<i>Lutra lutra</i>(Carnivora: Mustelidae)

Hung, Nancy; Law, Chris J.

doi:10.1093/mspecies/sew011

Cited by 33 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…N = number of specimens for that species. Scan Location indicates the facility where CT scans were made: 1) Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2) Royal Veterinary College, Hertfordshire, UK and 3) University of Chicago, Chicago, USASpeciesNCommon NameHabitReferenceScan Location Amblonyx cinereus 2Asian small-clawed otterNatatorialLarivière [60]1 Arctonyx collaris 1Hog badgerFossorialNowak [73]1 Eira barbara 2TayraScansorialPresley [80]1 Enhydra lutris 1Sea otterNatatorialEstes [26]1 Galictis vittata 1Greater grisonGeneralizedYensen & Tarifa [102]3 Gulo gulo 1WolverineGeneralizedPasitschniak-Arts & Larivière [76]1,2 Ictonyx striatus 2ZorillaFossorialLarivière [59]1 Lontra felina 1Marine otterNatatorialLarivière [57]1 Lontra longicaudis 1Long-tailed otterNatatorialLarivière [58]1 Lutra lutra 2Eurasian otterNatatorialHung & Law [46]1 Lutrogale perspicillata 1Smooth-coated otterNatatorialHwang & Larivière [48]3 Martes americana 2N. American martenScansorialClark et al [14]3 Martes flavigula 2Yellow-throated martenScansorialLarivière & Jennings [61]1 Martes foina 1Beech martenScansorialLarivière & Jennings [61]1 Martes martes 2Pine martenScansorial...…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphological diversification of biomechanical traits: mustelid locomotor specializations and the macroevolution of long bone cross-sectional morphology

Kilbourne

Hutchinson

2019

BMC Evol Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMorphological diversity of limb bone lengths, diameters, and proportions in mammals is known to vary strongly with locomotor habit. It remains less well known how different locomotor habits are correlated with cross-sectional traits of the limb skeleton, such as cross-sectional area (CSA), second moments of area (SMA), and section modulus (MOD) and whether these traits have evolved adaptively. CSA and SMA represent the bone’s resistance to axial compression and bending, respectively, whereas MOD represents bone structural strength related to shape. Sampling 28 species of mustelids, a carnivoran lineage with diverse locomotor habits, we tested for differences in humeral, radial, and ulnar cross-sectional traits among specialists for climbing, digging, and swimming, in addition to generalists. Given that the limbs of digging specialists function in the dense substance of soil, and that swimming specialists need to counteract buoyancy, we predicted that these mustelids with these specializations should have the greatest values of cross-sectional traits.ResultsWe analyzed cross-sectional traits (calculated via μCT scanning and rendered dimensionless) in 5% increments along a bone’s length and found significant differences among locomotor habits, though differences in ulnar cross-sectional traits were fewer than those for the humerus and radius. Swimming specialists had the greatest values of cross-sectional traits, followed by digging specialists. Climbing specialists had the lowest values of cross-sectional traits. However, phylogenetic affinity underlies these results. Fitting models of trait evolution to CSA and SMA revealed that a multi-rate Brownian motion model and a multi-optima Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model are the best-fitting models of evolution for these traits. However, inspection of α-values uncovered that many of the OU models did not differ from a Brownian motion model.ConclusionsWithin Mustelidae, differences in limb function and locomotor habit influence cross-sectional traits in ways that produce patterns that may diverge from adaptive patterns exhibited by external traits (e.g., bone lengths) of the mammalian limb skeleton. These results suggest that not all the traits of a single organ evolve under a single evolutionary process and that models of trait evolution should be fit to a range of traits for a better understanding of the evolution of the mammalian locomotor system.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12862-019-1349-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphological diversification of biomechanical traits: mustelid locomotor specializations and the macroevolution of long bone cross-sectional morphology

