DOCSLIB.ORG

Evolution, Ecology and Diversity of Pycnodontiform Fishes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evolution, Ecology and Diversity of Pycnodontiform Fishes Univ.-Prof. Dr. Jürgen Kriwet Evolution, Ecology and Diversity of Pycnodontiform Fishes Pycnodontiform fishes, which represent an extinct group of ray-finned fishes including more than 1000 nominal species are characterised by a deep, rounded, and laterally compressed body, a frontal flexure and prognathous snout, elongated dorsal and anal fins, which form together with the caudal fin an effective ruder, and distinct dentitions with teeth beimng mainly restricted to the prearticulars and the vomer. The dentition is assumed by most authors to be indicative for durophageous feeding habits. They resemble superficially in their body-shape extant coral reef fishes like the butterflyfishes (Chaetodontidae), doctor fishes (Acanthuridae), and parrotfishes (Balistidae). Their characteristic highly developed and specialised crushing heterodont dentition has long been a leading character in taxonomy and systematics for the last 170 years. Most pycnodontiform taxa are based entirely on characteristics of their prearticular or vomerine dentitions. The squamation pattern of pycnodontiforms fishes ranges from complete (covering the body from the posterior margin of the skull to the beginning of the caudal fin) to completely reduced with different intermediate stages. The scales of pycnodontiforms are rhombic and resemble the lepidosteoid scale type. However, the surfaces of the scales lack the ganoin layer, which is characteristic for this type and the term modified lepidosteoid scale type was introduced for pycnodont scales. The dermal skull bones also lack the ganoin layer. Additionally, these fishes are characterized by the lack of ossified vertebral centra, the significance of which still is not unambiguously established. The monophyly of pycnodontiforms fishes is well-established. The relationships among these fishes and of pycnodontiforms to other actinopterygians, however, have been discussed controversial for a long time and no general agreement has been achieved up to now. This project focuses on the (1) morphology, (2) taxonomy and systematics, (3) evolution, (4) functional aspects of the feeding apparatus, (5) ecology, and (6) palaeobiogeography of pycnodontiform fishes (Neopterygii, Pycnodontomorpha). Related Publications (* = conference abstracts) 1. KRIWET, J. 1997. Pycnodontid fishes from the Upper Barremian (Lower Cretaceous) of Uña (Cuenca Province, E-Spain). – Second International Meeting Mesozoic Fishes - Systematics and the fossil record, Buckow, 1997: 23; Berlin.* 2. KRIWET, J. 1999a. Schädelanatomie und Nahrung pycnodonter Fische (Neopterygii; Pycnodontiformes). – Terra Nostra, 99(8): 46; Zürich.* 3. KRIWET, J. 1999b. Evolutionary trends in the cranial anatomy of pycnodont fishes (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes). – Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 19 (suppl. 3): 57; Lawrence, Kansas.* 4. KRIWET, J. 1999c. Pycnodont fishes (Neopterygii, †Pycnodontiformes) from the upper Barremian (Lower Cretaceous) of Uña (Cuenca Province, E-Spain) and branchial teeth in pycnodontid fishes. – In: ARRATIA, G. & SCHULTZE, H.-P. (eds.): Mesozoic 1 Univ.-Prof. Dr. Jürgen Kriwet fishes – Systematics and the fossil record: 215–238; Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, München. 5. KRIWET, J., POYATO-ARIZA, F. & WENZ, S. 1999. A revision of Coelodus subdiscus WENZ, 1989 (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes) from the Early Cretaceous of Montsec de Rubies (Lérida). – Treballs del Museu de Geologia de Barcelona, 8: 33–65.* 6. KRIWET, J. 2000a. Revision of Mesturus cordillera MARTILL et al., 1998 (Actinopterygii, Pycnodontiformes) from the Oxfordian (Upper Jurassic) of northern Chile. – Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 20(3): 450–455. 7. KRIWET, J. 2000b. Ökomorphologische Aspekte pycnodonter Fische (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes. – Terra Nostra, 2000(3): 67; Berlin.* 8. KRIWET, J. 2000c. Evolutionary trends in the cranial anatomy of pycnodont fishes (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes). – Terra Nostra, 2000(3): 153; Berlin.* 9. KRIWET, J. 2001a. Palaeobiogeography of pycnodontiform fishes (Actinopterygii, Neopterygii). – Seminario de Paleontología de Zaragoza, 5.1: 121-130. 10. KRIWET, J. 2001b. Feeding mechanisms and ecology of pycnodont fishes (Neopterygii, †Pycnodontiformes). – Mitteilungen aus dem Museum für Naturkunde zu Berlin, Geowissenschaftliche Reihe, 4: 139–165. 