Postcranial morphology of<i>Notopithecus</i>Ameghino, 1897 (Notoungulata, Interatheriidae) from the middle Eocene of Patagonia, Argentina

Vera, Bárbara

doi:10.1080/02724634.2012.694320

Cited by 16 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The appendicular skeleton of notopithecines is only known for Notopithecus adapinus, which shows significant differences compared to the most complete interatheriines, such as Federicoanaya and Eopachyrucos from Deseadan SALMA, and Interatherium and Protypotherium from Santacrucian SALMA (Vera 2012b(Vera , 2013b. Amongst studied notoungulates with humeri, the entepicondylar foramen is absent [70 1 ] only in Interatherium and hence is an apomorphic character for this taxon.…”

Section: Phylogenetic Analysis Cladistic Methodologymentioning

confidence: 97%

Phylogenetic revision of the South American notopithecines (Mammalia: Notoungulata)

Vera

2015

Journal of Systematic Palaeontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A phylogenetic analysis of all Eocene taxa assigned to Notopithecinae has been conducted, evaluating relationships amongst notopithecines, basal interatheriids and Interatheriinae. Other groups of native ungulates were also included. New dental and postcranial characters are considered with respect to previously published data; some characters are evaluated in notoungulates for the first time. Two different searches were performed under parsimony and equal weights. The inclusion of postcranial characters strongly influenced tree topology. The most significant result of the phylogenetic analysis was the identification of a novel monophyletic group, including species traditionally grouped as Patagonian Notopithecinae. The 'notopithecid' name is linked to the new clade defined as the clade stemming from the most recent common ancestor of the species Notopithecus adapinus, Antepithecus brachystephanus, Transpithecus obtentus and Guilielmoscottia plicifera. This phylogeny supports the main morphological differences of the new clade with respect to Interatheriinae Interatheriidae. In consequence, a diagnosis is proposed based on phylogenetic results, to which some other morphological characters are added. The Chilean basal interatheriids Johnbell and Ignigena as well as Punapithecus (Argentinean Puna) are excluded from the notopithecid clade, implying biostratigraphical and biogeographical changes. Notopithecid distribution now becomes restricted to the middleÀlate Eocene part of the Sarmiento Formation outcropping in central Chubut and north-east Santa Cruz provinces, Argentina. Other extra-Patagonian records of notopithecids are not confirmed. The resulting phylogeny resolves some relationships within basal interatheriids differently from previous analyses. Interatheriinae is not recovered as a monophyletic group, and Oldfieldthomasiidae and Henricosborniid are paraphyletic. The position of the Archaeopithecidae Acropithecus rigidus is controversial; it appears at the base of the Typotheria lineage or in the notopithecid clade, but systematic taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships amongst members of Archaeopithecidae remain to be established.

show abstract

Section: Phylogenetic Analysis Cladistic Methodologymentioning

confidence: 97%

Phylogenetic revision of the South American notopithecines (Mammalia: Notoungulata)

Vera

2015

Journal of Systematic Palaeontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5.1). This peculiarity is shared with some notopithecids (Vera, 2012a(Vera, , 2012bVera and Cerdeño, 2014). On P4 and molars, the central fossette is mesiodistally elongated and has a narrow labial projection, which extends from the most anterior part of the central fossette in the M1 and from the middle part on M2 and M3 (Fig.…”

Section: Vera-eocene Archeopithecids From Patagoniamentioning

confidence: 97%

“…6.8,6.9) has a moderately concave and nearly vertically oriented articular facet for the humerus, similar to the ulna of Notopithecus adapinus (Vera, 2012b) and differing from the curved surface observed in Protypotherium (YPM-PU 0-15828, YPM-PU 0-15341; also see Sinclair, 1909).…”

Section: Vera-eocene Archeopithecids From Patagoniamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular for Notopithecus, body mass was also inferred from astragalar parameters (Tsubamoto, 2014) based on one specimen (MPEF-PV 1113, Vera, 2012b). Mean values for each model and taxon, as well as the average total, are listed in Table 3.…”

