Estimating divergence times of lizardfishes and their allies (Euteleostei: Aulopiformes) and the timing of deep-sea adaptations

A new lizardfish (Teleostei, Aulopiformes) from the Late Cretaceous Bearpaw Formation of Alberta, Canada, with a revised diagnosis ofApateodus(Aulopiformes, Ichthyotringoidei)

“…Based on a review of the literature (Goody, 1969;Davis and Fielitz, 2010;Fielitz and Gonz alez-Rodr ıguez, 2010;Schwarzhans and Bratishko, 2011;Silva and Gallo, 2011), there are 37 genera of Cretaceous aulopiforms, now including Ursichthys longiparietalis (Fig. 7A).…”

“…Late Cretaceous aulopiforms have captivated the attention of ichthyologists likely because of their impressive dentitions or often large size (Goody, 1969(Goody, , 1970(Goody, , 1976Chalifa, 1989a). Thirty-six genera of aulopiforms have been described from Cretaceous deposits, and there are 44 genera living today (Nelson, 2006;Davis and Fielitz, 2010;Silva and Gallo, 2010). During the Cretaceous, morphological diversity was markedly variable among aulopiforms, ranging from Cimolichthys Agassiz, 1835, with its large body size, to Enchodus Leidy, 1857, with its prominent fangs and interdigitating dentaries, to Rhynchoderetis Arambourg, 1943, andIchthyotringa Cope, 1878, with their elongate rostra (premaxillae, mesethmoids, or frontals).…”

“…Our phylogenetic understanding of extant aulopiforms is relatively good (Davis, 2010;Davis and Fielitz, 2010). In contrast, our phylogenetic understanding of aulopiforms in the fossil record is relatively poor even though much good research has been done recently (e.g., Fielitz, 2004;Fielitz and Gonz alez-Rodr ıguez, 2008;Davis and Fielitz, 2010;Silva and Gallo, 2011).…”

“…In contrast, our phylogenetic understanding of aulopiforms in the fossil record is relatively poor even though much good research has been done recently (e.g., Fielitz, 2004;Fielitz and Gonz alez-Rodr ıguez, 2008;Davis and Fielitz, 2010;Silva and Gallo, 2011). Essentially, there is still a poor understanding of the relationships between extinct and extant forms (Friedman, 2009;Davis and Fielitz, 2010). Consequently, there is a clear need for discovery and basic description of new aulopiform skeletons from the Cretaceous to ultimately help resolve various phylogenetic problems and successfully combine the phylogenies of extinct and extant taxa.…”

“…To date, Silva and Gallo (2011) produced the most comprehensive phylogeny of fossil aulopiforms, including one extant taxon and 33 fossil taxa. For thorough descriptions of aulopiform interrelationships, see Davis (2010), Davis and Fielitz (2010), and Silva and Gallo (2011). Davis (2010) identified three suborders of extant aulopiforms based on, among other characteristics, a variety of osteological features: Aulopoidei, Paraulopoidei, and the Alepisauroidei.…”