4.5 Article

A comparative atlas of selected skeletal elements of European urodeles (Amphibia: Urodela) for palaeontological investigations

期刊

ZOOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
卷 197, 期 3, 页码 569-619

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlac063

关键词

amphibian palaeontology; identification key; morphological phylogenetics; newts; palaeontology; phylogenetics; salamanders; taxonomy; vertebrae

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the osteology of European urodeles was extensively studied, with a focus on the most robust skeletal elements for fossil identification. The study provides taxonomically significant diagnostic characters and identification keys for different skeletal elements, as well as insights into the phylogenetic relationships of these species.
The osteology of European urodeles was studied extensively in the past, but comparative analyses of isolated bones are rare, despite being the most useful tool for the identification of fossil remains. The present work is focused on the most robust skeletal elements (therefore, common in the fossil record: otic-occipitum complexes and vertebrae) and provides taxonomically significant diagnostic characters at the genus level for European genera of urodeles, including some taxa whose osteology was poorly known (e.g. Euproctus and Calotriton). Characters subject to wide variability are identified, and their use is discouraged for diagnoses of extinct species. A selection of diagnostic characters is used herein to build an identification key for each studied skeletal element and for a phylogenetic analysis to understand whether these osteological elements can convey a genuine signal. The analysis under Bayesian inference resulted in a well-supported Salamandridae clade and Pleurodelinae tribe. Salamandrina was recovered as part of the Pleurodelinae, in agreement with previous morphological phylogenetic analyses, but in contrast to the conclusion of molecular studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据