Evolution and biogeography of primates: a new model based on molecular phylogenetics, vicariance and plate tectonics

Abstract

Heads, M. Evolution and biogeography of primates: a new model based on molecular phylogenetics, vicariance and plate tectonics. —Zoologica Scripta, 39, 107–127. The ages of the oldest fossils suggest an origin for primates in the Paleocene (∼56 Ma). Fossil‐calibrated molecular clock dates give Cretaceous dates (∼80–116 Ma). Both these estimates are minimum dates although they are often ‘transmogrified’ and treated as maximum or absolute dates. Oldest fossils can underestimate ages by tens of millions of years and instead of calibrating the time‐course of evolution with a scanty fossil record, the geographical boundaries of the main molecular clades of primates are calibrated here with radiometrically dated tectonic events. This indicates that primates originated when a globally widespread ancestor (early Archonta) differentiated into a northern group (Plesiadapiformes, extinct), a southern group (Primates), and two south‐east Asian groups (Dermoptera and Scandentia). The division occurred with the breakup of Pangea in the Early Jurassic and the opening of the central Atlantic (∼185 Ma). Within primates, the strepsirrhines and haplorhines diverged with volcanism and buckling on the Lebombo Monocline, a volcanic rifted margin in south‐east Africa (Early Jurassic, ∼180 Ma). Within strepsirrhines, lorises and galagos (Africa and Asia) and lemurs (Madagascar) diverged with the formation of the Mozambique Channel (Middle Jurassic, ∼160 Ma). Within haplorhines, Old World monkeys and New World monkeys diverged with the opening of the Atlantic (Early Cretaceous, ∼130 Ma). The main aspects of primate distribution are interpreted as the result of plate tectonics, phylogeny and vicariance, with some subsequent range expansion leading to secondary overlap. Long‐distance, trans‐oceanic dispersal events are not necessary. The primate ancestral complex was already widespread globally when sea‐floor spreading, strike‐slip rifting and orogeny fractured and deformed distributions through the Jurassic and Cretaceous, leading to the origin of the modern clades. The model suggests that the topology of the phylogenetic tree reflects a sequence of differentiation in a widespread ancestor rather than a series of dispersal events.

Non-Simian Foamy Viruses: Molecular Virology, Tropism and Prevalence and Zoonotic/Interspecies Transmission

“…Unfortunately in their investigations the clade differences did not present themselves very obvious as they were aiming to introduce the recently identified endogenous elements for FVs and additionally were using a small subset of SFVs for their analyses. A more comprehensive profile of all known New and Old World SFVs including PFV as shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3 illustrates the two entirely separated clades, closely correlating with Michael Heads evolution theory of the distribution of monkeys, mentioned below [45]. So far zoonotic transmission events of New World SFVs to humans have not been reported, thus leaving it open whether the New World SFVs have a comparable zoonotic potential like the Old World SFVs as it is proposed for SFV gor , SFV cpz and SFV agm in many publications [9,46,47,48,49].…”

“…The mean sequence identity of pol to the other FVs is 59.7% (CI 59.3–60.1) for RaFV-1, followed by SloEFV 60.27% (CI 59.77–60.77) and CoeEFV 48.51% (CI 48.13–48.9). The distant tree distribution of the endogenous FV in aye-aye, a prosimian lemur, living on Madagascar, fits into a modern evolution theory, according to which the monkeys split up not 60 but nearly 100 mya in compliance with the tectonically plate shift [45]. The separation of the tectonic plates and the following absence of genetic mixing led to the separated evolution of dry and wet nose apes the latter ones diverging into the lemurs and loris (both are Prosimians).…”

Ancient dates or accelerated rates? Morphological clocks and the antiquity of placental mammals

“…R. Soc. B 281: 20141278 ancient dates are implausible given the known mammalian fossil record (but see [46]). They require either: (i) extremely low preservation rates of fossil placentals during the Mesozoic, but not for the Coenozoic [47]; (ii) biogeographically unlikely 'Garden of Eden' hypotheses, in which Placentalia originated and began to diversify only in regions for which the Mesozoic mammalian fossil record is especially poor (such as Australia, India or Antarctica [48,49]); or (iii) that the earliest crown rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org Proc.…”

Biogeography in deep time – What do phylogenetics, geology, and paleoclimate tell us about early platyrrhine evolution?

“…This casts doubt on a scenario of dispersal by primates and rodents to South America in Late Cretaceous times (Heads, 2010).…”