Section: Vera-eocene Archeopithecids From Patagoniamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then, in Billet's (2011) analysis, Acropithecus forms part of a large basal bush branching out into the oldfieldthomasiids Oldfieldthomasia, Colbertia and Ultrapithecus; the genus Campanorco; the Interatheriidae; and a clade uniting the Archaeohyracidae, Mesotheriidae and Hegetotheriidae. More recently, a revision of the subfamily Notopithecinae (sensu Simpson, 1945Simpson, , 1967b yields novel taxonomic modifications for this group (Vera, 2012a(Vera, , 2012b(Vera, , 2013a(Vera, , 2013bVera and Cerdeño, 2014), including the Archaeopithecidae. For the latter, Vera (2013b) hypothesizes an overestimation in the number of species and preliminarily proposes two monospecific genera.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Patagonian Eocene Archaeopithecidae Ameghino, 1897 (Notoungulata): systematic revision, phylogeny and biostratigraphy

Vera¹

2017

J. Paleontol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-The Archaeopithecidae is a very poorly known group of native ungulates from the Eocene of Patagonia (Argentina), whose alpha taxonomy has remained obscure since Ameghino's times. It is traditionally considered as a family representative of the Casamayoran (middle Eocene) South American Land Mammal Age, and is thought to be morphologically close to the notopithecids. After studying >200 specimens from several institutions, including all the type specimens, a taxonomic overestimation is established. Out of the six species considered originally as archaeopithecids, Archaeopithecus rogeri Ameghino, 1897 is here recognized as the only valid name and species; subsequent synonymies are proposed and previous taxonomic hypotheses discarded. This exhaustive revision has permitted improving the knowledge of A. rogeri and, for the first time, it has revealed many craniodental characters, which allow amending its diagnosis and differentiating this taxon from other Eocene notoungulates. Archaeopithecus rogeri is a small-sized taxon characterized by its complete and rooted dentition, which is relatively higher than that of other contemporaneous short-crowned notoungulates and shows ontogenetic variation in size and morphology. The body mass range of A. rogeri (1.4-2.5 kg) is comparable to those of notopithecids and some small hegetotheriids.

show abstract

Geometric morphometric analysis as a proxy to evaluate age‐related change in molar shape variation of low‐crowned Notoungulata (Mammalia)

Scarano

Vera

2017

Journal of Morphology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shape and age variation in dentition of Paleogene extinct native South American ungulates (Notoungulata) has been traditionally described using qualitative and quantitative approaches, and has played a controversial role in the systematics of several groups. Such is the case of the Notopithecidae, a group of notoungulates with low-crowned teeth, known from the middle Eocene of Patagonia (Argentina). In this group, as well as in other contemporary families, extreme morphological changes associated to increasing dental wear were originally assumed to represent taxonomic differences; thus, dozens of species were erected, clearly reflecting the difficulty of defining discrete characters. In this contribution, a total of 89 upper molars and 91 lower molars were analyzed distributed in two factors, wear and species; three species of notopithecids were considered as study case, Notopithecus adapinus, Antepithecus brachystephanus, and Transpithecus obtentus, based on the large and well-identified sample of upper and lower molars for each species. We have coupled geometric morphometric analyses with traditional comparative methods to get a better understanding and interpretation of both the changes in tooth shape contour and the link between shape and ontogeny. In addition, we evaluate the utility of this approach to identify which changes are strictly wear-related and also test the qualitative characteristics used for diagnosing and differentiating notopithecid species. Our study yielded consistent results when applying independent geometric morphometric analyses on complex structures such as brachydont molar teeth. The landmark data is highly congruent with alternative sources of evidence, such as morphological studies using discrete characters. In notopithecid species, wear is the main factor affecting molar shape, followed by species (in lower molars) and allometry; in addition, lower teeth morphology is more definitive in separating species than upper molars, a fact that entails a key point for systematic studies of Paleogene brachydont notoungulates.

show abstract

Postcranial morphology ofNotopithecusAmeghino, 1897 (Notoungulata, Interatheriidae) from the middle Eocene of Patagonia, Argentina

Cited by 16 publications

References 10 publications

Phylogenetic revision of the South American notopithecines (Mammalia: Notoungulata)

Phylogenetic revision of the South American notopithecines (Mammalia: Notoungulata)

Patagonian Eocene Archaeopithecidae Ameghino, 1897 (Notoungulata): systematic revision, phylogeny and biostratigraphy

Geometric morphometric analysis as a proxy to evaluate age‐related change in molar shape variation of low‐crowned Notoungulata (Mammalia)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About