Showing posts with label Placoderms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Placoderms. Show all posts

Wednesday, 31 January 2024

Alienacanthus malkowskii: A highly specialised Placoderm Fish from the Late Devonian Rheic Ocean.

Placoderms are thought to have been the earliest jawed Vertebrates, first appearing in the Silurian and rising to become the most diverse group of Fish in the Devonian, before their extinction at the end of that period. During the Devonian the Placoderms, and in particular the Arthrodires (the most abundant and diverse Placoderm group) produced a wide range of forms, implying an equally diverse range of ecological and feeding strategies. However, Placoderms are known almost entirely from their hard parts, with only a single specimen with a body outline known, and no known stomach contents or soft parts, limiting our ability to interpret the ecology of these diverse early Fish. The jaws of early Placoderms show tend to be similar, apparently adapted to rapid snatching of prey, but later members of the group are much more varied, and have been interpreted to reflect a range of feeding styles from filter feeding to durophagy (the crushing of hard foodstuffs, such as shellfish).

In a paper published in the journal Royal Society Open Science on 31 January 2024, Melina Jobbins of the Department of Palaeontology at the University of ZurichMartin Rücklin of the Naturalis Biodiversity Cente and the University of LeidenMarcelo Sánchez Villagra, also of the Department of Palaeontology at the University of Zurich, Hervé Lelièvre of the Muséum National d’Histoire NaturelleEileen Grogan of the Department of Biology at Saint Joseph’s University, Piotr Szrek of the Polish Geological Institute, and Christian Klug, again of the Department of Palaeontology at the University of Zurich, redescribe a species of Late Devonian Placoderm previously only known from fragmentary material from the Holy Cross Mountains of Poland, on the basis of new material from the eastern Anti-Atlas of Morocco.

Alienacanthus malkowskii was originally described from fragmentary material from two quarries in Poland, as composing large, possibly paired, spines of uncertain origin. Jobbins et al.'s redescription of the species is based upon a nearly complete skull, the left side of a second skull, and a number of more fragmentary remains from sites in Morocco, which reveals the 'spines' to be part of the lower jaw of a large Eubrachythoracid Placoderm.

Alienacanthus malkowskii, skull, PIMUZ A/I 5239. In right (a), (b), left (c), (d) and dorsal (e), (f) view; inferognathals, PIMUZ A/I5238, in lingual (g), lateral (h) and dorsal (i) view. Each bone is differentiated by a separate colour. Black arrow points to lingualdepression. Scale bars correspond to 100 mm. Jobbins et al. (2024).

The inferognathal bones, which form the lower jaws in Placoderms protrude significantly beyond the upper jaw, reaching about twice the length of the rest of the skull, reaching a pointed tip. These jaw elements run closely parallel to one-another over about 60% of their length, although they are not fused at any point. The teeth of both jaws are posteriorly recurved, with the 'teeth' (actually bony protrusions, as in all Placoderms) of the lower jaw continuing forward of the upper jaw, but a significant distance short of the tip of the bone.

Extremely elongated lower jaws are known in a variety of other extant and fossil Fish and marine Tetrapods, including the Carboniferous Chondrichthyan Ornithoprion, the extant ray-finned Halfbeaks, which have a fossil record dating back to the Palaeogene, and the Pliocene Porpoise Semirostrum. Although in none of these are the lower jaws as elongated as they are in Alienacanthus malkowskii, with the longest examples being found in some species of Halfbeak, which can reach about 1.6 times the length of the skull.

Live reconstructions of Alienacanthus. Based on the body morphology of extinct and modern Fish with elongated jaws (elongated, fusiform, bodies). Beat Scheffold & Christian Klug in Jobbins et al. (2024).

The recurved teeth of Alienacanthus malkowskii are strongly suggestinve of a diet of live Fish, mirroring the shape of teeth seen in many other Fish-eating groups, including Ichthyosaurs, Snakes, Choristoderans, and other living and extinct Fish species. However, the lower teeth of Alienacanthus malkowskii continue beyond the upper jaw, with up to twelve teeth forward of the mouth in observed specimens. 

Teeth forward of the mouth are known in a number of Condrichthyan groups, including Sawfish, Sawsharks, and Rajiform Rays. All of these have teeth on the upper jaw rather than the lower, and are equipped with electroreceptive sensory organs which enable them to detect prey-Fish and strike them with a rapid side-motion of the rostrum. However, thin sections of the jaw of Alienacanthus malkowskii show no signs of the additional neural canals which would be associated with such a system, and the teeth of Alienacanthus malkowskii are directed upwards, rather than sideways, making it unlikely that the elongated jaw was used in the same way as seen in Sawfish. Instead, Jobbins et al. suggest that the presence of teeth forward of the mouth in Alienacanthus malkowskii is a product of the way the living Animal grew, with formerly useable oral teeth being carried forward as the jawbone elongated, probably in a short burst of growth as the Fish approached maturity, although it is still possible that the long lower jaw was used to strike at prey, and that the forward teeth could have inflicted damage on soft-bodied Animals.

See also...


Tuesday, 14 July 2020

Using Fish to look for a Devonian connection between Australia and Asia.

The Devonian Period is widely known as the ‘Age of Fish’, because for the first time in the fossil record there were abundant and diverse remains of early Vertebrates. In fact, it was an isolated scale of the Upper Devonian Lobe-finned Fish Holoptychius, identified by Louis Agassiz in 1840 from supposedly ‘Silurian’ strata in Belgium, that proved decisive evidence for correlating between marine strata in Devon, England, and the well-known ‘Old Red Sandstone’ of Scotland. This and other evidence led to Adam Sedgwick and Roderick Murchison erecting the Devonian System, to fill a gap in the stratigraphic succession above the Silurian System, previously described by Murchison, and beneath the Carboniferous of William Conybeare and William Phillips, for the British ‘Coal Measures’, which then also included the Devonian Old Red Sandstone. In the subsequent 180 years, Devonian Fish fossils have been found in sedimentary rocks throughout the world, in a wide range of lithologies representing all habitable aquatic environments, from marine to estuarine, fluviatile and lacustrine. The first Devonian Fish discoveries in the Southern Hemisphere included bones (probably belonging to the Antiarch Placoderm Remigolepis) from Twofold Bay on the coast of southeastern Australia, a skull from Burrinjuck, New South Wales, and fish scales and bones from Antarctica collected on Robert Falcon Scott’s 1910–1913 South Pole Expedition. Today these sites are among numerous Devonian fossil Fish localities representing the East Gondwanan region (Australasia–Antarctica). In Asia, Henri Mansuy first recorded Devonian Fish remains from China and northern Vietnam respectively, now extensively documented in the Siluro-Devonian of the South China Block as one of the three greatest endemic biological radiation episodes in the entire evolutionary history of the Vertebrates.

In a paper published in the Journal of Palaeogeography on 7 April 2020, Gavin Young of the Department of Applied Mathematics at the Australian National University, and the Australian Museum Research Institute, and Jing Lu, also of the Department of Applied Mathematics at the Australian National University, and of the Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology & Paleoanthropology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, present an overview of Middle Palaeozoic Vertebrate fossils from East Gondwana that provide evidence of faunal connections with the various Asian palaeo-blocks and terranes identified for the Silurian-Devonian.

Generalised Devonian vertebrate fossil localities for East Gondwana. (a) Australian localities numbered from the southeast in an anticlockwise direction; (b) Devonian reconstruction of Australia, East Antarctica and New Zealand showing additional localities in New Zealand (44) and southern Victoria Land, Antarctica (45). Abbreviations for regions, Australian states, etc. are: MBL, Marie Byrd Land (West Antarctica); NNZ, New Zealand North Island; N.S.W., New South Wales; N.T., Northern Territory; Qld, Queensland; S.A., South Australia; SNZ, New Zealand south island; Vic., Victoria; W.A., Western Australia; Tas., Tasmania. Abbreviations for Australian geological provinces and sedimentary basins (shaded areas) are: AB, Amadeus Basin; ADB, Adavale Basin (subsurface Devonian); BPB, Bonaparte Basin; BrR, Broken River Province; BT, Bancannia Trough (subsurface Devonian); BuB, Burdekin Basin; CB, Canning Basin; CAB, Carnarvon Basin; DB, Darling Basin; DrB, Drummond Basin; GB, Georgina Basin; LFB, Lachlan Fold Belt; OB, Officer Basin; THB, Timbury Hills Basin (subsurface Devonian). Details for localities discussed or mentioned are: (2) Buchan/Bindi, Gippsland, Victoria; (4) Twofold Bay, NSW south coast; (5) Taemas/Wee Jasper (Burrinjuck) limestones; (9) Grenfell-Bumberry syncline area; (12) Gunderbooka/Cobar; (13) Wuttagoona/ Tambua/Mt. Jack; (20) Toomba Range/Cravens Peak; (21) Dulcie Range; (24) Mount Winter; (40) Munyarai 1 well, Officer Basin; (41) western Darling Basin (Barrier Range, Mutawintji); (42) Grampians, western Victoria; (45) Aztec Fish Assemblage, Skelton Neve and Cook Mountains areas, Transantarctic Mountains, southern Victoria Land. Young & Lu (2020).