11. KRIWET, J. 2002a. Anomoeodus pauciseriale, a new pycnodont fish (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes) from the White Chalk Formation (Upper Cretaceous) of Sussex, South England – Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 76(1): 117–123. 12. KRIWET, J. 2002b. Pycnodont fish remains (Neopterygii: Pycnodontiformes) from the Upper Jurassic of the Lusitanian basin. – Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Monatshefte, 10: 577–587. 13. KRIWET, J. 2003. Dental Morphology of the pycnodont fish †Stemmatodus rhombus (Agassiz 1844) (Neopterygii, †Pycnodontiformes) from the Early Cretaceous with comments on its systematic position. – Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 94: 145–155. 14. KRIWET, J. 2004. A new pycnodont fish genus (Neopterygii: Pycnodontiformes) from the Cenomanian (Upper Cretaceous) of Mount Lebanon and its interrelationships. – Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 24: 525–532. 15. DELSATE, D. & KRIWET, J. 2004. Late Triassic pycnodont fish remains (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes) from the Germanic basin. – Eclogae geologicae Helvetiae, 97: 183–191. 16. KRIWET, J. 2005a. A comprehensive study of the skull and dentition of pycnodont fishes (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes. – Zitteliana, 45: 135–188. 17. KRIWET, J. 2005b. The cranial and dental morphology of pycnodont fishes (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes). – Berichte des Institutes für Geologie und Paläontologie der Karl- Franzens-Universität Graz/Austria, 10: 64.* 18. KRIWET, J. & SCHMITZ, L. 2005. New insight into the distribution and palaeobiology of the pycnodont fish Gyrodus. – Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 50: 49–56. 19. KRIWET, J. 2008. The dentition of the enigmatic pycnodont fish, Athrodon wittei Fricke, 1876 (Neopterygii; Pycnodontiformes), from the Late Jurassic of NW Germany. – Fossil Record, 11: 77–82. 20. LICHT, M. & KRIWET, J. 2008. Tooth replacement in pycnodontiforms (Actinopterygii, Neopterygii). – Terra Nostra 2009/3: 73-74.* 21. KRIWET, J. & LEHMANN, J. 2013. Turonian pycnodontid fish (Neopterygii, Pycnodontiformes) from northern Germany. – In: SCHWARZ, C. & KRIWET, J. (eds): 2 Univ.-Prof. Dr. Jürgen Kriwet Abstracts 6th International Meeting on Mesozoic fishes: 43; Verlag Dr. Friedirch Pfeil, Munich.* 3 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Development of the Muscles Associated with the Mandibular and Hyoid Arches in the Siberian Sturgeon, Acipenser Baerii (Acipenseriformes: Acipenseridae)
    Received: 31 May 2017 | Revised: 24 September 2017 | Accepted: 29 September 2017 DOI: 10.1002/jmor.20761 RESEARCH ARTICLE Development of the muscles associated with the mandibular and hyoid arches in the Siberian sturgeon, Acipenser baerii (Acipenseriformes: Acipenseridae) Peter Warth1 | Eric J. Hilton2 | Benjamin Naumann1 | Lennart Olsson1 | Peter Konstantinidis3 1Institut fur€ Spezielle Zoologie und Evolutionsbiologie mit Phyletischem Abstract Museum, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, The skeleton of the jaws and neurocranium of sturgeons (Acipenseridae) are connected only Germany through the hyoid arch. This arrangement allows considerable protrusion and retraction of the 2 Department of Fisheries Science, Virginia jaws and is highly specialized among ray-finned fishes (Actinopterygii). To better understand the Institute of Marine Science, College of unique morphology and the evolution of the jaw apparatus in Acipenseridae, we investigated the William & Mary, Gloucester Point, Virginia development of the muscles of the mandibular and hyoid arches of the Siberian sturgeon, Aci- 3Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon penser baerii. We used a combination of antibody staining and formalin-induced fluorescence of tissues imaged with confocal microscopy and subsequent three-dimensional reconstruction. These Correspondence data were analyzed to address the identity of previously controversial and newly discovered mus- Peter Warth, Institut fur€ Spezielle Zoologie cle portions. Our results indicate that the anlagen of the muscles in A. baerii develop similarly to und Evolutionsbiologie mit Phyletischem Museum, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, those of other actinopterygians, although they differ by not differentiating into distinct muscles. Erbertstr. 1, 07743 Jena, Germany. This is exemplified by the subpartitioning of the m. adductor mandibulae as well as the massive m.
