12 ciently collecting phylogenomic data within fishes, leaving much of the enormous potential 13 of massively parallel sequencing technologies for resolving major radiations in ray-finned 14 fishes unrealized. Here, we provide a genomic perspective on longstanding questions regard- 15 ing the diversification of major groups of ray-finned fishes through targeted enrichment of 16 ultraconserved nuclear DNA elements (UCEs) and their flanking sequence. Our workflow 17 efficiently and economically generates data sets that are orders of magnitude larger than 18 those produced by traditional approaches and is well-suited to working with museum speci- 19 mens. Analysis of the UCE data set recovers a well-supported phylogeny at both shallow and 20 deep time-scales that supports a monophyletic relationship between Amia and Lepisosteus 21 (Holostei) and reveals elopomorphs and then osteoglossomorphs to be the earliest diverging 22 teleost lineages. -
Relationships of Lower Euteleostean Fishes
CHAPTER 12 Relationships of Lower Euteleostean Fishes G. DAVID JOHNSON COLIN PATTERSON National Museum of Natural History Natural History Museum Smithsonian Institution London, England Washington, D.C.- We all make mistakes; then we're sorry. What are the relationships of and within the Os- Popular song meroidei? (6) What are the relationships of and within Salmonidae? (7) Where does Lepidogalaxias belong? (8) What are the relationships within stomiiform fishes? (9) What of the Myctophoidei, as recognized by I. Introduction Greenwood et al. (1966, i.e., Aulopiformes and Myc- tophiformes in current terminology)? In that agenda, In the first Interrelationships of Fishes lower eutel- items (8) and (9) are treated elsewhere in this volume eosts, or "protacanthopterygians" as they were then and do not concern us, but items (1) through (7) do. called, were omitted, with only a comment in the Some classifications and/or cladograms of lower eu- Preface citing Weitzman (1967, on osmeroids and teleosts, dating back to the first application of cladistic stomiatoids), McDowall (1969, on osmeroids and ga- method, are summarized in Fig. 1. As is obvious from laxioids), Rosen and Greenwood (1970, on gonoryn- incongruence between all the patterns in Fig. 1, there chiforms and ostariophysans), Greenwood and Rosen has been protracted argument on how lower euteleos- (1971, on argentinoids and alepocephaloids), and Nel- tean groups are interrelated, how they are related to son (1970b, on salangids and argentinids; 1972, on neoteleosts (stomiiforms and eurypterygians, John- esocoids and galaxioids). son, 1992), and what group is basal to other euteleosts. Ten years later, in Ontogeny and Systematics of Fishes, The most substantial treatment of these problems is Fink (1984a) summarized the history of protacantho- in Begle's (1991,1992) cladistic analyses of Osmeroidei pterygians as "erosion" and "attrition, most notably (1991) and Argentinoidei (1992) (Fig. -
Family-Group Names of Fossil Fishes
European Journal of Taxonomy 466: 1–167 ISSN 2118-9773 https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2018.466 www.europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu 2018 · Van der Laan R. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Monograph urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1F74D019-D13C-426F-835A-24A9A1126C55 Family-group names of fossil fishes Richard VAN DER LAAN Grasmeent 80, 1357JJ Almere, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected] urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:55EA63EE-63FD-49E6-A216-A6D2BEB91B82 Abstract. The family-group names of animals (superfamily, family, subfamily, supertribe, tribe and subtribe) are regulated by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Particularly, the family names are very important, because they are among the most widely used of all technical animal names. A uniform name and spelling are essential for the location of information. To facilitate this, a list of family- group names for fossil fishes has been compiled. I use the concept ‘Fishes’ in the usual sense, i.e., starting with the Agnatha up to the †Osteolepidiformes. All the family-group names proposed for fossil fishes found to date are listed, together with their author(s) and year of publication. The main goal of the list is to contribute to the usage of the correct family-group names for fossil fishes with a uniform spelling and to list the author(s) and date of those names. No valid family-group name description could be located for the following family-group names currently in usage: †Brindabellaspidae, †Diabolepididae, †Dorsetichthyidae, †Erichalcidae, †Holodipteridae, †Kentuckiidae, †Lepidaspididae, †Loganelliidae and †Pituriaspididae. Keywords. Nomenclature, ICZN, Vertebrata, Agnatha, Gnathostomata. -
The Intermuscular Bones and Ligaments of Teleostean Fishes *
* The Intermuscular Bones and Ligaments of Teleostean Fishes COLIN PATTERSON and G. DAVID JOHNSON m I I SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY • NUMBER 559 SERIES PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Emphasis upon publication as a means of "diffusing knowledge" was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian. In his formal plan for the institution, Joseph Henry outlined a program that included the following statement: "It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge." This theme of basic research has been adhered to through the years by thousands of titles issued in series publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series: Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology Smithsonian Contributions to Botany Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to the Marine Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology Smithsonian Folklife Studies Smithsonian Studies in Air and Space Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology In these series, the Institution publishes small papers and full-scale monographs that report the research and collections of its various museums and bureaux or of professional colleagues in the world of science and scholarship. The publications are distributed by mailing lists to libraries, universities, and similar institutions throughout the world. Papers or monographs submitted for series publication are received by the Smithsonian Institution Press, subject to its own review for format and style, only through departments of the various Smithsonian museums or bureaux, where the manuscripts are given substantive review.