In general terms, the Vertebrate fossil record from the Ordovician to the Devonian is concerned with two major aquatic groups: the Fish-like Agnathans (Jawless Vertebrates), and Fish with jaws (primitive Gnathostomes). This evolutionary phase ended with the emergence of terrestrial Vertebrates, for which a minimum age of Early Devonian is provided by the fossil record (both Tetrapod body fossils, and trackway evidence). Other evidence (e.g. diversity modelling of genus-level preservation rates; molecular data) does not exclude an even older (Silurian) age for Tetrapod origins, as had been previously suggested from phylogenetic and trace fossil considerations. The aquatic habitat of Fish, which are tied to environments of deposition rather than erosion, gives them a better chance of preservation as fossils than terrestrial Vertebrates. The robust bones of the most diverse Devonian group, the extinct Placoderms or ‘Armoured Fish’, provides a highly complex data set such that their distributions in time and space can be applied to questions of Middle Palaeozoic palaeogeography.

The importance of freshwater Fish distributions for modern biogeographic studies of continental faunas is well established, but whether it is reasonable to extrapolate back into the Palaeozoic has been questioned. In commenting on Devonian Vertebrate evidence, for example, the generalisation that ‘Fish could swim’ was considered to limit the value of fossil evidence compared to other palaeogeographic data (e.g. palaeomagnetism). Thus, the dispersal capabilities of Devonian Fish have been widely considered regarding reconstructions of past geography, in particular how to distinguish between two groupings: (i) ‘primary division’ Fish (entirely restricted to freshwater), and (ii) Fish with some tolerance of marine environments, or which entered the sea during parts of their life cycles. Detailed analysis of depositional environments has not resolved this problem; even if adults of certain fossil species are only found in marginal marine or non-marine deposits, the dispersal capacity of larval forms cannot be known. These are questions about processes, which are difficult or impossible to deal with in historical science as testable hypotheses. Yet the same difficulties apply to experimentation on living Fish species, for example to establish saltwater tolerance and dispersal capabilities to explain disjunct distributions (e.g. dispersal history of modern Galaxiid Fish across the
southern continents).

An alternative approach concerns analysis of pattern, whereby two ecological groupings of Fish are considered relevant to biogeographic studies ‘continental’ (freshwater, marginal and shallow marine forms of continental shelves), and ‘oceanic’ (pelagic forms of the open oceans). These are identified by biogeographic analysis of distribution patterns in relation to phylogeny. From this perspective, some compelling inferences can be drawn from the global distribution patterns of major Fish taxa recorded from Devonian rocks. Thus five faunal provinces have been identified, based on the presence or absence of major groups: the Cephalaspid Province (Laurussia), the Amphiaspid Province (Siberia), the Tannuaspid Province (Tuvan massif), the Galeaspid-Yunnanolepid Province (South China), and the Wuttagoonaspid-Phyllolepid Province (East Gondwana). The last two provinces and their inter-connections are the topic of Young and Lu's study.

Regarding palaeogeographic connections between East Gondwana and other areas, Middle Palaeozoic Vertebrate evidence has highlighted two major data conflicts. Strongly endemic Early Devonian faunas in East Gondwana indicate isolation, but with increased cosmopolitanism during the Middle Devonian, and strong evidence by the Late Devonian of faunal exchange with the Laurussian palaeocontinent (e.g. Antiarch Placoderms such as Bothriolepis widespread across both regions; the Arthrodire Groenlandaspis antarctica occurring in non-marine deposits in both Greenland and Antarctica). This is contradicted in some palaeomagnetic reconstructions that indicate just the reverse; i.e. proximity between Gondwana, Laurentia, and Baltica in the Early Devonian, and Gondwana widely separated from Laurussia by an equatorial ocean in the Late Devonian.

The second issue concerns Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion, also supported by some palaeomagnetic and other data. This proposed that South China, and perhaps North China and various parts of south-east Asia, were attached to the northern Gondwana margin in the Early Palaeozoic, but by the Mid-Late Devonian had separately moved away, to eventually form the collage of geological terranes making up modern Asia. Under that scenario, the further back in time, the greater should be dissimilarities between the Asian tectonic blocks and terranes. However, Siluro-Devonian distribution patterns for fossil Vertebrates across Asia suggested the opposite, being more consistent with modern geography than with the model of widely dispersed Asian terranes. Previous studies have shown various Asian blocks and terranes closely associated or connected from the Silurian onward, together representing a ‘Pan-Cathaysian landmass’ defined by Galeaspid Agnathans (Jawless Vertebrates).

Three major groups of jawless vertebrates are highly diverse and widespread in Siluro-Devonian continental deposits of other regions, but unknown in Gondwana. Heterostracans (over 120 genera) and Osteostracans (over 60 genera) are distributed across Laurussia, Siberia, and Tuva. The Galeaspid Agnathans (at least 50 genera), first formally described in 1965, occur only in Asia. The total absence from East Gondwana of Devonian Heterostracans and Osteostracans, common in the Siluro-Devonian of Laurussia, indicates some sort of significant barrier or isolating mechanism. If this was an oceanic barrier it must have been of considerable extent, perhaps 750–1000 km wide. It would need to have been comparable to or wider than the Uralian seaway, because in Laurussia there are many armoured Agnathan occurrences in shallow marine deposits.

In contrast, only two Devonian armoured Agnathans are known from Gondwana (Pituriaspis and Neeyambaspis). Both come from the Wuttagoonaspis Assemblage in the Georgina Basin of central Australia, and show a distinctive morphology, with long rostral processes. They are poorly known from only a small number of specimens preserved as impressions in sandstone. Pituriaspids have been interpreted as endemic at high taxonomic level (in their own Class Pituriaspida), with a possible close relationship to Osteostracans and stem Gnathostomes. This would imply derivation from an unknown, presumably pre-Devonian widespread Agnathan ancestor (note that Ordovician Agnathans are mainly known from marine beds). However, there is a striking superficial resemblance to some South Chinese Galeaspid Agnathans with long rostral processes (Huananaspidiformes), such as Asiaspis or Sinoszechuanaspis. In addition, Neeyambaspis (known from a single skull impression, but clearly different from Pituriaspis) partly preserves a Galeaspid-like median dorsal (nasohypophysial) opening.

The only armoured Agnathans known from Gondwana (a)-(e) compared with some from Asia (f) and (g). Pituriaspis (a), (b) right side, (d) and (e) and Neeyambaspis (b) left side, (c), from the Georgina Basin; (c) and (d) reconstructions of Neeyambaspis (c) and Pituriaspis (d) in dorsal view (d) based on (e); (f) and (g) comparison with two Galeaspids from South China, Sinoszechuanaspis yanmenpaensis (f) and Asiaspis expansa (g). Reconstructions and images not to scale. Abbreviation: mdo, median dorsal opening. Young & Lu (2020).

Galeaspid Agnathans first appeared in the Early Silurian of Asia, and became highly diverse in Asia from the Early Devonian. In South China, the Huananaspidiformes with pronounced rostral processes first appear in the Xitun fauna of Pragian age, and older representatives (Sanqiaspis; Lochkovian) are recorded from northern Vietnam, whereas the Pituriaspids of central Australia are somewhat younger (Emsian-Eifelian). Assuming the striking resemblance to Huananaspid Galeaspids is valid, the appearance of Pituriaspids in East Gondwana can be attributed to range enlargement (‘dispersal’) from China during the faunal exchange of the E’Em bio-event (Pragian-Emsian boundary), identified as the first faunal exchange between China and Australia.

Wuttagoonaspis gave its name to the East Gondwana Province, based on the diverse Placoderm assemblage in sandstones of the Mulga Downs Group (Darling Basin), named after the highly distinctive endemic genus. However, apart from Groenlandaspid Arthrodires, much of this assemblage remains undescribed. Presumably it had comparable diversity to that documented from the Dulcie Sandstone and Cravens Peak Beds of the Georgina Basin. Including the Pituriaspids, the Georgina Basin Wuttagoonaspis assemblage comprises at least 16 genera in 11 families, placed in at least six orders and four classes (Agnatha, Acanthodii, Placodermi, Osteichthyes). There is a second (larger) species of Wuttagoonaspis (Wuttagoonaspis milligani), and a diversity of Arthrodires with seven new genera erected. Biogeographically, these form two groups: (i) probably more primitive Arthrodires (Antarctaspids) that show Chinese affinities, and (ii) genera referred to more widely distributed Actinolepid, Phlyctaeniid and Groenlandaspid Arthrodire families, that have long been recorded from Laurussia (e.g. central Europe, western USA, Spitsbergen, Severnaya Zemlya).

Various Placoderms from East Gondwana (a)-(g) compared with one from South China (h). (a) and (b) Wuttagoonaspis milligani skull (a) and reconstruction (b) from the Georgina Basin; (c)-(e) Phyllolepid Placoderms: Placolepis dorsal reconstruction (c), isolated phyllolepid bones from Victoria (d) and Antarctica (e), all showing characteristic sinuous ridged ornament; (f) Skull reconstruction of Toombalepis tuberculata; (g) Holotype skull of Edgellaspis gorteri from the Hatchery Creek Group at Wee Jasper; (h) Holotype skull of Yujiangolepis liujingenesis from the Pragian of Guangxi. Images not to scale. Abbreviations: Nu, nuchal plate; orb, orbit (eye socket); sg, sensory grooves. Young & Lu (2020).