    [Show full text]
  • Horodysky Throws Light on Fish Vision
    3 Horodysky Throws Light on Fish Vision Andrij Horodysky’s research can be The research is part of an emerg- Horodysky also benefits summed up in a simple saying—what ing field called “visual ecology” that from collaborations with Char- you see is what you get. promises to throw new light on animal ter captains like Steve Wray, Horodysky, a VIMS graduate behavior and the interactions between who provide him with the fish student working with faculty members predators and prey. Horodysky and his he needs for his experiments. Drs. Rich Brill, Rob Latour, and Jack advisors are pioneers in applying this Horodysky’s preliminary Musick, is using electroretinography—a field to Bay fishes. results provide basic insight technique first developed for studying The researchers are focusing their into how Bay fishes see the human vision—to explore how fishes initial studies on recreationally impor- world. The results show that see the underwater world of Chesapeake tant Bay species such as striped bass, some species, like striped bass, Bay. weakfish, croaker, and drum. This re- are adapted to see large, swiftly Brill, an internationally recognized flects the source of their funding, which moving prey in daylight. Oth- fish physiologist who heads NOAA’s comes from the Recreational Fishing ers, like weakfish, are adapted Cooperative Marine Education and Advisory Board of the Virginia Marine to see small, sluggish prey at Research (CMER) program at VIMS, Resources Commission. The Board uses night. has recently turned his attention to the money from Virginia’s saltwater fishing He is also comparing the sensory world of fish and other marine license to fund projects that improve the types of prey that fishes are organisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Should I Eat the Fish I Catch?
    EPA 823-F-14-002 For More Information October 2014 Introduction What can I do to reduce my health risks from eating fish containing chemical For more information about reducing your Fish are an important part of a healthy diet. pollutants? health risks from eating fish that contain chemi- Office of Science and Technology (4305T) They are a lean, low-calorie source of protein. cal pollutants, contact your local or state health Some sport fish caught in the nation’s lakes, Following these steps can reduce your health or environmental protection department. You rivers, oceans, and estuaries, however, may risks from eating fish containing chemical can find links to state fish advisory programs Should I Eat the contain chemicals that could pose health risks if pollutants. The rest of the brochure explains and your state’s fish advisory program contact these fish are eaten in large amounts. these recommendations in more detail. on the National Fish Advisory Program website Fish I Catch? at: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/fish- The purpose of this brochure is not to 1. Look for warning signs or call your shellfish/fishadvisories/index.cfm. discourage you from eating fish. It is intended local or state environmental health as a guide to help you select and prepare fish department. Contact them before you You may also contact: that are low in chemical pollutants. By following fish to see if any advisories are posted in these recommendations, you and your family areas where you want to fish. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency can continue to enjoy the benefits of eating fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Neopterygian Fish with Secondary Sexual Characteristics Found from the Middle Triassic of China 18 February 2016
    Neopterygian fish with secondary sexual characteristics found from the Middle Triassic of China 18 February 2016 Sciences, and his collaborator reported a new sexually dimorphic primitive neopterygian fish, Venusichthys comptus, based on 30 exceptionally well-preserved specimens from the Middle Triassic (Pelsonian, Anisian) Luoping Lagerstätte of eastern Yunnan, China. The discovery represents the oldest known secondary sexual characteristics in Neopterygii, and provides an important addition for understanding the behavior, reproduction, and early diversification of Neopterygii. The Luoping Lagerstätte fossil beds are composed of thinly laminated micritic limestone alternating with silty limestone, indicating a semi-enclosed intraplatform depositional environment. This new species has a blunt snout, an elongate and fusiform body, and an almost homocercal caudal fin with a forked profile. All 30 specimens represent a small- Fig.1 Female specimen of Venusichthys comptus before sized primitive neopterygian with a standard length (a) and after coated with ammonium chloride. Credit: XU ranging from 25 to 38 mm. Guanghui Secondary sexual characteristics are features that appear at sexual maturity and distinguish the two sexes of a species. Studies of secondary sexual characteristics in a species are vital for fully understanding its behavior, reproduction, and evolution. Secondary sexual characteristics are easily observed and studied in living animals, but the situation is rather more complicated in extinct animals, primarily due to inadequacies of sample size or the fragmentary nature of fossil remains. Neopterygii are the most diverse group of extant ray-finned fishes, which underwent a rapid radiation in the aftermath of end-Permian mass extinction. In a paper published online 23 January in the journal Science Bulletin, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Science – Biology & Ecology
