4.2 Article

Three-dimensional cranial ontogeny in pantherines (Panthera leo, P. onca, P. pardus, P. tigris; Carnivora:, Felidae)

Journal

BIOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
Volume 120, Issue 1, Pages 210-227

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS

Keywords

anatomy; development; geometric morphometrics; growth; morphology; skull

Funding

  1. National Museum of Natural History
  2. Smithsonian Institution
  3. Field Museum of Natural History
  4. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica (ANPCyT) [PICT 2011-309, 2012-1583, 2014-3182, 2015-966]
  5. CONICET [PIP 2011-164]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Panthera lineage is a monophyletic clade of felids, supported by both morphological and molecular evidence. The lineage includes large species with cranial similarity such as Panthera leo and P. tigris, and other with very different cranium such as P. pardus. The aim of our work was to study the cranial ontogeny of Pantherines, elucidating whether their cranial shape is a product of size or phylogeny, and to compare these findings with available information about other carnivores. We studied 370 specimens using geometric morphometrics technique in three dimensions. Panthera leo and P. tigris show similar ontogenetic trajectories, sharing adult crania with wider rostrum, shorter basicranium and vertical occipital plate. The cranial configuration of P. leo is a scaling version of P. tigris. P. pardus shows the most different cranial pattern, with adults having a rounded braincase and zygomatic arches less expanded than the rest, whereas P. onca occupies an intermediate place between these patterns. P. pardus is the species with the smallest birth weight and the lowest growth rate, reaching a final size and shape later than the remaining species. Adult shape morphology reflects no relation to phylogenetic placement of the species and it is probably related to Pantherine body size. (C) 2016 The Linnean Society of London

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available