Oldest known cranium of a juvenile New World monkey (Early Miocene, Patagonia, Argentina): implications for the taxonomy and the molar eruption pattern of early platyrrhines.

A juvenile cranium of Homunculus patagonicus Ameghino, 1891a from the late Early Miocene of Santa Cruz Province (Argentina) provides the first evidence of developing cranial anatomy for any fossil platyrrhine. The specimen preserves the rostral part of the cranium with deciduous and permanent alveoli and teeth. The dental eruption sequence in the new specimen and a reassessment of eruption patterns in living and fossil platyrrhines suggest that the ancestral platyrrhine pattern of tooth replacement was for the permanent incisors to erupt before M(1), not an accelerated molar eruption (before the incisors) as recently proposed. Two genera and species of Santacrucian monkeys are now generally recognized: H. patagonicus Ameghino, 1891a and Killikaike blakei Tejedor et al., 2006. Taxonomic allocation of Santacrucian monkeys to these species encounters two obstacles: 1) the (now lost) holotype and a recently proposed neotype of H. patagonicus are mandibles from different localities and different geologic members of the Santa Cruz Formation, separated by approximately 0.7 million years, whereas the holotype of K. blakei is a rostral part of a cranium without a mandible; 2) no Santacrucian monkey with associated cranium and mandible has ever been found. Bearing in mind these uncertainties, our examination of the new specimen as well as other cranial specimens of Santacrucian monkeys establishes the overall dental and cranial similarity between the holotype of Killikaike blakei, adult cranial material previously referred to H. patagonicus, and the new juvenile specimen. This leads us to conclude that Killikaike blakei is a junior subjective synonym of H. patagonicus.

Biogeography in deep time - What do phylogenetics, geology, and paleoclimate tell us about early platyrrhine evolution?

Molecular data have converged on a consensus about the genus-level phylogeny of extant platyrrhine monkeys, but for most extinct taxa and certainly for those older than the Pleistocene we must rely upon morphological evidence from fossils. This raises the question as to how well anatomical data mirror molecular phylogenies and how best to deal with discrepancies between the molecular and morphological data as we seek to extend our phylogenies to the placement of fossil taxa. Here I present parsimony-based phylogenetic analyses of extant and fossil platyrrhines based on an anatomical dataset of 399 dental characters and osteological features of the cranium and postcranium. I sample 16 extant taxa (one from each platyrrhine genus) and 20 extinct taxa of platyrrhines. The tree structure is constrained with a "molecular scaffold" of extant species as implemented in maximum parsimony using PAUP with the molecular-based 'backbone' approach. The data set encompasses most of the known extinct species of platyrrhines, ranging in age from latest Oligocene (∼26 Ma) to the Recent. The tree is rooted with extant catarrhines, and Late Eocene and Early Oligocene African anthropoids. Among the more interesting patterns to emerge are: (1) known early platyrrhines from the Late Oligocene through Early Miocene (26-16.5Ma) represent only stem platyrrhine taxa; (2) representatives of the three living platyrrhine families first occur between 15.7 Ma and 13.5 Ma; and (3) recently extinct primates from the Greater Antilles (Cuba, Jamaica, Hispaniola) are sister to the clade of extant platyrrhines and may have diverged in the Early Miocene. It is probable that the crown platyrrhine clade did not originate before about 20-24 Ma, a conclusion consistent with the phylogenetic analysis of fossil taxa presented here and with recent molecular clock estimates. The following biogeographic scenario is consistent with the phylogenetic findings and climatic and geologic evidence: Tropical South America has been a center for platyrrhine diversification since platyrrhines arrived on the continent in the middle Cenozoic. Platyrrhines dispersed from tropical South America to Patagonia at ∼25-24 Ma via a "Paraná Portal" through eastern South America across a retreating Paranense Sea. Phylogenetic bracketing suggests Antillean primates arrived via a sweepstakes route or island chain from northern South America in the Early Miocene, not via a proposed land bridge or island chain (GAARlandia) in the Early Oligocene (∼34 Ma). Patagonian and Antillean platyrrhines went extinct without leaving living descendants, the former at the end of the Early Miocene and the latter within the past six thousand years. Molecular evidence suggests crown platyrrhines arrived in Central America by crossing an intermittent connection through the Isthmus of Panama at or after 3.5Ma. Any more ancient Central American primates, should they be discovered, are unlikely to have given rise to the extant Central American taxa in situ.

The Origin and Diversification of Birds.

Birds are one of the most recognizable and diverse groups of modern vertebrates. Over the past two decades, a wealth of new fossil discoveries and phylogenetic and macroevolutionary studies has transformed our understanding of how birds originated and became so successful. Birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs during the Jurassic (around 165-150 million years ago) and their classic small, lightweight, feathered, and winged body plan was pieced together gradually over tens of millions of years of evolution rather than in one burst of innovation. Early birds diversified throughout the Jurassic and Cretaceous, becoming capable fliers with supercharged growth rates, but were decimated at the end-Cretaceous extinction alongside their close dinosaurian relatives. After the mass extinction, modern birds (members of the avian crown group) explosively diversified, culminating in more than 10,000 species distributed worldwide today.

Response to Comment on "Whole-genome analyses resolve early branches in the tree of life of modern birds".

Mitchell et al. argue that divergence-time estimates for our avian phylogeny were too young because of an "inappropriate" maximum age constraint for the most recent common ancestor of modern birds and that, as a result, most modern bird orders diverged before the Cretaceous-Paleogene mass extinction event 66 million years ago instead of after. However, their interpretations of the fossil record and timetrees are incorrect.