The age range of the Wuttagoonaspis assemblage has been unclear due to the dearth of marine fossils providing external age control, and the fact that many localities are in isolated sandstone outcrops with no stratigraphic context. A post-Pragian to Eifelian age range has been suggested for the Cravens Peak Beds, probably partly overlapping but perhaps younger than the type area in the Mulga Downs Group of western New South Wales (to explain the different Wuttagoonaspis species). An extension higher into the Middle Devonian (?Givetian) for some sites is supported by similarities in Groenlandaspid Arthrodire remains from the Antarctic Aztec sequence.

Across eastern and central Australia, younger (Late Devonian) strata in these non-marine sequences are characterised by a Bothriolepis-Phyllolepid Fish assemblage. Phyllolepid Placoderms are the second group used to define the East Gondwana Province. The documented range of Phyllolepids in Gondwana is Emsian-Famennian, with their greatest diversity in the Givetian-Frasnian, yet very rare in lowest and highest horizons (evidently small species as an insignificant part of these fish assemblages). In the youngest Australian horizons with Placoderm bones (e.g. latest Famennian assemblage with the giant Sarcopterygian Edenopteron keithcrooki) Phyllolepid plates have not been found. They are shown disappearing just before the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary.

Phyllolepid Placoderms demonstrate the greatest time/space disjunction of any group of Devonian Vertebrates. Louis Agassiz erected the genus Phyllolepis for a highly distinctive isolated bone with sinuous ridged ornament from the ‘Old Red Sandstone’ of Scotland in 1844. Subsequently, 170 years of European research produced nine species within this one genus, all in Famennian strata of Laurussia. In contrast, three decades of research on the Phyllolepids of East Gondwana has documented five genera: Austrophyllolepis, Placolepis, Cobandrahlepis, Yurammia, and Cowralepis. The first four are represented by several species in eastern Australia and Antarctica. On the Australian craton, different species of Austrophyllolepis and Placolepis have been recorded in the Georgina and Amadeus basins. The first Gondwanan appearance of Phyllolepids sensu stricto (Emsian) is based on the oldest Placolepis (and Phyllolepid) in the Jauf Formation of Saudi Arabia. Thus, a Gondwanan origin for the group is strongly indicated, supported by a close relationship to Wuttagoonaspis as proposed by many authors. In contrast, possible precursors of both Wuttagoonaspis and Phyllolepids have been suggested from the Early Devonian of China, but based only on single incomplete skulls, neither of which shows the distinctive and characteristic ridged ornament of Wuttagoonaspids and Phyllolepids. Ridged ornament remains are more likely to be observed by field geologists, even as fragmentary bones These are a very common component in all Devonian Fish assemblages of East Gondwana, but neither Wuttagoonaspids nor Phyllolepids are known from the diverse younger Devonian Fish assemblages in Asia. A new phylogenetic analysis failed to recover a sister group relationship between Wuttagoonaspis (Australia) and Yiminaspis (China), the resemblances residing mainly in primitive Arthrodire skull characters.

The diverse arthrodires documented from the Wuttagoonaspis assemblage of the Georgina Basin included some evidently more primitive forms suggesting Chinese affinities. Toombalepis from the Cravens Peak Beds was assigned to the actinolepid family Antarctaspididae, other members being Antarctaspis (Antarctica) and Yujiangolepis (South China). All of these share a large nuchal plate in the centre of the skull that carried converging sensory grooves. However, this is a general resemblance residing mainly in primitive Arthrodire skull characters, being also seen in many other groups, including Wuttagoonaspids and Phyllolepids, and Petalichthyids (e.g. Eurycaraspis from China). Some Laurussian Actinolepid Arthrodires (e.g. Aethaspis) have a similarly elongate nuchal plate. The incomplete skull of the Chinese ‘Wuttagoonaspid’ Yiminaspis preserves the same general feature (other supposed resemblances to Wuttagoonaspis are mainly non-preserved and shown as dashed lines). A large nuchal plate with converging sensory grooves is displayed in the skull of Edgellaspis from the Hatchery Creek Group. 

The Hatchery Creek Group is an alluvial fan deposit with abundant Fish and Plant remains, about 1800m thick and conformably overlying the Emsian marine limestones at Wee Jasper. The fauna includes early Tetrapodomorphs indicating Chinese affinity as discussed below. The parallel-sided skull of Edgellaspis is another highly unusual feature seen in Placoderm outgroups, whilst the tubercular ornament shows a strong tendency to alignment, as in some primitive Phyllolepids. These early Arthrodires from China, Australia and Antarctica show a range of primitive characteristics never seen in the much better studied Arthrodire faunas of Laurussia, and thus are interpreted to have had limited dispersal capacity. They can be explained by palaeogeographic connections resulting in faunal exchange related to the E’Em bioevent approximating the Pragian-Emsian boundary.

A more widespread arthrodire group are the Buchanosteids, which are diverse in the Burrinjuck marine limestones underlying the Hatchery Creek Group. The type area is Buchan, Victoria, which produced the original specimen named Buchanosteus from equivalent limestones of Emsian age. The Buchanosteids are primitive Brachythoracids characterised by a rostral capsule separate from the rest of the skull and braincase, a feature never recorded in the Brachythoracids of Laurussia. The most diverse assemblage is from Burrinjuck (genera Parabuchanosteus, Errolosteus and Richardosteus). A Chinese Emsian Arthrodire skull, Kweichowlepis, shows close resemblance to Buchanosteus from Australia. A previous study summarised the range of Buchanosteus in China, extending down to the early Lochkovian (Yulin, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region) Again, an ‘out-of-China’ origin at the Pragian-Emsian boundary as part of the E’Em bio-event can be suggested, perhaps related to marine transgressions in the early Emsian documented for both South China and eastern Australia. These shallow marine Fish were widespread along the northern Gondwana margin, up the Uralian seaway (Uralosteus) nd in Severnay Zemlya (Urvaspis). As biogeographic/palaeogeographic indicators with different marine tolerance, they show quite different distribution patterns compared to the primitive non-Brachythoracid Arthrodires (Edgellaspis, Toombalepis, Yujiangolepis).

Placoderm Fish suggesting shallow marine (a)-(c), possibly marginal marine (d) and (f), or continental (g)-(i) faunal exchange between east Gondwana and east Asia. (a) Skull of the Arthrodire Kweichowlepis from the early Emsian Duyun Assemblage of South China re-interpreted as a Buchanosteid; (b) Skull of the Australian Emsian Arthrodire Buchanosteus; (c) Buchanosteid skull (cf. Errolosteus) with ridged ornament (Wee Jasper, New South Wales); (d) and (f). Skulls of the Bothriolepid Antiarch Bothriolepis with a pentagonal preorbital recess; (d) Bothriolepis shaokuanensis (Eifelian, Guangdong, China); (e) Bothriolepis karawaka, and (f) Bothriolepis portalensis from the Aztec sequence (Middle-Late Devonian), southern Victoria Land, Antarctica; (g)-(i) Australian Sinolepid Antiarch Grenfellaspis branagani (Upper Devonian, Lachlan Fold Belt); (g) Reconstruction based on the only known Articulated specimen; (h) and (i) articulated specimen in ventral view, (h), showing the unique ventral fenestra, and dorsal view, (i), skull only. Images not to scale. Abbreviations: f.ven, ventral fenestra; Nu, nuchal plate; orb, orbit (eye socket); orb.f, central opening for eyes, pro, preorbital recess. Young & Lu (2020).

The Yunnanolepid Antiarchs, together with Galeaspid Agnathans, gave the name for the Yunnanolepid/Galeaspid Province, or ‘Pan-Cathaysian Galeaspid Province’. The diversification of these groups in the Silurian-Early Devonian of China represents one of the most dramatic endemic radiations in Vertebrate evolutionary history. Of over 40 Antiarch genera recognised in the most recent phylogenetic analysis, eight genera are Yunnanolepids. This highly endemic group is only known from Asia. First formally documented from Yunnan Province of South China jn 1963, although mentary remains had much earlier been collected from northern Vietnam by Henri Mansuy. Many new localities in this area lie north of the Song Ma suture and thus represent an extension of the South China Block. The discovery of Yunnanolepid remains in Vietnam south of the Song Ma suture, on the ‘Indochina Terrane’, provided the first clear evidence of close faunal (and therefore palaeogeographic) connection with the highly endemic Yunnanolepid-Galeaspid fossil Fish of the South China Block. At the other extreme is the antiarch Bothriolepis, the most widespread Devonian fish. It is known from all regions of the world preserving Upper Devonian strata, with over 60 species recognised world-wide. Traditionally, Bothriolepis was typical of non-marine ‘Old Red Sandstone’ deposits, from which it was first described. Subsequently a small number of occurrences have been demonstrated in calcareous beds associated with marine invertebrates, indicating that these species at least had a tolerance of salt-water. Such a widespread form therefore seemed unlikely to contribute much to considerations of biogeography and palaeogeography.