    Fishery Science – Biology & Ecology How Fish Reproduce Illustration of a generic fish life cycle. Source: Zebrafish Information Server, University of South Carolina (http://zebra.sc.edu/smell/nitin/nitin.html) Reproduction is an essential component of life, and there are a diverse number of reproductive strategies in fishes throughout the world. In marine fishes, there are three basic reproductive strategies that can be used to classify fish. The most common reproductive strategy in marine ecosystems is oviparity. Approximately 90% of bony and 43% of cartilaginous fish are oviparous (See Types of Fish). In oviparous fish, females spawn eggs into the water column, which are then fertilized by males. For most oviparous fish, the eggs take less energy to produce so the females release large quantities of eggs. For example, a female Ocean Sunfish is able to produce 300 million eggs over a spawning cycle. The eggs that become fertilized in oviparous fish may spend long periods of time in the water column as larvae before settling out as juveniles. An advantage of oviparity is the number of eggs produced, because it is likely some of the offspring will survive. However, the offspring are at a disadvantage because they must go through a larval stage in which their location is directed by oceans currents. During the larval stage, the larvae act as primary consumers (See How Fish Eat) in the food web where they must not only obtain food but also avoid predation. Another disadvantage is that the larvae might not find suitable habitat when they settle out of the ~ Voices of the Bay ~ [email protected] ~ http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/education/voicesofthebay.html ~ (Nov 2011) Fishery Science – Biology & Ecology water column.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Whitefish (Coregonus Peled) ERSS
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northern Whitefish (Coregonus peled) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, March 2011 Revised, September 2014 and July 2015 Photo not available. 1 Native Range, and Status in the United States Native Range From Froese and Pauly (2015): “Europe and Asia: lakes and rivers from Mezen to Kolyma River, Russia.” Status in the United States This species has not been reported as introduced in the United States. Means of Introductions in the United States This species has not been reported as introduced in the United States. 2 Biology and Ecology Taxonomic Hierarchy and Taxonomic Standing From ITIS (2015): “Kingdom Animalia Subkingdom Bilateria Infrakingdom Deuterostomia Phylum Chordata Subphylum Vertebrata Infraphylum Gnathostomata Superclass Osteichthyes Class Actinopterygii Subclass Neopterygii Infraclass Teleostei Superorder Protacanthopterygii Order Salmoniformes Family Salmonidae Subfamily Coregoninae Genus Coregonus Linnaeus, 1758 – whitefishes Species Coregonus peled (Gmelin, 1789) – peled” “Taxonomic Status: valid” Size, Weight, and Age Range From Froese and Pauly (2015): “Maturity: Lm ?, range 22 - 36 cm Max length : 50.0 cm TL male/unsexed; [Berg 1962]; max. published weight: 5.0 kg [Berg 1962]; max. reported age: 13 years [Kottelat and Freyhof 2007]” Environment From Froese and Pauly (2015): “Marine; freshwater; brackish; demersal; anadromous [Riede 2004].” Climate/Range From Froese and Pauly (2015): “Polar; 74°N - 64°N” Distribution Outside the United States Native From Froese and Pauly (2015): “Europe and Asia: lakes and rivers from Mezen to Kolyma River, Russia.” Introduced From Freyhof and Kottelat (2008): “Hybrids involving C. peled introduced in many reservoirs and lakes (Onega) throughout Russia, eastern and central Europe.” Means of Introduction Outside the United States From Savini et al.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Fossil Coelacanths from the Late Cretaceous of the Eastern
