1989
DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.1989.tb00550.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interrelationships of lower actinopterygian fishes

Abstract: The lower actinopterygian fishes are classified using dermal skull roof pattern, in particular the various configurations displayed by the bones on the otic branch of the infraorbital canal (dermosphenotic, intertemporal‐supratemporal/dermopterotic). Where possible these patterns are related to the sequential acquisition of derived features, and the resulting cladogram represents a synthesis of dermal bone pattern and endochondral and dermal skeletal characters. We have proposed 27 terminal groups which we ten… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
338
6

Year Published

1991
1991
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 174 publications
(355 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
11
338
6
Order By: Relevance
“…This work was done without the reinvestigation of the genus called for by Moy-Thomas and Bradley Dyne (1938). Gardiner and Schaeffer (1989) attempted to divide lower actinopterygians into different generic groups. Different †Rhadinichthys species were placed in different generic groups.…”
Section: † Rhadinichthysmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This work was done without the reinvestigation of the genus called for by Moy-Thomas and Bradley Dyne (1938). Gardiner and Schaeffer (1989) attempted to divide lower actinopterygians into different generic groups. Different †Rhadinichthys species were placed in different generic groups.…”
Section: † Rhadinichthysmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because the Chondrostei were widely regarded as the sister-group of the Neopterygii [29], two chondrostean taxa were selected as the out-group, including the Triassic Birgeria and the living Acipenser. Sixty characters were adopted from previous publications [3,5,6,17,19,[30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37] on the phylogenetic relationships of lower actinopterygians (Appendix 1). The data matrix of taxa and characters are given in Appendix 2.…”
Section: Phylogeny Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Later morphological analyses classified bichirs as basal actinopterygians (Tree 3; Fig. 1C) (Goodrich, 1928;Gardiner, 1973;Schaeffer, 1973;Patterson, 1982;Lauder and Liem, 1983;Gardiner and Schaeffer, 1989;Nelson, 1994) or even a distinct subclass of Osteichthyes, the Brachiopterygii (Tree 2; Fig. 1B) (Jessen, 1973;Nelson, 1973;Jarvik, 1981;Bjerring, 1985).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%