2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1502-3931.2011.00295.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nectocaris and early cephalopod evolution: reply to Mazurek & Zatoń

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Given that a number of Cambrian groups such as the nectocariids [31,32] and amiskwiids [33] remain in phylogenetic limbo (but see [34,35]), the only option might be to add the vetulicolians to this roster and continue our efforts to find even better preserved material and/or related taxa that might serve to pinpoint their relationships.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Given that a number of Cambrian groups such as the nectocariids [31,32] and amiskwiids [33] remain in phylogenetic limbo (but see [34,35]), the only option might be to add the vetulicolians to this roster and continue our efforts to find even better preserved material and/or related taxa that might serve to pinpoint their relationships.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As already noted we argue that a position within the stem-group deuterostomes is the best phylogenetic solution, but as is often the case in such problematic animals from the Cambrian the correct identification of homologies is crucial. In this context the case of the putative cephalopod Nectoccaris [31,32,34,35] provides a useful parallel. Thus any attempt to link the vetulicolians to one or other group within either the ambulcrarians or chordates is largely frustrated not only by the paucity of obvious homologies, but in addition evidence for radical reorganization of some bodyplans (notably echinoderms [43]) as well as both molecular [44] and fossil [45] data that suggest other groups (notably amphioxus) are more or less degenerate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They noted the absence of key cephalopod characters, including a molluscan radula and a siphunculate shell, and drew attention to some similarities between Nectocaris and coeval Cambrian panarthropods such as Anomalocaris . However, they were not comparing homologous characters as Smith & Caron (2011) easily showed. For example, the paired unsegmented anterior ‘tentacles’ of Nectocaris bear no resemblance in construction or presumed mode of operation to the jointed ‘great appendages’ of the anomalocarids.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the ‘axial cavity’ is a gut and the ‘ctenidia’ are not gills then all other similarities to structures found in crown‐group cephalopods become dubious (Smith & Caron 2011, table 1). A pair of stalked eyes that are found only in highly derived squids?…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation