A Revision Of Paramblypterid And Amblypterid Actinopterygians From Upper Carboniferous–Lower Permian Lacustrine Deposits Of Central Europe

Abstract

ABSTRACT. The descriptions and diagnoses of the type species of Paramblypterus, Paramblypterus decorus, and the type species of Amblypterus, Amblypterus latus, which is very similar to Paramblypterus, are revised. The skulls of Paramblypterus decorus, P. duvernoyi, and A. latus are restored in three-dimensional models, and their diagnoses are emended. Intra-speci®c variation of P. decorus and P. duvernoyi concerns dermohyal,`suborbital' and extrascapular bones, and dermohyal, rostral, parietal and extrascapular bones, respectively. Owing to poor preservation, patterns of variation could only be recognised in one specimen of A. latus regarding the extrascapular series and the posterior edges of the scales. All data on Amblypterus and Paramblypterus were entered into a PAUP analysis. Fifty taxa of lower actinopterygians were analysed for 57 characters. According to this analysis, Paramblypterus and Amblypterus are contained in the same family, the Amblypteridae. P. gelberti and P. duvernoyi are the sister group of P. rohani and P. decorus, and the genus Paramblypterus is the sister taxon of the genus Amblypterus.

A new aeduellid actinopterygian from the Lower Permian of the Krkonoše Piedmont Basin (Bohemian Massif) and its relationship to other Aeduellidae

“…This is one of the important characters of the Aeduellidae (Poplin & Dutheil 2005). A similar mosaic of small suborbital bones is also present in paramblypterids (Blot 1966;Dietze 1999Dietze , 2000.…”

“…The frontal/parietal length ratio is 1.5 in Bourbonnella (Heyler 1969, Poplin 2001, Štamberg 2007a, Aeduella and Decazella (Heyler 1969). The frontal in paramblypterids is twice as long as the parietal (Blot 1966;Štamberg 1976;Dietze 1999Dietze , 2000. The left and right parietals are often dissimilar.…”

Devonian actinopterygian phylogeny and evolution based on a redescription ofStegotrachelus finlayi

“…However, although many of these characters were adapted from several prior studies (Patterson, 1982; Gardiner, 1984; Maisey, 1986; Gardiner & Schaeffer, 1989; Lund et al. , 1995; Cloutier & Ahlberg, 1996; Taverne, 1997; Coates, 1998, 1999; Dietze, 2000; Lund, 2000; Poplin & Lund, 2000; Schultze & Cumbaa, 2001; Zhu & Schultze, 2001; Lund & Poplin, 2002), I find fault with the ability to score certain morphological differences adequately in order to estimate evolutionary relationships objectively. The three major problems include: (1) the direct linkage of character states; (2) the limited use of character states to account for observed variation; and (3) the inaccurate or inconsistent scoring of specific character states.…”

“…This taxon, D. salgueiroensis , is not older than the Lockhovian D. markae , but is more ancient than all uncontentious Devonian ray‐fin genera. Schultze & Cumbaa (2001) combined 105 characters from five previous studies (Lund, Poplin & McCarthy, 1995; Zhu & Schultze, 1997; Coates, 1998; Zhu, Yu & Janvier, 1999; Dietze, 2000) to test the basal position of Dialipina within the Actinopterygii. This study included 12 known ray‐fins: eight Devonian, three Carboniferous, and Polypterus (Fig.…”

The early evolution of ray‐finned fishes

“…; Taverne ; Lund ; Schultze and Cumbaa ; Lund and Poplin ) or exclusively (Long et al . ; Dietze ; Poplin and Lund ; Friedman and Blom ; Long et al . ; Swartz ; Choo ) to extinct forms and therefore have little to say about how fossils might fit into the stable framework available for extant lineages.…”