In the Southern Hemisphere, Bothriolepis was first identified from the Aztec sequence of Antarctica, and considered sufficient to demonstrate a Late Devonian age based on occurrences in Europe and North America. Exhaustive studies of the species Bothriolepis canadensis seemingly left little to be discovered regarding morphology. However, in a detailed study of very extensive Antarctic material, a new type of preorbital recess of the skull wqs identified in three Antarctic species (Bothriolepis portalensis, Bothriolepis karawaka, Bothriolepis macphersoni) Remarkably, this structure was otherwise only known in two Chinese species: Bothriolepis shaokuanensis and Bothriolepis niushoushanensis. Both are of middle Eifelian age, in the Tiaomajian Assemblage of South China and the Shixiagou Assemblage of Ningxia (North China Block). This indicates faunal exchange between these regions in the Middle Devonian for this species group, to the exclusion of other areas. Another significant aspect relative to palaeogeography was a demonstrated temporal discordance in China compared to the Late Devonian age assumed by European researchers, first noted by HC Wang in 1944, but dismissed for decades. Bothriolepis is first recorded in the late Emsian Chuandong Assemblage of Yunnan Province, whereas its European first occurrence (late Givetian of the Baltic region) indicates a range enlargement episode from China-Gondwana near the Middle-Late Devonian boundary.

Global biostratigraphic summary for Placoderms, showing disparate stratigraphic ranges between China, Gondwana and Laurussia, and five postulated biotic dispersal/range enlargement episodes, (A)-(D) square boxes, to explain them. Left column shows international subdivisions for the Silurian and Devonian, with macrovertebrate assemblages MAV1–15 for East Gondwana, and (I)-(XI) for China. Calibration points (Ma) from ICS International Stratigraphic Chart. Range enlargement events are: (S-D) Siluro-Devonian global expansion for various gnathostome groups; (A₁), Pragian-Emsian E’Em or mid-Emsian M’Em bio-events for faunal exchange from Asia to East Gondwana, with possible later (Eifelian) extension of asterolepid antiarchs into Laurussia (A₂); (B₁) range enlargement into East Gondwana of Bothriolepis, from its earliest occurrence (Emsian, South China), with extension (B₂) into Laurussia possibly related to the Givetian Taghanic transgressive event; (C) expansion of Phyllolepids into the Famennian of Laurussia, possibly associated with Kellwasser and Condroz Event sea level changes; other groups with similar patterns consistent with a biotic dispersal event (‘Great Devonian Interchange’) are Groenlandaspids, Rhizodontids, Gyracanthids, and Tetrapods; (D) range enlargement of Sinolepid Antiarchs from South and North China into East Gondwana, possibly associated with Hangenberg Event sea level changes; (b) Summary of placoderm distributions and dispersal episodes in (a) on a Devonian palaeomagnetic reconstruction. Abbreviations: KAZ, Kazakhstan; NC, North China; SC. South China. Young & Lu (2020).

The Asterolepiformes is the second major European grouping of antiarchs, based on Asterolepis from the Frasnian of the Baltic. Previous evidence suggested the group was absent from the Early Devonian of Asia, with the later appearance of endemic Middle Devonian (e.g. Hunanolepis), and cosmopolitan Upper Devonian forms (Remigolepis). Note that ‘Asterolepissinensis, based on material from the Wutung Group near Nanjing, was shown to be congeneric with Jiangxilepis, a Bothriolepid Antiarch. Recently it gas been suggested that Luquanolepis (Emsian, Yunnan Province) could belong in this group (previously interpreted as a probable Bothriolepid. However the skull of Luquanolepis is not known, so this result is very provisional. Asterolepid affinity is anomalous given that all other Chinese Antiarchs (except Hunanolepis, Remigolepis) are Yunnanolepids, Bothriolepids, or Sinolepids. Some ornamented fragments from Tra Ban Island, Vietnam, could also indicate an Asterolepid Antiarch, but such tuberculate ornament is seen in a majority of Placoderm groups, so better evidence is needed.

Currently there is no clear indication of Asterolepids in the Early Devonian of Asia. In contrast, the Early Devonian of Gondwana has produced acid-prepared remains of an unnamed Asterolepid from the Cravens Peak Beds limestone of the Georgina Basin. Its probable Emsian age, based on the presence of an Ostracod very close to Healdianella subdistincta described from the Emsian Sipai Formation (Guangxi), indicates this is probably the oldest confirmed occurrence of the Asterolepid antiarchs in the fossil record. The slightly younger (Emsian-Eifelian) Asterolepid Sherbonaspis comes from the Hatchery Creek Fish assemblage at Wee Jasper, associated with the primitive Arthrodire Edgellaspis, and basal Tetrapodomorphs close to the Chinese Kenichthys. In summary, these data suggest that Asterolepiform Antiarchs were present in East Gondwana as early as, or earlier than, in Laurussia, even if the typical Middle Devonian radiation of species of Asterolepis is not evident.

The Antiarch family Sinolepididae as the name suggests, is a distinctive Asian taxon showing clear distributional evidence for Chinese origins. Sinolepids have a highly unusual morphology with a large rectangular opening or fenestra in the ventral trunk-armour, a structure unknown in any other Placoderm group. The genotype of the family (Sinolepis) has its type area in the Wutung Group near Nanjing (Famennian Leigutai Assemblage. Other Sinolepids (Liujiangolepis, Dayoshania, Xichonolepis) range right through the Devonian of China, and possibly in the Early Devonian of northern Vietnam (?Vanchienolepis). A Late Devonian range enlargement into Gondwana was demonstrated by the discovery of the genus Grenfellaspis in the Lachlan Fold Belt of eastern Australia. The late Famennian age of the Grenfellaspis assemblage of East Gondwana was confirmed with the discovery of a single articulated specimen high in the Hervey Group sequence of central New South Wales. Sinolepids have also been found at other localities in the late Famennian of central New South Wales (e.g. the Bumberry Syncline). Other fossil groups support a faunal connection across the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary.

The diverse Early Devonian Lungfish fauna of southeastern Australia has been documented in numerous publications. From the Pragian-Emsian limestone sequence of Burrinjuck, five species are assigned to four genera (Dipnorhynchus, Speonesydrion, Cathlorhynchus, Placorhynchus). Sorbitorhynchus was described from the Emsian of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region in 1993, and has a close affinity with Dipnorhynchus from Burrinjuck. The dipnoan Erika jarviki (Dipnorhynchidae) was described from the Pojiao Formation (early Emsian) of Wenshan, Yunnan Province, in 1995. Recently a new species of the Burrinjuck genus Cathlorhynchus was recorded from Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. A widespread (‘trans-Panthalassic’) Early Devonian distribution for the Dipnorhynchus lineage has been noted. As discussed above for the Arthrodire Buchanosteus, this would be expected for shallow marine tropical environments. However, the more closely related taxa (species) between China and Australia may be considered an indicator of geographic proximity. Again, given the slightly older age of the Chinese occurrences, faunal exchange related to the E’Em bio-event can be proposed.

Osteichthyan fishes suggesting shallow marine (a), or marginal marine/continental (b)-(i) faunal exchange between East Gondwana and South China. (a) Restoration of the Early Devonian Lungfish Speonesydrion from Burrinjuck. (b)-(e) cf. Kenichthys (previously ‘Gyroptychius? australis’) from Hatchery Creek; parietal (b) and (c) dorsal and ventral, and post-parietal (d) dorsal) skull shields, and right lower jaw (e) external view); (f) Kenichthys from South China, parietal shield in ventral view; (g) Muranjilepis from central Australia, parietal shield, dorsal view; (h) and (i) Tungsenia (South China) parietal shield, dorsal view (h) and CT scan image showing brain cavity (i). Images not to scale. Abbreviations: cv, brain cavity; f.pin, pineal opening; nas.c, nasal capsule; orb, orbit (eye socket); Psp, parasphenoid bone in palate; re.pin, recess for pineal and para-pineal organs. Young & Lu (2020).

The origin of land Animals from Fish was one of the major events in Vertebrate evolutionary history, which has fascinated scientists and the general public since before the time of Charles Darwin. Where and when the first Tetrapods (land Vertebrates) evolved is still shrouded in uncertainty. However, the traditional morphological gap between Fish and Amphibians has been partly closed by a wealth of Fish-like fossil ‘stem-Tetrapods’, many discovered since the mid 1980s. These represent the more advanced part of the stem-Tetrapod lineage, and mainly come from the Laurussian palaeocontinent (Europe or North America).

Over the last 15 years, various extinct Lobe-finned Fish (Sarcopterygians) have been discovered in the remarkable fossil Fish assemblages of South China, some of which represent the basal part of the Tetrapod stem-lineage. The oldest and basal-most stem-Tetrapod so far known is Tungsenia from the Pragian, and the next most basal is the Emsian Kenichthys. Both come from South China. Close resemblances between Kenichthys and Australian material from the Hatchery Creek Group was noted over 20 years ago. Initially this material was provisionally referred to the Laurussian genus Gyroptychius, but most recently several closely related forms are recognised including one listed as cf. Kenichthys. Another closely related stem-Tetrapod is Muranjilepis, described from the Amadeus Basin of central Australia. The detailed relationship between these Australian forms and other Chinese basal stem-Tetrapods (e.g. from Wuding, referred to the Laurussian taxon Thursius) is the subject of ongoing research. All these taxa are strong indicators of faunal exchange between South China and East Gondwana in the Early Devonian.

