Molecular phylogeny and node time estimation of bioluminescent Lantern Sharks (Elasmobranchii: Etmopteridae)

Straube, Nicolas; Iglésias, Samuel P.; Sellos, Daniel; Kriwet, Jürgen; Schliewen, Ulrich K.

doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2010.04.042

Cited by 70 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

119

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, only a few analyses calculating divergence and origination dates have been performed so far (e.g. Valsecchi et al 2005;Stelbrink et al 2010;Straube et al 2010). Most of these studies used either small taxon samplings or were focused on a particular group.…”

Section: Node Age Estimates and Molecular Clock Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Node age estimations and the origin of angel sharks, Squatiniformes (Neoselachii, Squalomorphii)

Klug

Kriwet

2013

Journal of Systematic Palaeontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fossil record of angel sharks is reviewed with special focus on skeletal remains. A new family †Pseudorhinidae is established for two species based on complete specimens from the Late Jurassic and a possible third species based on isolated teeth. This clade is a member of the stem lineage of Squatiniformes. Squatinidae represents the crown with a reliable fossil record extending back into the Aptian based on a partial skeleton displaying characteristic morphological traits of Squatina. We also present revised morphological descriptions of the skeletal remains of †Squatina baumbergensis (Campanian of Germany) and †Squatina sp. (Miocene of Japan). In this study, we used reliable skeletal remains and a modified approach to establish the origin and divergence of the Squatiniformes and the Squatinidae. Isolated teeth are considered to be unreliable because of the poor knowledge of squatiniform dental character traits and their evolution. We estimate a 'hard' minimum age constraint of 156.2 Ma and a 'soft' maximum age constraint of 181.74 Ma for the origin of the Squatiniformes. For the crown represented by the Squatinidae, we estimate a 'hard' minimum age constraint of 114 Ma and a 'soft' maximum age constraint of 157.59 Ma. These age constraints most likely designate the timing of the origin of identifiable squatiniform and squatinid characters as currently understood rather than the origin of the Squatiniformes or the divergence between the †Pseudorhinidae and the Squatinidae. The lack of pre-Late Jurassic pseudorhinids and pre-Cretaceous squatinids probably represents an artefact because characteristic squatiniform tooth morphologies, which generally provide only a restricted set of diagnosable features, might not have yet been fully developed. Consequently, skeletal remains of neoselachians from the Early and Middle Jurassic are crucial for establishing reliable characters of stem-lineage representatives and to avoid misinterpretations resulting from transferring morphological traits of the crown to fossil groups with unresolved interrelationships, as well as sister-group relations.http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5A5FA554-C834-48E3-AE44-6F92DE9CB5F1

show abstract

Section: Node Age Estimates and Molecular Clock Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Node age estimations and the origin of angel sharks, Squatiniformes (Neoselachii, Squalomorphii)

Klug

Kriwet

2013

Journal of Systematic Palaeontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although a squaliform phylogeny based on dental characters previously suggested that Etmopteridae benefited from the Cenomanian-Turonian global anoxic event to colonize newly empty deepwater niches (approximately 90 million years ago) (Adnet and Capetta, 2001), a more recent molecular phylogeny places the origin of these sharks earlier (approximately 65 million years ago) at the Cretaceous/Tertiary (C/T) boundary (Straube et al, 2010). Both phylogenies (morphological and molecular) are, however, unanimous in placing the origin of the Dalatiidae at the C/T boundary.…”

Section: Evolution Of Photophore Control In Sharksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This environmental change would have been accompanied by a deep reorganisation of etmopterid photogenic structures. Indeed, although lantern shark luminescence can still be used in counterilluminating behaviours , it started to be involved in intraspecific functions such as schooling, cooperative hunting and mating, favouring their rapid radiation in the darkness of the deep sea (Claes and Mallefet, 2009c;Straube et al, 2010). Photophores of Etmopteridae would first have become larger, encompassing more than one photogenic cell, and more regularly distributed in the skin, forming more homogeneous photogenic surface areas well adapted to their luminescent behaviours.…”

Section: Evolution Of Photophore Control In Sharksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly, the control mechanism of etmopterid photophores gives clues to evolutionary pathway of luminescence in sharks, as it involves the same hormones as those acting in the physiological colour change used by elasmobranchs to remain cryptic against variable backgrounds [PRL and MT provoke skin lightning via pigment retraction in melanophores whereas a-MSH provokes skin darkening via pigment expansion in these cells (Visconti et al, 1999;Gelsleichter, 2004)]. It is therefore suggested that lantern sharks modified their original shallow-water crypsis mechanism when they started to colonize deep-water niches during the late Cretaceous (Adnet and Capetta, 2001;Straube et al, 2010) and develop their ability to produce light .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because the separation of Dalatiidae and Etmopteridae certainly occurred before the radiation of lantern sharks in the deep sea (Straube et al, 2010) and because dalatiid and etmopterid photophores harbour structural differences, it has been suggested that the luminescence capability observed in members of these two shark families is the result of convergent evolution (Hubbs et al, 1967;Claes and Mallefet, 2009a;Straube et al, 2010). In this context, the study of the physiology of luminescence control in a dalatiid species such as S. aliae is particularly interesting because it contributes to our understanding of the evolutionary history of luminescence in sharks; although a similar control mechanism would be in favour of a single acquisition of luminescence in sharks, a distinct mechanism would suggest multiple independent acquisitions of the phenomenon in these fishes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Control of luminescence from pygmy shark (Squaliolus aliae) photophores

Claes

Mallefet

2012

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe smalleye pygmy shark (Squaliolus aliae) is a dwarf pelagic shark from the Dalatiidae family that harbours thousands of tiny photophores. In this work, we studied the organisation and physiological control of these photogenic organs. Results show that they are mainly situated on the ventral side of the shark, forming a homogeneous ventral photogenic area that appears well suited for counterillumination, a well-known camouflage technique of pelagic organisms. Isolated ventral skin patches containing photophores did not respond to classical neurotransmitters and nitric oxide but produced light after melatonin (MT) application. Prolactin and a-melanocyte-stimulating hormone inhibited this hormonally induced luminescence as well as the spontaneous luminescence from the photogenic tissue. The action of MT seems to be mediated by binding to the MT 2 receptor subtype, as the MT 2 receptor agonist 4P-PDOT inhibited the luminescence induced by this hormone. Binding to this receptor probably decreases the intracellular cAMP concentration because forskolin inhibited spontaneous and MT-induced luminescence. In addition, a GABA inhibitory tonus seems to be present in the photogenic tissue as well, as GABA inhibited MT-induced luminescence and the application of bicuculline provoked luminescence from S. aliae photophores. Similarly to what has been found in Etmopteridae, the other luminous shark family, the main target of the luminescence control appears to be the melanophores covering the photocytes. Results suggest that bioluminescence first appeared in Dalatiidae when they adopted a pelagic style at the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary, and was modified by Etmopteridae when they started to colonize deep-water niches and rely on this light for intraspecific behaviours.

show abstract

Helminth biodiversity research transformed by a century of evolutionary thought

Caira

Jensen

2016

A Century of Parasitology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Molecular phylogeny and node time estimation of bioluminescent Lantern Sharks (Elasmobranchii: Etmopteridae)

Cited by 70 publications

References 43 publications

Node age estimations and the origin of angel sharks, Squatiniformes (Neoselachii, Squalomorphii)

Node age estimations and the origin of angel sharks, Squatiniformes (Neoselachii, Squalomorphii)

Control of luminescence from pygmy shark (Squaliolus aliae) photophores

Helminth biodiversity research transformed by a century of evolutionary thought

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About