Journal
ZOOLOGY
Volume 129, Issue -, Pages 69-81Publisher
ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.zool.2018.06.003
Keywords
Caiman latirostris; Caiman yacare; diet and cranial shape covariation; post-hatching ontogenetic variation; tridimensional landmark estimation methods
Categories
Funding
- National Agency for Scientific and Technological Promotion [PICT 2016 N 0159, PICT 2015 N5 2389, PICT 2008 N 0143]
- Council National Scientific and Technical Research [PIP 1054]
- National University of La Plata [N747]
- National University of Lujan [CDD-CB 650/14]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Ontogenetic variation of cranial characters used in crocodylian phylogenetic systematics has never been studied. Furthermore, the relationship between diet and skull morphological transformation during ontogeny has not been properly explored yet. We quantify the inter- and intraspecific skull morphological variation in extant caiman species focusing on those areas relevant to systematics and, also investigate the relation between diet and morphological changes during ontogeny. We applied a three-dimensional approach of geometric morphometrics on post-hatching ontogenetic cranial series of Cain= latirostris and C. yacare. In order to incorporate incomplete material, we additionally tested four different methods of missing landmark estimation and apply the thin-plate spline interpolation. We detected morphological changes between species and during ontogeny (snout and pterygoid flanges increase their proportions and, orbits, temporal fenestrae, skull roof and foramen magnum decrease their relative size) that constitutes part of a general morphological change in the cranial ontogeny of crocodylians. Moreover, the negative allometry of the fenestrae and neurocranium and the positive allometry of the splanchnocranium in both caiman species are the plesiomorphic condition, at least, for tetrapods. Shape changes during growth were found to be related to ontogenetic changes in the diet. Dissimilarities between species seem to be related to different mechanical requirements and different use of the habitat. We found inter-and intraspecific variation in some morphological characters with systematic implications (the contact of nasals with naris, the contact of prefrontals in the midline, and the bones that border the suborbital fenestra and the proportion in which one of them participates) that are not currently considered in phylogenetic analyses.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available