4.8 Article

Oldest known euarchontan tarsals and affinities of Paleocene Purgatorius to Primates

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1421707112

Keywords

Euarchonta; Primates; Paleocene; paleontology; evolution

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) [SBE-1028505]
  2. Leakey Foundation
  3. Brooklyn College Tow Faculty Travel Fellowship
  4. NSF [SBR-9616194, BCS 1317525, EAR 9505847]
  5. Yale Institute for Biospheric Studies
  6. Doris O. and Samuel P. Welles Research Fund
  7. University of California Museum of Paleontology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Earliest Paleocene Purgatorius often is regarded as the geologically oldest primate, but it has been known only from fossilized dentitions since it was first described half a century ago. The dentition of Purgatorius is more primitive than those of all known living and fossil primates, leading some researchers to suggest that it lies near the ancestry of all other primates; however, others have questioned its affinities to primates or even to placental mammals. Here we report the first (to our knowledge) nondental remains (tarsal bones) attributed to Purgatorius from the same earliest Paleocene deposits that have yielded numerous fossil dentitions of this poorly known mammal. Three independent phylogenetic analyses that incorporate new data from these fossils support primate affinities of Purgatorius among euarchontan mammals (primates, treeshrews, and colugos). Astragali and calcanei attributed to Purgatorius indicate a mobile ankle typical of arboreal euarchontan mammals generally and of Paleocene and Eocene plesiadapiforms specifically and provide the earliest fossil evidence of arboreality in primates and other euarchontan mammals. Postcranial specializations for arboreality in the earliest primates likely played a key role in the evolutionary success of this mammalian radiation in the Paleocene.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available