Generalised phylogeny showing current ideas of relationships of the Tetrapod lineage. Basal stem-Tetrapods only known from South China and East Gondwana are shown in red. Abbreviations: AU, Australia; SC, South China. Young & Lu (2020).

Until a decade ago it was argued that overwhelming fossil evidence showed the ‘Fish-Tetrapod Transition’ had occurred on the Laurussian palaeocontinent during a 10 million-year time interval of the Late Devonian (about 372–382 million years ago). Then a discovery in Poland of much older possible Vertebrate trackways and footprints implied that animals with limbs had already evolved before the Middle Devonian. Similar trackways from Australia had previously been dismissed as too old, because of a long gap before the first occurrence of Tetrapod body fossils (rare examples in the Upper Devonian of Laurussia and Australia). The older Australian and Polish trackway evidence is controversial. However, other Middle Devonian trackways still imply that previous assumptions about the Fish-Tetrapod Yransition occurring in the Late Devonian is an artefact of an incomplete fossil record from one palaeocontinent (Laurussia). The new trackway evidence focussed attention on regions of the world less investigated than Europe and North America, such as Asia and Gondwana. Gondwana was the largest landmass of the Devonian, but its fossil record remains poorly known.

(a) Disparate stratigraphic ranges for some major stem-Tetrapod Fish groups between Asia, Gondwana, and Laurussia (Europe-America); (b) Summary of relevant stem-Tetrapod distributions and possible dispersal episodes on a Devonian palaeomagnetic reconstruction. Young & Lu (2020).

In Laurussia, Tetrapodomorph Fish only occur in strata of Middle Devonian age or younger. The oldest Tristichopterids (e.g. Tristichopterus from Scotland, Eusthenopteron from Canada) occur near the Middle-Late Devonian boundary (previously considered good supporting evidence for Late Devonian Tetrapod origins in Laurussia). The Pragian-Eifelian age range now established for the genera Kenichthys, Tungsenia, ‘Thursius’, and related forms from South China, and ‘Gyroptychius’, cf. Kenichthys and Muranjilepis from Australia, makes them older than any Tetrapodomorphs from Laurussia. Thus, earlier interpretations that they were ‘migrants’ from a European evolutionary centre are no longer tenable. The older age and basal phylogenetic position indicates instead dispersal or range enlargement to Europe, the most direct route on palaeogeographic reconstructions being along the northern Gondwana margin.

Similarly, Tristichopterids were considered of northern origin, with Australian and Antarctic representatives interpreted as more derived, having dispersed from the north into East Gondwana. The underlying assumption is that basal taxa, or stratigraphically older taxa, or both, indicate the centre of origin for the group concerned. However, alternative interpretations, of endemic Tetrapodomorph subgroups (e.g. Canowindridae, Mandageriinae) in Australia-Antarctica are consistent with the placement of the only Australian taxon (Marsdenichthys), resolved as the sister-group to all other Tristichopterids.

Nevertheless, given the diverse basal Tetrapodomorphs in the Lower Devonian of China, it is surprising that Tristichopterids have not been found in the Frasnian, at a time when they are most diverse in both East Gondwana and Laurussia. This seems only explicable by palaeogeographic change. One possibility is that increasing sea-level during the Frasnian, leading to the global maximum transgression near the Frasnian-Famennian boundary, may have isolated continental areas and prevented dispersal of Fish with limited marine tolerance, perhaps including Tristichopterids.

The area occupied by the Wuttagoonaspis assemblage, from western New South Wales and across central Australia, covers about 1 million km² of the Australian craton. In the Georgina Basin of central Australia it extends from the east, in the Toko Syncline area of western Queensland, to the Dulcie Range in the Northern Territory. To the west it occurs in equivalent strata along the MacDonnell Ranges of the Amadeus Basin, being identified in the upper part of the Mereenie Sandstone at Mt Winter. 

This highly diverse assemblage represents the first Vertebrate fauna to occupy the Australian continent (as opposed to marine forms in the shallow seas of the Ordovician). The containing strata represent the upper part of thick non-marine clastic sequences characterising the Early-Middle Palaeozoic of central Australia, with an age range from Ordovician to latest Devonian/Early Carboniferous. These were laid down following regression of the Early Palaeozoic ‘Larapintine seaway’ (which bisected the continent from east to west until the Late Ordovician). It is noted that the Palaeozoic in both the Amadeus and Georgina basins is either producing or being actively explored for hydrocarbons. In the southern Georgina Basin, Cambrian marine sediments are considered the likely source rocks, and the overlying clastics (including Siluro-Devonian with fossil Fish remains) as potential reservoirs.

In the 1970s a new limestone outcrop was found beneath the Devonian Cravens Peak Beds. It is very isolated, at the southern end of the Toko Syncline and on the edge of the Simpson Desert, in an area where lack of outcrop but possible petroleum prospects had long been recognised. The outcrop was sampled for microfossils on the assumption it would be either Cambrian or Ordovician, the typical age of marine limestones in this region. Surprisingly, it contained Devonian Ostracods and Thelodont Agnathans, the first Devonian occurrence in central Australia to produce fossils indicating marine to marginal marine conditions.

(a) Palaeogeography for the Early Devonian of Australia, showing a marine incursion from the southwest to reach the Cravens Peak limestone, Toko Syncline. Alternative marine incursions (arrows) from the Canning, Adavale and Darling basins (CB, ADB, DB) are also shown; (b) Early Devonian palaeogeographic reconstruction for East Gondwana (Australia attached to Antarctica). Young & Lu (2020).

Since then, a diverse Fish assemblage has been documented from this limestone. In addition to the first discovered Thelodonts, it contains Asterolepid Antiarchs, the ‘Notidanid’ Shark Mcmurdodus, various Acanthodians, and Osteolepid, Holoptychiid, Dipnoan, and Onychodontid Osteichthyan remains. Several new groups are not yet described. Generally, the described assemblage shows little affinity to that of South China, in contrast to the associated Ostracods (very close or identical to Healdianella subdistincta from the late Emsian Sipai Formation of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region). The Thelodont Turinia is widely distributed across Gondwana, but also known from Asia (west Yunnan, part of the Shan-Thai Terrane, and also South China Block), and evidently was able to disperse in marine environments. The Shark Mcmurdodus seems clearly a Gondwanan form (first described from Antarctica). Chondrichthyans generally are poorly represented in Siluro-Devonian Fish faunas of South China; they have been suggested as a Vertebrate equivalent of the cool-water Malvinokaffric biogeographic province for Siluro-Devonian invertebrates. The only suggestion of a possible South Chinese element from the Cravens Peak limestone Fish concerns unusual ‘Osteolepid’ scales with posterior serrations, which resemble in some respects the scales of the early Osteichthyan Guiyu from the Silurian (Ludlow) Kuanti Formation of Yunnan Province.

Without the discovery of Devonian microfossils, the Cravens Peak outcrop would have been readily assigned to Cambro-Ordovician marine limestones that are widespread in this region. Based only on lithofacies, the new site would have had little palaeogeographic signficance. Biostratigraphic age control is a key contributor to palaeogeographic map reconstruction, by correlating relevant facies in different stratigraphic sections. With the new age assignment based on marine-marginal marine microfossils, the Cravens Peak limestone acquired new significance regarding Devonian palaeogeography for central Australia.

There has been some discussion about the validity of basing palaeogeographic maps on modern geography, or whether they should also take account of plate tectonic reconstructions, or detailed consideration of interaction of ‘terranes’ in mobile orogenic belts (e.g. ‘orogenic palaeogeography'). Terranes are assumed to have had separate palaeogeographic histories, and in some regions (e.g. the geological composite of eastern Asia), it seems necessary to take them into account for palaeogeographic map compilation. For Palaeozoic Australia, the Lachlan Fold Belt in the east may have involved separate terranes. However, for the craton at least it seemed reasonable to base a series of palaeogeographic maps on modern geography, as in the Australian Government ‘Palaeogeographic Maps Project'.

However, the example of the Cravens Peak limestone reveals difficulties with that approach. To explain its palaeogeographic setting, a long marine extension from the southwest was proposed for the relevant Early Devonian time-slice. This evidently relied upon a single well producing similar Thelodont Fish scales in the Officer Basin, rather than hypothetical marine extensions either from the northwest (Canning Basin) or from eastern Australia, both of these areas having thick sequences demonstrating marine Devonian. There are two objections to the western connection to the Canning Basin; drill hole data in the Canning suggested a topographic high to the east, and the Devonian in the Amadeus Basin was entirely non-marine. However, extensive limestone outcrops (mostly undated) have been noted in the western Amadeus Basin. To the east of the Toko syncline, Devonian marine sedimentary rocks are widespread throughout Queensland, the relevant sedimentary basins considered structural remnants of larger sedimentary provinces. Emsian-Eifelian allochthonous limestones adjacent to the Drummond Basin (‘Ukalunda Shelf’) may extend into the subsurface Belyando Basin. To the west, in the subsurface Adavale Basin (that hosts the Devonian Gilmore gas field), subsurface Devonian may extend into the poorly known Warabin and Barrolka troughs, which lie about 400 km south-east of the Toko syncline, but with no intervening Devonian outcrop. Similarly, there is no outcrop into the north-western part of New South Wales, where an extensive but poorly dated Devonian succession occurs in the subsurface Bancannia trough. In outcrops of the adjacent Darling Basin, Early Devonian marine transgressions are dated as Lochkovian (Icriodus woschmidti and Pedavis pesavis Conodont zones), but given the highly similar Devonian Fish assemblages, a marine connection to the Toko syncline is also possible.

