Systematics and Phylogenetic Interrelationships of the Enigmatic Late Jurassic Shark Protospinax annectans Woodward, 1918 with Comments on the Shark–Ray Sister Group Relationship

Abstract

The Late Jurassic elasmobranch Protospinax annectans is often regarded as a key species to our understanding of crown group elasmobranch interrelationships and the evolutionary history of this group. However, since its first description more than 100 years ago, its phylogenetic position within the Elasmobranchii (sharks and rays) has proven controversial, and a closer relationship between Protospinax and each of the posited superorders (Batomorphii, Squalomorphii, and Galeomorphii) has been proposed over the time. Here we revise this controversial taxon based on new holomorphic specimens from the Late Jurassic Konservat-Lagerstätte of the Solnhofen Archipelago in Bavaria (Germany) and review its skeletal morphology, systematics, and phylogenetic interrelationships. A data matrix with 224 morphological characters was compiled and analyzed under a molecular backbone constraint. Our results indicate a close relationship between Protospinax, angel sharks (Squatiniformes), and saw sharks (Pristiophoriformes). However, the revision of our morphological data matrix within a molecular framework highlights the lack of morphological characters defining certain groups, especially sharks of the order Squaliformes, hampering the phylogenetic resolution of Protospinax annectans with certainty. Furthermore, the monophyly of modern sharks retrieved by molecular studies is only weakly supported by morphological data, stressing the need for more characters to align morphological and molecular studies in the future.

From historical expedition diaries to whole genome sequencing: A case study of the likely extinct Red Sea torpedo ray

“…Moreover, the sister relationship of Torpedo and Tetronarce within Torpedinoidea is confirmed. According to several molecular (Aschliman, Claeson, & McEachran, 2012;Naylor et al, 2012Naylor et al, , 2016, and morphological (Jambura et al, 2023;Villalobos-Segura et al, 2022;Villalobos-Segura & Underwood, 2020) studies, Platyrhinidae (with two genera: Platyrhinoidis and Platyrhina) were placed within Torpediniformes. However, this classification is unsupported by the molecular analysis of COI and NADH2 genes reported here, with both genera clustering with the outgroup (Figure 4 and Figure S5).…”

Exceptionally preserved shark fossils from Mexico elucidate the long-standing enigma of the Cretaceous elasmobranchPtychodus

“…We explored the phylogenetic relationships of the genus Ptychodus Agassiz, 1834 within the elasmobranchs using a modified version of Jambura et al 's [43] data matrix. In order to provide a broader context of these relations, several Palaeozoic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic and Recent chondrichthyan taxa were additionally included as outgroups, with Pucapampella and Doliodus serving as the root.…”

Rostral and body shape analyses reveal cryptic diversity of Late Jurassic batomorphs (Chondrichthyes, Elasmobranchii) from Europe

“…2019, 2022) and on a combination of molecular and morphological data (Jambura et al . 2023) posited that Late Jurassic batomorphs form a monophyletic group when maximum parsimony was used as optimality criterion. It should be noted that analyses of the same datasets with different optimality criteria (i.e.…”

“…Zittel 1887Zittel -1890Woodward 1889aWoodward , 1889bThies 1995;Underwood & Ward 2004;Kriwet et al 2009;Thies & Leidner 2011;Klug & Kriwet 2013). However, recent phylogenetic studies based on morphological characters (Villalobos-Segura et al 2019 and on a combination of molecular and morphological data (Jambura et al 2023) posited that Late Jurassic batomorphs form a monophyletic group when maximum parsimony was used as optimality criterion. It should be noted that analyses of the same datasets with different optimality criteria (i.e.…”