    ^rfij^i^v^^™, - » v ' - - 4 j/ N ^P"" ,- V ^™ V- -*^ >•;:-* ' ^ * -r;' David R. Schwimmer, Geologist, Columbus State University Introduction In Autumn, 1987, a sizeable mass of fossil bone was discovered by amateur collectors in the bed of a small creek in eastern Alabama. The bone-bearing rock, some 300 kg in weight, was collected by a party led by G. Dent Williams and transferred to the paleontology laboratory at Columbus State University. Williams prepared most of the material using air percussion tools, and I further cleared some bones with acetic acid. A mandible (lower jaw bone) of 502 mm length was the first bone prepared from the material. It strangely lacked evidence of both teeth and tooth sockets, and it was covered medially with coarse denticulation resembling #40 grit sandpaper. The jawbone conformed with no recognizable North American Late Cretaceous fish or four-legged animal, and, given the large size of the mandible, my initial search for an identification ranged from ankylosaurid dinosaurs, to mosasaurs, to the larger contemporary fish, such as Xiphactinus. Nothing known in the Late Cretaceous of North America matched the mandible nor any other bone which was subsequently prepared from this matrix. J.D. Stewart of the L.A. County Museum was prior fossil record of a North American coelacanth is concurrently studying fossils of small marine Diplurus newarki, from freshwater deposits of earliest coelacanths from the Late Cretaceous of western Kansas, Jurassic age (ca. 205 Myr.: Schaeffer, 1941, 1952). USA (which were also a new discovery at the time: see Forey (1981) and Maisey (1991) recognized two sub- Stewart et al., 1991).
    [Show full text]
  • Explore a Fish Lesson Plan
    Grade Level 4 - 12 EXPLORE A FISH Duration FISH DISSECTION 1 - 1 ½ hours Subject/Subject Area Focus Overview Science, language arts; Students will examine the external and internal anatomy of various fish Analysis, application, species. They will note similarities and differences. Students will then communication, use their observations to make inferences about the relationships among comparing similarities and them. differences, description, discussion, drawing, small Background information group work, using time This activity gives students first-hand experience exploring the and space, writing. adaptations which allow fish to function in their environment. Students look at both form and function of different systems to help understand Materials how specific adaptations assist organisms in adapting to their For each pair (or group) of environment. How do fish move through the water and keep their vertical students: position within the water? Students can make comparisons between their • Whole body fresh fish own anatomy and the anatomy of a fish. • Dissecting trays or thick pads of newspaper It is important for students to understand the purpose of this activity • Scissors or Scalpel is to study the internal and external anatomy of a fish. It requires (Most cuts can be concentration, listening skills and being able to follow directions. All made with a pair of students should be given the option of not participating in the activity classroom scissors) and be allowed an alternate activity. You may want to do a practice run on • Probe (A large partially your own. straightened paper clip works well) You can either do this activity as a teacher-led class discussion or break • Forceps (A nice tool but the students into cooperative learning groups and give each group: a fish, not necessary) “Explore a Fish” worksheet, dissection and anatomy sheet, newspaper • Paper towels and and something to cut the fish with.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Anatomy
    Fish Anatomy Objectives: become acquainted with the general external and internal structures of fishes, and how they vary functionally and taxonomically Head mouth mouth position – superior, terminal, sub-terminal, inferior teeth types and locations barbels, tubercules – what are their positions and uses? sensory pores nares Body shapes – which taxa have each, what are the advantages of each type? fusiform sagittaform aguilliform compressiform depressiform filiform Fins – what are each used for? how does their presence or location vary among taxa? paired fins: pelvic pectoral anal single fins: dorsal - one or two; rarely three, as in cod family (median) caudal - adipose spines vs. rays Internal organs GI tract, reproductive organs, excretory system including kidneys, liver gas bladder (present or absent, sealed or unsealed, connected or not to other organs) Body musculature (more on these later when we talk about swimming) hypaxial muscles epaxial muscles myomeres Skin and scales presence, absence, or partial covering of scales functions of scales types of scales: placoid, ganoid, cycloid, ctenoid, scutes skin pigmentation: melanophores Anatomy, cont. Terms/structures you should know: Osteology Skull branchial arches; gill rakers premaxilla, maxilla, dentary operculum: opercle, subopercle, preopercle, interopercle bones which have teeth attached, including pharyngeal teeth otoliths Vetebral column neural spine, neural arch, neural canal centrum zygopophysis, basapophysis hemal spine, hemal arch (not always present?), hemal canal ribs (dorsal - epipleurals, and ventral - pleurals) Caudal skeleton urostyle hypurals epurals Appendicular skeleton pterygiophores lepidotrichia ceratotrichia pectoral girdle - cleithrum pelvic girdle .