Using a Gondwana reconstruction with Antarctica and Australia juxtaposed makes the southwestern Devonian marine extension very improbable. The adjacent region of Antarctica is an igneous/metamorphic terrain, which was cratonic for most of the Palaeozoic so the possibility of corresponding unknown marine Devonian strata is extremely unlikely.

A more recent reconstruction has Australia placed on the eastern Gondwana margin between 10°S and 40°S, with the North and South China blocks above the equator and off the northern Gondwana margin at similar palaeolatitudes. By the Late Devonian, the South China Block had crossed the equator to have the same southern palaeolatitude as eastern Australia. Based on Chinese Cambrian and Silurian palaeomagnetic data, and an assumed correspondence in the apparent polar wander paths for South China and Australia/East Gondwana. Another reconstruction also showed South China attached to northwestern Australia, while the most recent maps show combined South China, North China and Tarim blocks in this position (their ‘Pan-Cathaysian Galeapid Province’). Recent palaeoclimatic data maps again show all the Asian blocks and terranes attached to the northwest margin of Australia through the Silurian-Devonian time interval. Thus, given these various reconstructions, an assumed marine incursion from the Canning Basin would represent a direct connection with the Siluro-Devonian Vertebrate assemblages of Asia. In contrast, an incursion from the east would be less direct (perhaps more consistent with the minimal Asian affinities on the Cravens Peak Limestone Fish Assemblage).

However, the assumption that juxtaposition of palaeoblocks on a plate tectonic reconstruction means a palaeogeographic connection is greatly oversimplified. Sea-level fluctuations would dramatically change connections or barriers between areas. Other problems include the difficulty of accommodating tectonic deformation, stretched continental margins, compression in highly deformed fold belts representing collision zones, and lost ocean floor sediments with obliteration of former oceans. All are long recognised issues preventing more realistic palaeogeographic reconstructions using palinspastic base maps. These issues indicate some of the limitations to standard map representations for palaeogeographic data. It is noted that in the most recent palaeogeographic maps based only on palaeomagnetic constraints, the South China Block and various south-east Asian terranes are shown closely juxtaposed to the western Australian margin in the Silurian, but drifting away to the west during the Devonian. This is completely the opposite to what is indicated by the highly endemic Devonian Fish assemblages of the ‘Pan-Cathaysian landmass’ of the Late Silurian-Early Devonian.

The reconstruction of past geography, like most aspects of historical Earth Science, relies on a range of geological, geophysical, and biological empirical data. How disparate data sets can be integrated, to produce a coherent and testable hypothesis of changing geography through time, has remained elusive and controversial. An oversimplification of the data integration problem is to distinguish between qualitative and quantitative evidence, the latter component (primarily palaeomagnetic data) considered superior because they can be represented as numbers. The standard representation of palaeogeographic data in map form ideally represents a synthesis of all available evidence bearing on the palaeogeography of an area for a particular interval of geological time.

There is no question that map representation is the primary tool for palaeogeography. However, complementary to a palaeogeographic map can be an analytical representation of certain palaeogeographic data sets, to expose particular data in a clearly testable way, and provide a guide to new empirical observations required to resolve data conflicts. An example of such representation is the standard ‘Apparent Polar Wander Path’ for palaeomagnetic data, whereby new measurements are tested by the degree to which they conform to a previously established linear pattern (apparent polar wander path).

Quantitative palaeomagnetic data provide evidence of palaeolatitude, as do other qualitative data, for example palaeoclimatic evidence, which could be tested against palaeomagnetism when represented in the same way. Palaebiogeographic data may also provide evidence for palaeolatitude, through recognition of cold and warm assemblages, latitudinal diversity gradients, etc., and would also be best analysed using an Apparent Polar Wander Path representation. An early example of this approach was comparison of Labyrinthodont Amphibian abundance and diversity gradients versus palaeomagnetism as indicators of palaeolatitude for the Late Palaeozoic and Triassic.

However, palaeobiogeographic data may also provide a completely different type of evidence, not concerned with palaeolatitude, but instead with the connections or barriers between regions. This is the predominant approach in preceding discussions of this paper. This information has hierarchical structure, and can be analysed ‘cladistically’; i.e. using branching diagrams or cladograms. Hierarchical structure is not a special attribute of biogeographic data; rather, it is imposed on the empirical evidence to facilitate analysis and testing of competing hypotheses. The same applies to a range of geological data concerning, for example, past distributions of land and sea, palaeocirculation patterns, or many of the criteria used by geologists to work out a history of accretion for allochthonous terranes.

The evidence of past sea-level fluctuations illustrates how the same data can be represented to facilitate either non-hierachical or hierarchical analysis. The primary evidence of past sea-level fluctuations derives from lithofacies mapping to distinguish between areas of land and sea for a particular geological time interval. However, identifying second- and third-order sea-level changes, and distinguishing local (uplift or subsidence) from global effects requires the most detailed biostratigraphic control (e.g. for the Devonian, using Conodonts). Like the curved lines of a palaeomagnetic ‘apparent polar wander path’, linear (non-hierarchical) representation is standard for a transgression-regression curve. But this evidence has implications for reconstruction of barriers or connections between areas, and the same information can be transformed into a hierarchical data set, which is then amenable to cladistic analysis. 
 
(a)-(d) Alternative representations of a transgression-regression pattern (sea-level curve), using the Early-Middle Devonian (Emsian-Givetian) as an example. (a) Linear representation (standard sea-level curve); (b) Marine barriers between three hypothetical continental areas X, Y, Z, and dispersal events resulting from sea level fall and rise (letters A-E correspond to positions on sea-level curve in a); (c) Hierarchical (cladistic) representation of a vicariance (splitting) pattern in continental faunas resulting from the successive marine barriers; (d) Converging (dispersal) pattern in continental faunas resulting from disappearance of marine barriers; e Summary of Siluro-Devonian vertebrate evidence for collision histories of Asian terranes. Young & Lu (2020).

Cladistic methods have been applied to analysis of relative timing of collision sequences for palaeocontinental blocks and terranes in the geological past. The first representation of a converging area cladogram in the geological literature concerned the collision sequence for continental components that came together during the Middle-Late Palaeozoic to form Pangaea. The fusion history of four areas (Laurentia, Baltica, ‘Armorica’, and Gondwana) was considered as three competing hypotheses, based on a range of geological and geophysical data. It was noted that a similar analysis of four taxa in phylogeny could produce 15 fully resolved and 10 partly resolved cladograms, but for the formation of Pangaea only three out of 25 possible hypotheses of collision history had been considered in the geological literature. The complexity was such that competing hypotheses could not be adequately represented as maps, but most effectively as six different converging cladograms.

A much more complex collision sequence concerns the collage of geological terranes making up modern Asia, and hypothesised to have originated from Gondwana according to a range of geological and geophysical evidence. In 1999 Gavin Young and Philippe Janvier summarised fossil evidence from some 14 terranes or micro-blocks assumed to have had separate histories according to geological or geophysical evidence. Data from Siluro-Devonian vertebrate distribution patterns across the region were integrated and summarised as three converging area cladograms. The evidence indicates that the Tarim and South China blocks had come together by the Early Silurian, followed by North China and the Indochina terrane by the Middle Devonian (relative timing unresolved), and then connection with East Gondwana by the Early Carboniferous. The distribution of three key endemic Asian Vertebrate groups (Galeaspid Agnathans, and Yunnanolepid and Sinolepid Antiarchs) represented on the cladogram predicted the discovery of Galeaspids and Sinolepids on the Indochina terrane, from which at the time they had not been recorded. Subsequently, Galeaspid remains were found at Ly Hoa in Vietnam, a prediction of the cladistic hypothesis, confirming that Indochina and South China had come together across the Song Ma suture before the Middle Devonian. On available evidence these regions were likely already very close to each other in the Late Silurian and Early Devonian, the Indochina terrane being included in the ‘Pan-Cathaysian landmass’.

Early Fish of the Siluro-Devonian were highly mobile organisms, achieving a global distribution in various aquatic environments. However, those forms living in rivers, lakes, and estuaries were largely confined by marine barriers, as evidenced by major taxonomic groupings confined to limited regions. The Late Silurian Vertebrate faunas on the South China Block represent one of the most endemic radiations in Vertebrate evolutionary history, indicating extreme biogeographic isolation that requires a palaeogeographic explanation.

The highly endemic Devonian Fish assemblages of both the Asian region and the eastern Gondwana margin have challenged ideas of early Vertebrate evolution based on the fossil assemblages of Europe and North America. Galeaspid Agnathans and Yunnanolepid and Sinolepid Antiarch Placoderms define the Asian region, and demonstrate close connections between most of the major blocks and terranes making up the collage of modern Asia. Wuttagoonaspid and Phyllolepid Placoderms define the East Gondwana region, and faunal connections between these regions, indicating palaeogeographic proximity, are indicated by limited similarities in Agnathans, basal Arthrodires, early Tetrapodomorph Osteichthyans, and Sinolepid Antiarchs.