Kilbourne

Hutchinson

2019

BMC Evol Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Genetic evidence resume L. lutra as closely related with the extant L. sumatrana (Hung and Law 2016), and it has been suggested that both derived from the Upper Siwalik L. palaeindica (Willemsen 1992). However, despite the lack of cranial material prevents conclusive comparisons, our analyses reveal strong morphological affinities between L. palaeindica and L. simplicidens.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite its fossil record is less abundant if compared to other Mustelidae taxa (e.g., Meles meles, Mecozzi et al 2019), otters are largely distributed across the Eurasian continent over a long stratigraphical interval. Currently, this carnivoran inhabits a large variety of aquatic habitats, including highland and lowland lakes, rivers, streams, marshes, swamp forests and coastal areas independent of their size, origin or latitude (Mason and Macdonald 2009;Hung and Law 2016). It can be found in brackish waters from sea level up to 4120 m (Mason and Macdonald 2009).…”

Section: Paleoecological Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This scenario has received indirect support from the first description of L. simplicidens maxillary dentition, which led Cherin (2017) to doubt of the species generic attribution, remarking the similarities with Lutraeximia umbra (Cherin et al 2016). Alternatively, Fejfar and Sabol (2004) argued for a derivation of the extant Lutra sumatrana from Lutra bravardi Pomel 1843, but excluding a close relationship with L. lutra of the latter species, which is difficult to reconciliate with molecular data that consistently find a close relation between L. lutra and L. sumatrana (Koepfli et al 2008;Hung and Law 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rediscovering Lutra lutra from Grotta Romanelli (southern Italy) in the framework of the puzzling evolutionary history of Eurasian otter

Mecozzi

Iannucci

Bona

et al. 2021

PalZ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A river otter hemimandible has been rediscovered during the revision of the historical collections of G.A. Blanc from Grotta Romanelli, complementing the ongoing multidisciplinary research fieldwork on the site. The specimen, recovered from the level G (“terre rosse”; early Late Pleistocene or late Middle Pleistocene), is here assigned to Lutra lutra. Indeed, morphological and morphometric comparisons with other Quaternary Lutrinae fossils from Europe allow to exclude an attribution to the relatively widespread and older Lutra simplicidens, characterized by distinctive carnassial proportions. Differences with Cyrnaonyx antiqua, which possessed a more robust, shellfish-feeding dentition, support the view of a successful niche repartition between the two species during the late Middle to Late Pleistocene of Europe. The occurrence of Lutra lutra from the “terre rosse” of Grotta Romanelli suggests deep modifications of the landscapes due to the ecological adaptation of the taxon, and indicates that the Eurasian otter spread into Europe at the Middle–Late Pleistocene transition.

show abstract

“…canadensis and L . lutra , respectively 12 , 19 . Based on morphological and ecological similarity to those respective species, we sampled L .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Feeding capability in the extinct giant Siamogale melilutra and comparative mandibular biomechanics of living Lutrinae

Tseng

Wang

et al. 2017

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At 50 kg in estimated weight, the extinct Siamogale melilutra is larger than all living otters, and ranks among the largest fossil otters. The biomechanical capability of S. melilutra jaws as related to their large size is unknown but crucial to reconstructing the species’ potentially unique ecological niche. Here we compare the mandibular biomechanics of S. melilutra using engineering-based performance measures against ten extant otter biomechanical models. Despite a wide range of feeding preferences from durophagy to piscivory, living otter species exhibit a linear relationship between mandible stiffness and volume, as expected in isometric model scaling. In contrast, S. melilutra models exhibit a six-fold increase in stiffness from expected stiffness-volume relationships calculated from extant species models. Unlike stiffness, mechanical efficiency of biting is conserved among living otters and in S. melilutra. These findings indicate that although similar to living bunodont otters in morphology and biting efficiency, jaw strength in S. melilutra far surpasses molluscivores such as sea otters and Cape clawless otters, even after accounting for size. Therefore, Siamogale represents a feeding ecomorphology with no living analog, and its giant size and high mandibular strength confer shell-crushing capability matched only by other extinct molluscivores such as the marine bear Kolponomos.

show abstract

Lutra lutra(Carnivora: Mustelidae)

Cited by 33 publications

References 85 publications

Morphological diversification of biomechanical traits: mustelid locomotor specializations and the macroevolution of long bone cross-sectional morphology

Morphological diversification of biomechanical traits: mustelid locomotor specializations and the macroevolution of long bone cross-sectional morphology

Rediscovering Lutra lutra from Grotta Romanelli (southern Italy) in the framework of the puzzling evolutionary history of Eurasian otter

Feeding capability in the extinct giant Siamogale melilutra and comparative mandibular biomechanics of living Lutrinae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About