Whales, Whaling, and Ocean Ecosystems 2007
DOI: 10.1525/california/9780520248847.003.0007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolutionary Patterns in Cetacea Fishing Up Prey Size through Deep Time

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These data, together with the apparent monophyly of Balaeopteroidea (Deméré et al 2005), provide tentative support for an evolutionary scenario advanced by Lambertsen et al (1995), which frames lunge feeding as a putative key innovation that enhanced a pre-existing suite of engulfment-assisting morphological characters (Kimura 2002, Deméré et al 2005. Moreover, the present diversity of living balaenopterids (in terms of both prey preferences and body size range; Lindberg & Pyenson 2006), sister group comparisons, and ancestral body size reconstruction all suggest that the advent of lunge feeding provided an ecological advantage that promoted large body size in the balaenopterid lineage, eventually providing the opportunity for the evolution of some of the largest organisms that have ever existed. However, these hypotheses cannot be tested until (1) further comparative work identifies clear evolutionary transformations in the cranial and mandibular character complexes (e.g.…”
Section: Ecology and Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 61%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These data, together with the apparent monophyly of Balaeopteroidea (Deméré et al 2005), provide tentative support for an evolutionary scenario advanced by Lambertsen et al (1995), which frames lunge feeding as a putative key innovation that enhanced a pre-existing suite of engulfment-assisting morphological characters (Kimura 2002, Deméré et al 2005. Moreover, the present diversity of living balaenopterids (in terms of both prey preferences and body size range; Lindberg & Pyenson 2006), sister group comparisons, and ancestral body size reconstruction all suggest that the advent of lunge feeding provided an ecological advantage that promoted large body size in the balaenopterid lineage, eventually providing the opportunity for the evolution of some of the largest organisms that have ever existed. However, these hypotheses cannot be tested until (1) further comparative work identifies clear evolutionary transformations in the cranial and mandibular character complexes (e.g.…”
Section: Ecology and Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 61%
“…Rorquals are among the most speciose groups of living cetaceans, whereas balaenids comprise only a few species; a difference that is also observed in the generic diversity of these 2 groups throughout their evolutionary history (Lindberg & Pyenson 2006). Preliminary reconstructions of body size in extinct balaenopteroids indicate that, ancestrally, this group of baleen whales did not exhibit the larger size categories of their extant relatives (Pyenson & Sponberg 2007), and the same situation appears to be true for the balaenid lineage as well (Bisconti 2005).…”
Section: Ecology and Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although human-initiated overexploitation is well understood, extending back through the Pleistocene [44], identifying definitive examples of predator-driven extinction in the fossil record is more elusive, despite potential candidates. One example comes from the Neogene, where declining mysticete whale diversity coincided with the occurrence of carcharodontid sharks [45] and sperm whales [46]. Although these predators fed on mysticete whales during the Neogene [46,47], it is challenging to determine from the fossil record whether predation was directly responsible for the extinction of mysticete species.…”
Section: Overexploitationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the strong correlation between TL and adult body mass has been well documented for both mysticetes and odontocetes (Mackintosh and Wheeler 1929;Nishiwaki 1950;Gambell 1970;Perrin 1975;Lockyer 1976;Uhen 2004), TL is more widely reported in the literature for other marine vertebrates (e.g., teleosts, elasmobranchs, and Mesozoic marine reptiles). Because of the abundant specimen data available from the whaling industry and long-term stranding programs, some cetological studies have sought to predict the body size of living cetaceans using proxy metrics (e.g., Stuart and Morejohn 1980;Kemper and Leddard 1999), but few have explored the implications of such proxies for illuminating evolutionary patterns in the fossil record (Lindberg and Pyenson 2006). In this study, we favored the approach of using total length as a valid size metric.…”
Section: Reconstructing Body Size Using Total Lengthmentioning
confidence: 99%