2015
DOI: 10.1163/1937240x-00002328
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Archaeostracan (Phyllocarida: Archaeostraca) antennulae and antennae: sexual dimorphism in early malacostracans and Ceratiocaris M’Coy, 1849 as a possible stem eumalacostracan

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As N. stuertzi has the same relationship to crown Malacostraca as A. inflata (at least in the analysis of (Collette and Hagadorn, 2010b), neither fossil can be confidently placed within crown-group Malacostraca. Recent reinvestigation of Ceratiocaris suggests this Silurian 'phyllocarid' may be a stem eumalacostracan due to possession of an antennal scale, perhaps casting doubt on the monophyly of fossil phyllocarids (Jones et al, 2015). The Ceratiocaris study, however, assumes malacostracan identity of phyllocarids (partly defined by biramous antennules), which, as discussed above, may not be robust to phylogenetic analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As N. stuertzi has the same relationship to crown Malacostraca as A. inflata (at least in the analysis of (Collette and Hagadorn, 2010b), neither fossil can be confidently placed within crown-group Malacostraca. Recent reinvestigation of Ceratiocaris suggests this Silurian 'phyllocarid' may be a stem eumalacostracan due to possession of an antennal scale, perhaps casting doubt on the monophyly of fossil phyllocarids (Jones et al, 2015). The Ceratiocaris study, however, assumes malacostracan identity of phyllocarids (partly defined by biramous antennules), which, as discussed above, may not be robust to phylogenetic analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, little in the way of other morphology can be discerned. Antennal morphology of C. macroura was described in detail by Jones et al (2015). The mandibles of UWGM 1923 occupy greater than half of the cephalic region ( Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has also been discussed whether certain phyllocarid‐like fossils could represent either offshoots of the lineage towards Malacostraca or Eumalacostraca (Jones et al . ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%