Evolutionary shifts in extant mustelid (Mustelidae: Carnivora) cranial shape, body size and body shape coincide with the Mid-Miocene Climate Transition

Law, Chris J.

doi:10.1098/rsbl.2019.0155

Cited by 31 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our PLM results revealed a significant effect of evolutionary history and ecology on humeral shape at the three levels studied (i.e. whole-bone, diaphyseal and epiphyseal), a result expected following studies of morphological variation in bats (Arbour et al, 2019;Brokaw & Smotherman, 2020;Monteiro & Nogueira, 2011;Rossoni et al, 2017), other mammals (Law, 2019) and other vertebrates (Gill et al, 2014;Hedrick et al, 2020;Vidal-García & Keogh, 2017;Wilson, 2013). Morphological adaptations of the humerus and shoulder joint in bats have proven informative, providing insight into the functional performance of bat species and the systematic arrangement of the order (Gaudioso et al, 2020;Hand et al, 2009;Schlosser-Sturm & Schliemann, 1995).…”

Section: Drivers Of Humeral Morphological Variationsupporting

confidence: 58%

“…terrestrial locomotion) in bats could have also canalised morphological adaptations in the epiphysis of the humerus (Hand et al, 2009; Norberg & Rayner, 1987; Riskin et al, 2006). At least eight ossification centres have been identified during humeral development in mammals (Kwong et al, 2014; Wisniewski et al, 2017). The humeral shaft is ossified prenatally in mammals (Wisniewski et al, 2017), whereas the epiphyseal plate remains cartilaginous at birth to allow longitudinal growth of the bone (Kwong et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Phylogeny and foraging behaviour shape modular morphological variation in bat humeri

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bats show a remarkable ecological diversity that is reflected both in dietary and foraging guilds (FGs). Cranial ecomorphological adaptations linked to diet have been widely studied in bats, using a variety of anatomical, computational and mathematical approaches. However, foraging-related ecomorphological adaptations and the concordance between cranial and postcranial morphological adaptations remain unexamined in bats and limited to the interpretation of traditional aerodynamic properties of the wing (e.g. wing loading [WL] and aspect ratio [AR]). For this reason, the postcranial ecomorphological diversity in bats and its drivers remain understudied. Using 3D virtual modelling and geometric morphometrics (GMM), we explored the phylogenetic,

show abstract

Section: Drivers Of Humeral Morphological Variationsupporting

confidence: 58%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogeny and foraging behaviour shape modular morphological variation in bat humeri

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fact that the relative body length was influenced by phylogeny was in part expected because the same finding has been recently reported in mustelids, a family of carnivorans, with some taxa exhibiting highly elongated bodies (Law et al, 2019, Law, 2019.…”

Section: Con Clus Ionssupporting

confidence: 64%

“…Moreover, these morphological adaptations seem to be associated with body mass, relative tail length, and relative body length, the latter highly influenced by phylogeny. The fact that the relative body length was influenced by phylogeny was in part expected because the same finding has been recently reported in mustelids, a family of carnivorans, with some taxa exhibiting highly elongated bodies (Law et al ., 2019, Law, 2019). The morphological regions of the lumbosacral, sacrocaudal and sacroiliac articulations are also highly variable among species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphological evolution of the carnivoran sacrum

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sacrum is a key piece of the vertebrate skeleton, since it connects the caudal region with the presacral region of the vertebral column and the hind limbs through the pelvis. Therefore, understanding its form and function is of great relevance in vertebrate ecomorphology. However, it is striking that morphometric studies that quantify its morphological evolution in relation to function are scarce. The main goal of this study is to investigate the morphological evolution of the sacrum in relation to its function in the mammalian order Carnivora, using three-dimensional (3D) geometric morphometrics. Principal component analysis under a phylogenetic background indicated that changes in sacrum morphology are mainly focused on the joint areas where it articulates with other parts of the skeleton allowing resistance to stress at these joints caused by increasing muscle loadings. In addition, we demonstrated that sacrum morphology is related to both the length of the tail relativised to the length of the body, and the length of the body relativised to body mass. We conclude that the sacrum in carnivores has evolved in response to the locomotor requirements of the species analysed, but in locomotion, each family has followed alternative morphological solutions to address the same functional demands.

show abstract

“…Skull evolution has been poorly studied using contemporary methods in anurans (frogs and toads) relative to more speciespoor lineages [e.g., carnivoran mammals (1,16) and crocodilians (17,18)]. Frog skulls may be understudied because it has been assumed that the highly derived Bauplan and skeletal morphology of this clade are tightly conserved (19).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of hyperossification expands skull diversity in frogs

Paluh

Stanley

Blackburn

2020

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frogs (Anura) are one of the most diverse vertebrate orders, comprising more than 7,000 species with a worldwide distribution and extensive ecological diversity. In contrast to other tetrapods, frogs have a highly derived body plan and simplified skull. In many lineages of anurans, increased mineralization has led to hyperossified skulls, but the function of this trait and its relationship with other aspects of head morphology are largely unexplored. Using three-dimensional morphological data from 158 species representing all frog families, we assessed wide-scale patterns of shape variation across all major lineages, reconstructed the evolutionary history of cranial hyperossification across the anuran phylogeny, and tested for relationships between ecology, skull shape, and hyperossification. Although many frogs share a conserved skull shape, several extreme forms have repeatedly evolved that commonly are associated with hyperossification, which has evolved independently more than 25 times. Variation in cranial shape is not explained by phylogenetic relatedness but is correlated with shifts in body size and ecology. The species with highly divergent, hyperossified skulls often have a specialized diet or a unique predator defense mechanism. Thus, the evolution of hyperossification has repeatedly facilitated the expansion of the head into multiple new shapes and functions.Anura | cranium | dermal ornamentation | geometric morphometrics | microcomputed tomography I dentifying the factors that drive evolutionary changes in the heads of vertebrates has been a long-standing challenge because of the difficulties of sampling taxa broadly, quantifying complex morphologies, and identifying possible mechanisms responsible for generating macroevolutionary patterns. The diverse selective pressures proposed to drive extreme derivations in the skull include specializations in feeding biology (1), habitat use (2), and locomotion (3). Sexual selection also is thought to influence head morphology because the skull often is sexually dimorphic in size and shape (4, 5). The interactions among these selective pressures can result in functional trade-offs (6) that shape the head as an integrated system that must house the sensory organs, capture prey, provide protection, and partake in locomotion and reproduction (7). The nonadaptive mechanisms of architectural constraint (i.e., allometry; ref. 8) and phylogenetic conservatism (9) also have been invoked to explain morphological variation within and across lineages, particularly in cases in which extreme shifts are absent. The diversification of the skull usually results from changes in size or shape of preexisting elements or the loss of bones (10), but the origin of novel structures also may be responsible for shifts in morphology (11).Increased mineralization or hyperossification of the skull is a recurrent feature among vertebrates; it also is known as dermal ornamentation (12,13). In its most rudimentary form, additional membrane bone is deposited on the skeleton to form ridges and...

show abstract

Evolutionary shifts in extant mustelid (Mustelidae: Carnivora) cranial shape, body size and body shape coincide with the Mid-Miocene Climate Transition

Cited by 31 publications

References 48 publications

Phylogeny and foraging behaviour shape modular morphological variation in bat humeri

Phylogeny and foraging behaviour shape modular morphological variation in bat humeri

Morphological evolution of the carnivoran sacrum

Evolution of hyperossification expands skull diversity in frogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About