How to date a crocodile: estimation of neosuchian clade ages and a comparison of four time‐scaling methods

IF 2.5 2区 地球科学 Q1 PALEONTOLOGY Palaeontology Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1111/pala.12589
Sebastian S. Groh, P. Upchurch, P. Barrett, J. J. Day
{"title":"How to date a crocodile: estimation of neosuchian clade ages and a comparison of four time‐scaling methods","authors":"Sebastian S. Groh, P. Upchurch, P. Barrett, J. J. Day","doi":"10.1111/pala.12589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Clade ages within the crocodylomorph clade Neosuchia have long been debated. Molecular and morphological studies have yielded remarkably divergent results. Despite recent advances, there has been no comprehensive relative comparison of the major time calibration methods available to estimate clade ages based on morphological data. We used four methods (cal3, extended Hedman, smoothed ghost lineage analysis (sGLA) and the fossilized birth–death model (FBD)) to date clade ages derived from a published crocodylomorph supertree and a new neosuchian phylogeny. All time‐scaling methods applied here agree on the origination of Neosuchia during the Late Triassic or Early Jurassic, and the presence of the major extant eusuchian groups (Crocodyloidea, Gavialoidea, Alligatoroidea and Caimaininae) by the end of the Late Cretaceous. The number of distinct lineages present before the K/Pg boundary is less certain, with support for two competing scenarios in which Crocodylinae, Tomistominae and Diplocynodontinae either: (1) diverged from other eusuchian lineages before the K/Pg boundary; or (2) evolved during a ‘burst’ of diversification after the K/Pg event. Cal3 and FBD proved to be the most suitable methods for time‐scaling phylogenetic trees dominated by fossil taxa. Extended Hedman estimates are substantially older than the others, with larger standard deviations and a strong sensitivity to taxon sampling and topological changes; sGLA has similar problems. We conclude that a detailed understanding of phylogenetic relationships, tree reconstruction methods, and good taxonomic coverage (in particular the inclusion of the oldest taxon in each clade) is essential when evaluating the results of such dating analyses.","PeriodicalId":56272,"journal":{"name":"Palaeontology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palaeontology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pala.12589","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PALEONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Clade ages within the crocodylomorph clade Neosuchia have long been debated. Molecular and morphological studies have yielded remarkably divergent results. Despite recent advances, there has been no comprehensive relative comparison of the major time calibration methods available to estimate clade ages based on morphological data. We used four methods (cal3, extended Hedman, smoothed ghost lineage analysis (sGLA) and the fossilized birth–death model (FBD)) to date clade ages derived from a published crocodylomorph supertree and a new neosuchian phylogeny. All time‐scaling methods applied here agree on the origination of Neosuchia during the Late Triassic or Early Jurassic, and the presence of the major extant eusuchian groups (Crocodyloidea, Gavialoidea, Alligatoroidea and Caimaininae) by the end of the Late Cretaceous. The number of distinct lineages present before the K/Pg boundary is less certain, with support for two competing scenarios in which Crocodylinae, Tomistominae and Diplocynodontinae either: (1) diverged from other eusuchian lineages before the K/Pg boundary; or (2) evolved during a ‘burst’ of diversification after the K/Pg event. Cal3 and FBD proved to be the most suitable methods for time‐scaling phylogenetic trees dominated by fossil taxa. Extended Hedman estimates are substantially older than the others, with larger standard deviations and a strong sensitivity to taxon sampling and topological changes; sGLA has similar problems. We conclude that a detailed understanding of phylogenetic relationships, tree reconstruction methods, and good taxonomic coverage (in particular the inclusion of the oldest taxon in each clade) is essential when evaluating the results of such dating analyses.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
如何确定鳄鱼的年代:新石器时代的估计和四种时间尺度方法的比较
鳄鱼类分支新苏门的进化时代一直争论不休。分子和形态学的研究已经产生了非常不同的结果。尽管近年来取得了一些进展,但目前还没有对基于形态学数据估计进化枝年龄的主要时间校准方法进行全面的相对比较。我们使用了四种方法(cal3,扩展Hedman,平滑幽灵谱系分析(sGLA)和化石出生-死亡模型(FBD))来确定来自已发表的鳄鱼形超级树和新苏亚纲系统发育的进化枝年龄。本文采用的所有时间尺度方法都一致认为,新苏门的起源时间是晚三叠世或早侏罗世,而现存的主要苏门类群(鳄鱼科、gavialo总科、鳄鱼科和Caimaininae)是在晚白垩纪末期出现的。在K/Pg边界之前存在的不同谱系的数量不太确定,这支持了鳄鱼、Tomistominae和Diplocynodontinae两种竞争情景:(1)在K/Pg边界之前从其他类谱系分化出来;或者(2)在K/Pg事件后的多样化“爆发”中进化而来。Cal3和FBD是构建以化石类群为主的时间尺度系统发育树最合适的方法。扩展的Hedman估计比其他估计要古老得多,具有较大的标准偏差,对分类群采样和拓扑变化具有很强的敏感性;sGLA也有类似的问题。我们的结论是,在评估这种测年分析结果时,详细了解系统发育关系、树重建方法和良好的分类覆盖(特别是在每个分支中包含最古老的分类单元)是必不可少的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Palaeontology
Palaeontology 地学-古生物学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
43
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Palaeontology publishes a wide variety of papers on palaeontological topics covering: palaeozoology palaeobotany systematic studies palaeoecology micropalaeontology palaeobiogeography functional morphology stratigraphy taxonomy taphonomy palaeoenvironmental reconstruction palaeoclimate analysis and biomineralization studies.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the macroevolutionary impact of ecosystem engineers using an individual‐based eco‐evolutionary simulation New evidence for five cephalic appendages in trilobites and implications for segmentation of the trilobite head The palaeobiological significance of clustering in acritarchs: a case study from the early Cambrian of North Greenland Impact of environmental barriers on temnospondyl biogeography and dispersal during the Middle–Late Triassic Priapulid neoichnology, ecosystem engineering, and the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1