The first evidence of faunal exchange between Asia and East Gondwana is in the Early Devonian (Pragian-Emsian), but how this and later connections relate to global sea-level transgressions or regressions is still unclear.

In addition, some more widespread groups, that from their distribution patterns must have had better tolerance of marine conditions and evidently could disperse along coastal margins, show disparate temporal-spatial distributions between Asia, Gondwana, and Laurussia. These indicate changing marine tolerances within taxonomic groups, fluctuating connections and barriers due to sea level changes, or both factors combined.

For continental fossil Fish assemblages, lacking marine fossils, the age control is much less precise than detailed biozonation (e.g. using conodonts) that is possible for Devonian marine limestones. Nevertheless, the possibility of integrating global sea-level (transgression-regression) curves for the Middle Palaeozoic with changing distribution patterns in Siluro-Devonian Fish groups is an area to be explored in future research.

See also...

https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/titanichthys-termieri-possible.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/cheiracanthus-murchisoni-cheiracanthus.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/placoderms-from-early-devonian-of.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2018/08/looking-for-eastern-margin-of-palaeo.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2016/12/ontogeny-in-siphonodellid-conodonts.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2015/10/raynerius-splendens-ray-finned-fish.html
Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.

Friday, 10 July 2020

Titanichthys termieri: Possible suspension feeding in a Devonian Placoderm.

Some of the largest organisms ever to have roamed the ocean and alive today are suspension feeders. The switch to feeding on the lowest levels of the trophic pyramid is a tremendous shift in food resource. While pursuing large-bodied prey results in adaptations towards stealth, complex hunting behaviours and expanded sensory repertoires, suspension feeding results in a host of anatomical, migratory and behavioural modifications. Locomotory speed and energy reserves scale with body mass, enabling a migratory lifestyle in some species to capitalise on seasonal periods of high food abundance. Invertebrate suspension feeders are known from the Cambrian, giant-bodied relative to their temporal counterparts. While the first definitive Vertebrate megaplanktivores occurred in the Mesozoic, within the Pachycormids, this ecological niche may in fact have originated in the Devonian. The arthrodire Titanichthys occurred in the Famennian the uppermost stage of the Devonian (372–359 million years ago). There are multiple morphological features indicating that Titanichthys may have been a megaplanktivore, primarily its massive size. The elongate, narrow jaws lack any form of dentition or shearing surface; seemingly ill-equipped for any form of prey consumption more demanding than simply funnelling prey-laden water into the oral cavity. Titanichthys is also known for its small orbits (in relation to skull size), indicating that visual acuity may not have been that important in its predatory behaviour. This is a known feature of predation in extant suspension feeders, so may be further evidence of planktivory. However, the suspension-feeding Pachycormid Rhinconichthys has enlarged sclerotic rings, bringing into question the use of reduced orbitals as a diagnostic character of planktivory.

In a paper published in the journal Royal Society Open Science on 20 May 2020, Samuel Coatham, Jakob Vinther, and Emily Rayfield of the University of Bristol, and Christian Klug of the Paläontologisches Institut und Museum at the Universität Zürich, present the results of a study in which aimed assess whether Titanichthys was indeed a suspension feeder, by investigating the mechanical properties of its jaw in order to infer function.

Despite the numerous physical traits shared between Titanichthys and other definitive giant suspension feeders, planktivory in Titanichthys has yet to be strongly supported, due to the absence of evidence of a suspension-feeding structure. If Titanichthys was indeed a suspension feeder, presumably it would have fed in a roughly analogous manner to modern planktivorous Fish, which separate prey from water entering the oral cavity using elaborate or ornamented gill rakers (this was also the suspension-feeding method of planktivorous Pachycormids). Placoderm gill arches are rarely preserved, so the absence of a fossil suspension-feeding structure may be an artefact of the poor fossil record, or it may indicate that Titanichthys was not a suspension feeder.

The viability of suspension feeding in Titanichthys is promoted by seemingly favourable conditions in the Devonian. Increases in primary productivity appear to be associated with the recurrent evolution of megaplanktivores, with potential expansions of available food resources enabling larger body sizes. This has been observed in the diversification of Mysticetes, and the origin of most suspension-feeding Elasmobranch clades, with potential further correlations in the evolution of giant planktivorous Anomalocarids in the Lower Cambrian, and Pachycormids in the Jurassic. Productivity probably also increased throughout the Devonian, with the combination of Tracheophyte proliferation and the advent of arborescence probably accelerating the rate of chemical weathering. This could have resulted in enrichment of the oceanic nutrient supply via runoff, potentially increasing marine productivity. There is little direct proof of this, as is typical when trying to track primary productivity. However, we can infer from the rise in diversity of predators with high energetic demands that there was probably sufficient productivity to support relatively complex ecosystems. Consequently, it seems probable that productivity did increase, potentially facilitating the evolution of a giant suspension feeder in the Devonian.

The engineering technique finite-element analysis has previously been used to effectively differentiate between the mandibles of related species with differing diets. Consequently, finite-element models of the inferognathals of Titanichthys termieri, Tafilalichthys lavocati and Dunkleosteus terrelli were generated and compared. Tafilalichthys is thought to have been durophagous (specialized to consume hard-shelled prey), while Dunkleosteus was almost certainly an apex predator; representing the two most plausible feeding modes for Titanichthys (excluding planktivory). Both species were Arthrodires related to Titanichthys, with Tafilalichthys more closely related, probably within the same family.

By digitally discretising a structure into many elements and applying loads, constraints and material properties, the stress and strain experienced within each element can be calculated in finite-element analysis. When viewed as components of the entire structure, its resistance to stress and strain can be clearly visualised, enabling functional inference. While the magnitude of stress/strain values in extinct taxa are hard to definitively ascertain, comparing between models loaded in the same manner is effective for comparative studies of function. Therefore, the mechanics of the arthrodire inferognathals will be compared based purely on their shape. Extant taxa, the lifestyles of which are far better understood, will be used as a further reference point, to validate the use of jaw robustness as a proxy for feeding strategy. The Sharks Cetorhinus maximus (Basking), Carcharodon carcharias (Great White) and Heterodontus francisci (Horn) all occupy ecological niches roughly analogous to those of the Placoderms studied (planktivore, apex predator and durophage, respectively). In addition, the Cetaceans Balaenoptera musculus (Blue Whale) and Orcinus orca (Killer Whale) will serve as a further planktivore–apex predator reference; albeit with much greater evolutionary distance between the species.

Comparing the jaw mechanics of definitive suspension feeders with their macrophagous relatives should provide clarity regarding the implications of any differences in stress/strain patterns of the Placoderm jaws, informing any conclusions regarding Titanichthys’ feeding strategy. Should Titanichthys have been a suspension feeder, its jaw would be expected to be less mechanically robust than those of related species with diets associated with greater bite forces, which would exert more stress on the jaw. Consequently, the jaw of a suspension feeder is predicted to be less resistant to stress and strain than those of the compared durophagous and macropredatory species.

Titanichthys specimens are mostly known from the Cleveland Shale, with remains of five different Titanichthys species having been found there, albeit mostly from relatively incomplete specimens. There have also been species described from Poland and, most pertinently for this study, Morocco. Titanichthys termieri, one of the largest members of the genus, is known from the Tafilalet basin in South Morocco.

The Titanichthys and Tafilalichthys specimens used in Coatham et al.'s study were found in Morocco, where the Famennian strata are known for their high quantity of preserved Placoderms. Both specimens were discovered in the Southern Maïder basin, which neighbours the Tafilalet basin. The type specimens of both Titanichthys termieri and Tafilalichthys lavocati were described in the Tafilalet basin; therefore, the fossils in Coatham et al.'s study can be assigned to those species with some confidence.

The primary subject of this investigation was a nearly complete Titanichthys termieri left inferognathal (PIMUZ A/I 4716). It is missing only the anterior tip, representing a small portion of the overall length, with a total length of 96 cm without the tip. While Arthrodire inferognathals are typically divided antero-posteriorly into distinct biting and non-biting divisions, in Titanichthys termieri, there is a much more gradual transition between the narrow posterior division and the thicker anterior biting division. The posterior blade is narrow mediolaterally and high dorsoventrally, similar to other Arthrodires. There are no denticles or shearing surfaces visible on the anterior biting division, a pattern common across all Titanichthys species with known gnathal, supragnathal or inferognathal elements.

Left inferognathal of Titanichthys termieri (PIMUZ A/I 4716), from the Southern Maïder basin, Morocco. The specimen is nearly complete, excluding the anteriormost tip. The inferognathal lacks both dentition and shearing surfaces. It has been glued together where fractures occurred. Photographed at the University of Zurich. Total length 96 cm. Coatham et al. (2020).

Titanichthys is considered to have been a member of the family Mylostomatidae, with Bungartius perissus and Tafilalichthys lavocati, both of which are thought to have been durophagous, although there was little evidence of Tafilalichthys lower jaw elements prior to Coatham et al.'s study. Durophagy seems an extremely plausible feeding method for Bungartius, with a thickened occlusal surface at the anterior symphyseal region on its inferognathal appearing ideally suited to function as a shearing surface.

