Abstract

Recent efforts have led to the development of extremely sophisticated methods for incorporating tree-wide data and accommodating uncertainty when estimating the temporal patterns of phylogenetic trees, but assignment of prior constraints on node age remains the most important factor. This depends largely on understanding substantive disagreements between specialists (paleontologists, geologists, and comparative anatomists), which are often opaque to phylogeneticists and molecular biologists who rely on these data as downstream users. This often leads to misunderstandings of how the uncertainty associated with node age minima arises, leading to inappropriate treatments of that uncertainty by phylogeneticists. In order to promote dialogue on this subject, we here review factors (phylogeny, preservational megabiases, spatial and temporal patterns in the tetrapod fossil record) that complicate assignment of prior node age constraints for deep divergences in the tetrapod tree, focusing on the origin of crown-group Amniota, crown-group Amphibia, and crown-group Tetrapoda. We find that node priors for amphibians and tetrapods show high phylogenetic lability and different phylogenetic treatments identifying disparate taxa as the earliest representatives of these crown groups. This corresponds partially to the well-known problem of lissamphibian origins but increasingly reflects deeper instabilities in early tetrapod phylogeny. Conversely, differences in phylogenetic treatment do not affect our ability to recognize the earliest crown-group amniotes but do affect how diverse we understand the earliest amniote faunas to be. Preservational megabiases and spatiotemporal heterogeneity of the early tetrapod fossil record present unrecognized challenges in reliably estimating the ages of tetrapod nodes; the tetrapod record throughout the relevant interval is spatially restricted and disrupted by several major intervals of minimal sampling coincident with the emergence of all three crown groups. Going forward, researchers attempting to calibrate the ages for these nodes, and other similar deep nodes in the metazoan fossil record, should consciously consider major phylogenetic uncertainty, preservational megabias, and spatiotemporal heterogeneity, preferably examining the impact of working hypotheses from multiple research groups. We emphasize a need for major tetrapod collection effort outside of classic European and North American sections, particularly from the southern hemisphere, and suggest that such sampling may dramatically change our timelines of tetrapod evolution.

Highlights

  • Modern biodiversity is generally organized into large, relatively ancient, clades (i.e., Amniota, Mammalia, and Reptilia) with characteristic body plans and broad ecomorphological similarity

  • The early tetrapod record is punctuated by several key intervals of minimal sampling of the tetrapod record (Figure 4B). Two of these are noteworthy: an 18million-year interval in the lower Carboniferous, spanning from the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary (358.9 Ma) until the middle Viséan (∼330.9 Ma), and a second within the first half of the middle Permian (272–265 Ma). The former is generally referred to as Romer’s Gap and likely coincides with the origin of the tetrapod crown group, whereas the second, referred to as Olson’s Gap, coincides with a major faunal turnover between Carboniferous-Permian transition faunas dominated by archaic tetrapods and early amniotes and Upper Permian faunas dominated by diverse therapsid-grade stem mammals, and spans an interval that may represent the assembly of distinct lissamphibian body plans (Marjanovicand Laurin, 2007; Anderson et al, 2008; Pardo et al, 2017a)

  • Attempts to establish a priori constraints for major tetrapod clade ages must contend with two parallel problems: there is little agreement on the inclusiveness of these clades, and the early tetrapod record is so unevenly sampled that we cannot assume representative sampling of early members of these clades

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Modern biodiversity is generally organized into large, relatively ancient, clades (i.e., Amniota, Mammalia, and Reptilia) with characteristic body plans and broad ecomorphological similarity.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call