    [Show full text]
  • Bichir External Gills Arise Via Heterochronic Shift That Accelerates
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Bichir external gills arise via heterochronic shift that accelerates hyoid arch development Jan Stundl1,2, Anna Pospisilova1, David Jandzik1,3, Peter Fabian1†, Barbora Dobiasova1‡, Martin Minarik1§, Brian D Metscher4, Vladimir Soukup1*, Robert Cerny1* 1Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic; 2National Museum, Prague, Czech Republic; 3Department of Zoology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava, Bratislava, Slovakia; 4Department of Theoretical Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria *For correspondence: Abstract In most vertebrates, pharyngeal arches form in a stereotypic anterior-to-posterior [email protected] progression. To gain insight into the mechanisms underlying evolutionary changes in pharyngeal (VS); arch development, here we investigate embryos and larvae of bichirs. Bichirs represent the earliest [email protected] (RC) diverged living group of ray-finned fishes, and possess intriguing traits otherwise typical for lobe- Present address: †Eli and Edythe finned fishes such as ventral paired lungs and larval external gills. In bichir embryos, we find that Broad CIRM Center for the anteroposterior way of formation of cranial segments is modified by the unique acceleration of Regenerative Medicine and Stem the entire hyoid arch segment, with earlier and orchestrated development of the endodermal, Cell Research, University of mesodermal, and neural crest tissues. This major heterochronic shift in the anteroposterior Southern California, Los Angeles, developmental sequence enables early appearance of the external gills that represent key ‡ United States; The Prague breathing organs of bichir free-living embryos and early larvae. Bichirs thus stay as unique models Zoological Garden, Prague, for understanding developmental mechanisms facilitating increased breathing capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Overview
    The Toledo Zoo/ThinkingWorks Teacher Overview for the Fish Lessons Ó2003 Teacher Overview: Fish Fish have many traits that are unique to this particular class of animals. Below is a list of general fish traits to help you and your students complete the ThinkingWorks menu. This lesson focuses on typical fish that most people are familiar with, not on atypical fish such as seahorses. Fish are divided into three groups or classes, each with its own set of features. These classes include the bony fish (e.g., tuna and bass), cartilaginous fish (e.g., sharks and rays) and jawless fish (e.g., lampreys). We have included a list of the different fish found at The Toledo Zoo. Most of the fish are found in the Aquarium but there are also fish in the Diversity of Life. Note that animals move constantly in and out of the Zoo so the list below may be inaccurate. Please call the Zoo for a current list of fish that are on exhibit and their locations. Typical Fish Traits Lightweight, strong scales Lateral line for detecting for protection changes in turbulence along a fish as well as changes in water pressure Gas bladder for buoyancy, stability (internal) Symmetrical tail for Most fish have a well powerful swimming developed eye for locating prey, detecting predators and finding a mate. Flexible “lips” for picking up food Gills for extracting oxygen from the water Maneuverable, paired fins for Lightweight, strong moving forward and controlling skeleton for support roll, pitch and yaw q Fish are cold-blooded, obtaining heat from the surrounding water.
    [Show full text]