An invited contribution to the special feature 'Putting fossils in trees: combining morphology, time and molecules to estimate phylogenies and divergence times'.Electronic supplementary material is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0051 or via http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org. Evolutionary biologyThe impact of phylogenetic dating method on interpreting trait evolution: a case study of Cretaceous -Palaeogene eutherian body-size evolution T. J. D. Halliday 1 and A. Goswami 1,2 1 Department of Genetics, Evolution, and Environment, and 2 Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK TJDH, 0000-0002-4077-732XThe fossil record of the earliest Cenozoic contains the first large-bodied placental mammals. Several evolutionary models have been invoked to explain the transition from small to large body sizes, but methods for determining evolutionary mode of trait change depend on input from tree topology and divergence dates. Different dating methods may therefore affect inference of evolutionary model. Here, we fit models of body mass evolution onto dated phylogenies of Cretaceous and Palaeogene mammals, comparing the effect of dating method on interpretation of evolutionary model. Among traditional palaeontological dating approaches, an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model with high alpha parameters is recovered as best-fitting when minimum-age dating is used, while branch-sharing methods are highly sensitive to topology. Release or release-radiate models are preferred when Bayesian fossilized birth-death method is used, but when using stochastic cal3 dating of trees, a model of increased evolutionary rate without a release in constraint at the Cretaceous-Palaeogene boundary has highest support. These results demonstrate unambiguously that choice of dating method is critical for interpretation of continuous trait evolution, and that care must therefore be taken to consider these effects in macroevolutionary studies.

Despite a global fossil record, Metatheria are now largely restricted to Australasia and South America. Most metatherian paleodiversity studies to date are limited to particular subclades, time intervals, and/or regions, and few consider uneven sampling. Here, we present a comprehensive new data set on metatherian fossil occurrences (Barremian to end Pliocene). These data are analyzed using standard rarefaction and shareholder quorum subsampling (including a new protocol for handling Lagerstätte-like localities).Global metatherian diversity was lowest during the Cretaceous, and increased sharply in the Paleocene, when the South American record begins. Global and South American diversity rose in the early Eocene then fell in the late Eocene, in contrast to the North American pattern. In the Oligocene, diversity declined in the Americas, but this was more than offset by Oligocene radiations in Australia. Diversity continued to decrease in Laurasia, with final representatives in North America (excluding the later entry ofDidelphis virginiana) and Europe in the early Miocene, and Asia in the middle Miocene. Global metatherian diversity appears to have peaked in the early Miocene, especially in Australia. Following a trough in the late Miocene, the Pliocene saw another increase in global diversity. By this time, metatherian biogeographic distribution had essentially contracted to that of today.Comparison of the raw and sampling-corrected diversity estimates, coupled with evaluation of “coverage” and number of prolific sites, demonstrates that the metatherian fossil record is spatially and temporally extremely patchy. Therefore, assessments of macroevolutionary patterns based on the raw fossil record (as in most previous studies) are inadvisable.