4.6 Review

Unlocking the early fossil record of the arthropod central nervous system

Publisher

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0038

Keywords

Cambrian; brains; Chengjiang; Burgess Shale; Arthropoda

Categories

Funding

  1. Leverhulme Trust Research Project [F/00 696/T]
  2. Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Independent Research Fellowship [NE/L011751/1]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [U1302232]
  4. University of Arizona's Center for Insect Science
  5. University of Arizona Regents
  6. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/L011751/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. NERC [NE/L011751/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Extant panarthropods (euarthropods, onychophorans and tardigrades) are hall-marked by stunning morphological and taxonomic diversity, but their central nervous systems (CNS) are relatively conserved. The timing of divergences of the ground pattern CNS organization of the major panarthropod clades has been poorly constrained because of a scarcity of data from their early fossil record. Although the CNS has been documented in three-dimensional detail in insects from Cenozoic ambers, it is widely assumed that these tissues are too prone to decay to withstand other styles of fossilization or geologically older preservation. However, Cambrian Burgess Shale-type compressions have emerged as sources of fossilized brains and nerve cords. CNS in these Cambrian fossils are preserved as carbon films or as iron oxides/hydroxides after pyrite in association with carbon. Experiments with carcasses compacted in fine-grained sediment depict preservation of neural tissue for a more prolonged temporal window than anticipated by decay experiments in other media. CNS and compound eye characters in exceptionally preserved Cambrian fossils predict divergences of the mandibulate and chelicerate ground patterns by Cambrian Stage 3 (ca 518 Ma), a dating that is compatible with molecular estimates for these splits.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available