To date, the only described Tafilalichthys jaw specimen is an anterior supragnathal, which indicated that Tafilalichthys was durophagous, although not specialized to the same degree as the related Bungartius or Mylostoma. The Tafilalichthys inferognathal investigated by Coatham et al. (PIMUZ A/I 4717) suggests that Tafilalichthys may have been more adapted for durophagy than previously thought, with the anterior symphyseal region somewhat resembling that previously described for Bungartius and other durophagous Arthrodires. with the occlusal dorsal surface partially composed of a cancellous texture. However, this surface is flattened to the point of horizontality in Tafilalichthys, whereas both Bungartius and Mylostoma have more curved dental regions, which potentially could also have ‘chopped’ prey.

Inferognathals of Tafilalichthys lavocati (PIMUZ A/I 4717), from the Southern Maïder basin, Morocco. Photographed at the University of Zurich. Total length 33 cm. Coatham et al. (2020).

Like Mylostoma, the posterior ‘blade’ portion of Tafilalichthys’ inferognathal comprises over half of the total length, as opposed to a smaller proportion in the earlier, Frasnian (383–372 million years ago) Mylostomatids,  which were less specialized for durophagy. This proportional lengthening of the blade is thought to have increased the area of attachment for the adductor (jaw-closing) muscles, thereby increasing the bite force; crucial when specializing upon tough-to-digest, hard-shelled prey.

Dunkleosteus was selected as a comparison due to its well-documented status as an apex predator and an Arthrodire, indicating fairly close relatedness with Mylostomatidae. Ideally, a Dunkleosteus marsaisi specimen would have been the first preference to be selected for use, as it co-occurred with Titanichthys termieri in the Southern Maïder basin; however, this did not prove possible. Instead, Dunkleosteus terrelli, known from the Cleveland Shale, was used. While Dunkleosteus terrelli was substantially larger than Dunkleosteus marsaisi, the skulls of the two species seem to have broadly similar shapes. Given that all jaws in this study were scaled to the same length, using either species would be likely to yield broadly similar results.

The inferognathal of Dunkleosteus terrelli is more clearly differentiated into blade and dental portions than the other Arthrodires in this study. The dental portion is divided into an anterior fang-shaped cusp, presumably for puncturing flesh, and a posterior sharp blade which occluded with a parallel bladed surface on the supragnathal. This masticating, bladed surface is part of the dental portion of the inferognathal, separate from the edentulous posterior portion. From a simple visual comparison, it appears much better-adapted for consuming large prey than Titanichthys.

Sharks were selected as an extant comparison group due to the range of feeding strategies they display, including taxa with potentially analogous lifestyles to the three Arthrodiran species investigated. The Basking Shark (Cetorhinus maximus) is a megaplanktivore, approaching a body length of 12 m. Being closely related to an apex predator it co-occurs with, the Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias), the Basking Shark seems analogous with the proposed ecological niche of Titanichthys. The Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus) would potentially have represented an even closer analogue for Titanichthys, having also evolved from durophagous ancestors, as seems likely for Titanichthys, unfortunately Whale Shark specimens could not be accessed for this Coatham et al..

The Great White Shark is an ideal analogue for Dunkleosteus, being a Lamniform Shark (the same order as Cetorhinus) with a powerful bite force befitting of an apex predator. The Horn Shark Heterodontus francisci was selected for its durophagous lifestyle, making it analogous for the proposed feeding strategy of Tafilalichthys. However, it is not that closely related to the other Sharks in the study; being in a different order, the Heterodontiformes. Due to the absence of known durophagous species among Lamniform Sharks, Heterodontus is the most suitable candidate for a durophage related to Cetorhinus.

To provide a further comparison point, and potentially assess whether certain lower jaw structural changes were common among parallel evolutionary pathways, whales were also included in the analysis. The planktivorous Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus) was compared with the Killer Whale (Orcinus orca), an apex predator. A third comparison species was not used because of the lack of durophagous Whale species.

Due to the considerable evolutionary distance between the suspension-feeding Mysticetes and macrophagous Odontocetes, which diverged around 38 million years ago, this comparison may be somewhat less strong. When the investigated species are co-occurring sister taxa, like Titanichthys and Tafilalichthys, morphological differences are more likely to be driven by a single explanatory factor, such as divergence of function. There is a far greater possibility that differences between distantly related species are due to a myriad of different factors, the effects of which are hard to distinguish between. The results for the Whales should be viewed with that caveat in mind.

All jaw models were produced using surface scans of the original specimens. Some specimens had already been scanned prior to this research, those remaining were scanned at the University of Zurich using an Artec Eva light 3D scanner. Surface scans were used instead of computerised tomography scans as the size and composition of some specimens rendered computerised tomography scanning extremely difficult. This, unfortunately, prevented the incorporation of internal features into the models; therefore, the jaws were treated as homogeneous structures. Doing so has previously yielded differing results to more accurate, heterogeneous models. However, the surface scans should still prove valid for the purely shape-based comparison undertaken in this paper; although computerised tomography scanning would be essential for an assessment of the absolute performance of Titanichthys’ jaw. While the Shark jaws were originally computerised tomography scanned, only the surfaces were used to ensure methodological equivalence between species.

Jaw scans were processed, cleaned (removal of extraneous material and smoothing of fractures) and fused (where jaws were scanned in separate pieces) using a combination of Artec Studio 12, Avizo 9.4 and MeshLab. Jaw models were scaled to the same total length, as model size and forces applied had to be kept constant to ensure the analysis was solely investigating the effect of jaw shape on stress/strain resistance. Ideally, the models would have been scaled to the same surface area instead of length, as this typically produces stress comparisons of greater validity. Similarly, scaling models to volume is most effective for comparing strain resistance. However, the extremely varied dentition among the various species skewed the results when models were scaled to either the same surface area or volume; an effect that has been noted previously. Consequently, it was judged that equivocating model size using jaw length produced reasonably comparable models.

The muscle force applied to the jaws was adapted from a prior investigation of Arthrodiran jaw mechanics, which primarily centred on a Dunkleosteus terrelli inferognathal. Consequently, all jaws were scaled to the length of the Dunkleosteus terrelli inferognathal scanned herein. The material properties, based on typical Arthrodiran inferognathals, were applied to all jaw models. Treating each jaw as one homogeneous material, jaws were assigned a Young’s modulus of 20 GPa and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.3. A vertical force of 300 N was applied at the presumed central point of adductor mandibulae attachment. While this does not accurately represent the force exerted by the muscles, it is a decent approximation, given the absence of further skull material with which muscle action could be modelled. Each jaw was constrained at the attachment point with the skull, typically on the dorsal surface at the posterior end of the articular bone. This constraint involved fixing a node at the attachment point for both translation and rotation in the X, Y and Z axes. Another constraint was applied to a node at the base of the anteriormost tooth (or the roughly analogous location proportionally for species with no discernible dentition), fixed for translation in the Y-axis, effectively simulating the dentition being suspended within an item of prey.

Each jaw scan was ‘meshed’, divided into elements, comprising the three-dimensional volume of the jaw, in Hypermesh whereupon forces, constraints and material properties were applied. Each loaded model was imported into Abaqus, where finite-element analysis was performed. Every element comprises multiple nodes, which make up the outline of the element. Given the material properties of the model and the applied constraints, the deformation at each node can be simulated using finite-element analysis. From these deformations, the stresses and strains experienced by each element within the model can be calculated.

The primary indicator selected was von Mises stress, which relates to the likelihood of ductile yielding causing a structure to fail. Maximum principal stress distribution across the jaw was also analysed, as an indicator of the probability of brittle fracture. Given that bone responds in both ductile and brittle manners to stresses, recording both von Mises and maximum principal stress values should provide a more comprehensive profile of the jaws’ robustness. The maximum principal strain value of each element was also recorded. The extent of strain experienced within a structure indicates the degree of deformation undergone by the structure; therefore, models with lower strain values are more resistant to deformation. Experimentally, it was observed that proportional comparisons based on each of the three metrics produced extremely similar results. Consequently, only von Mises stress was used for further analysis, as it seemed to reflect structural robustness effectively.

It is important to emphasize that the values produced by Coatham et al. are very unlikely to accurately represent the actual values of stress that the jaws would have experienced. Re-scaling of the jaw length, as well as assignment of equal material properties and applied forces, renders the absolute values irrelevant. Instead, these measures all served to validate comparisons between the different finite-element models. Consequently, it is the proportional differences between the stress values experienced across the respective jaws that should be the main focus of analysis, as the disparities observed will indicate the relative robustness of the jaw shapes.

Initial comparison of stress distribution across the finite-element models is purely visual, which has been used repeatedly to effectively distinguish mandibles by their dietary function. This will enable qualitative assessment of the stress patterns in the respective jaws, highlighting regions of particularly high stress and enabling an approximation of the differing overall resistances to stress.

In order for quantitative comparison between the jaws to take place, the average von Mises stress values were recorded for each model, from every element across the model. Typically, mean values are used, but median values may prove more robust to being skewed by extreme values. