A Comprehensive Approach towards the Phylogeny and Evolution of Cervidae (project)

Heckeberg, Nicola S.

doi:10.7934/p1021

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, using nuclear markers, particularly paternally inherited Sry (sex determining region on the Y-chromosome), results in polytomous (but not polyphyletic) Rucervus species more closely related to each other than to E. davidianus and yields the latter as closely related to Cervus (Figure 8). In accordance with this classification, a sister group relationship of R. eldii and R. duvaucelii is also supported by dental and cranial (including antler) morphology (Heckeberg, 2017b(Heckeberg, , 2020.…”

Section: Hybridizationsupporting

confidence: 70%

“…The first fossil Muntiacus are known from the upper Miocene, M. noringensis (11-9 mya) and M. leilaoensis (9-7 mya), and resemble extant muntjacs (Dong, 2007;Dong et al, 2004). The split between Muntiacus and Elaphodus was estimated to have happened between 4.8 and 3.4 mya (Lan & Shi 1993, 1994 or at about 2.5 mya based on total evidence dating (Heckeberg, 2017b). The first certain Elaphodus fossils are known from the Middle Pleistocene (around 700 kya) (Hooijer, 1951;Leslie et al, 2013).…”

Section: Muntiacinimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Antler tine homologies and cervid systematics: A review of past and present controversies with special emphasis on Elaphurus davidianus

Heckeberg

Zachos

Kierdorf

2022

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antlers are the most conspicuous trait of cervids and have been used in the past to establish a classification of their fossil and living representatives. Since the availability of molecular data, morphological characters have generally become less important for phylogenetic reconstructions. In recent years, however, the appreciation of morphological characters has increased, and they are now more frequently used in addition to molecular data to reconstruct the evolutionary history of cervids. A persistent challenge when using antler traits in deer systematics is finding a consensus on the homology of structures. Here, we review early and recent attempts to homologize antler structures and objections to this approach, compare and evaluate recent advances on antler homologies, and critically discuss these different views in order to offer a basis for further scientific exchange on the topic. We further present some developmental aspects of antler branching patterns and discuss their potential for reconstructing cervid systematics. The use of heterogeneous data for reconstructing phylogenies has resulted in partly conflicting hypotheses on the systematic position of certain cervid species, on which we also elaborate here. We address current discussions on the use of different molecular markers in cervid systematics and the question whether antler morphology and molecular data can provide a consistent picture on the evolutionary history of cervids. In this context, special attention is given to the antler morphology and the systematic position of the enigmatic Pere David's deer (Elaphurus davidianus).

show abstract

Section: Hybridizationsupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: Muntiacinimentioning

confidence: 99%

Antler tine homologies and cervid systematics: A review of past and present controversies with special emphasis on Elaphurus davidianus

Heckeberg

Zachos

Kierdorf

2022

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a few species, for example Rucervus eldii, the premetaconulecrista is serrated ( Fig. 7) More details are in Heckeberg (2017a).…”

Section: Upper Premolars and Molarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The systematics of the Cervidae: a total evidence approach

Heckeberg

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic relationships of cervids have been controversial for decades. Despite new input from molecular systematics, consensus could only be partially reached. The initial, gross (sub) classification based on morphology and comparative anatomy was mostly supported by molecular data. The rich fossil record of cervids has never been extensively tested in phylogenetic frameworks concerning potential systematic relationships of fossil cervids to extant cervids. The aim of this work was to investigate the systematic relationships of extant and fossil cervids using molecular and morphological characters and make implications about their evolutionary history based on the phylogenetic reconstructions. To achieve these objectives, molecular data were compiled consisting of five nuclear markers and the complete mitochondrial genome of 50 extant and one fossil cervids. Several analyses using different data partitions, taxon sampling, partitioning schemes, and optimality criteria were undertaken. In addition, the most extensive morphological character matrix for such a broad cervid taxon sampling was compiled including 168 cranial and dental characters of 41 extant and 29 fossil cervids. The morphological and molecular data were analysed in a combined approach and other comprehensive phylogenetic reconstructions. The results showed that most Miocene cervids were more closely related to each other than to any other cervids. They were often positioned between the outgroup and all other cervids or as the sister taxon to Muntiacini. Two Miocene cervids were frequently placed within Muntiacini. Plio-and Pleistocene cervids could often be affiliated to Cervini, Odocoileini or Capreolini. The phylogenetic analyses provide new insights into the evolutionary history of cervids. Several fossil cervids could be successfully related to living representatives, confirming previously assumed affiliations based on comparative morphology and introducing new hypotheses. New systematic relationships were observed, some uncertainties persisted and resolving systematics within certain taxa remained challenging.

show abstract

“…Antler generations not only increase in size and branching complexity with progressive age of the individual, but also reach maximum daily growth rates up to 27.5 mm (in Cervus canadensis, Goss 1970) (not considering the putatively higher maximum growth rate of the giant deer Megaloceros giganteus from Pleistocene times, Lister 1994); though maximum size and branching pattern is species specific (e.g. Geist 1998;Krauss et al 2011;Caecero 2016;Heckeberg 2017a;Samejima and Matsuoka 2020). The onset of antlerogenesis comes with puberty.…”

Section: Communicated By: Aurora Grandal-d'angladementioning

confidence: 99%

Antiquity and fundamental processes of the antler cycle in Cervidae (Mammalia)

Rößner

Costeur

Scheyer

2020

Sci Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The origins of the regenerative nature of antlers, being branched and deciduous apophyseal appendages of frontal bones of cervid artiodactyls, have long been associated with permanent evolutionary precursors. In this study, we provide novel insight into growth modes of evolutionary early antlers. We analysed a total of 34 early antlers affiliated to ten species, including the oldest known, dating from the early and middle Miocene (approx. 18 to 12 million years old) of Europe. Our findings provide empirical data from the fossil record to demonstrate that growth patterns and a regular cycle of necrosis, abscission and regeneration are consistent with data from modern antlers. The diverse histological analyses indicate that primary processes and mechanisms of the modern antler cycle were not gradually acquired during evolution, but were fundamental from the earliest record of antler evolution and, hence, explanations why deer shed antlers have to be rooted in basic histogenetic mechanisms. The previous interpretation that proximal circular protuberances, burrs, are the categorical traits for ephemerality is refuted.

show abstract

A Comprehensive Approach towards the Phylogeny and Evolution of Cervidae (project)

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Antler tine homologies and cervid systematics: A review of past and present controversies with special emphasis on Elaphurus davidianus

Antler tine homologies and cervid systematics: A review of past and present controversies with special emphasis on Elaphurus davidianus

The systematics of the Cervidae: a total evidence approach

Antiquity and fundamental processes of the antler cycle in Cervidae (Mammalia)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About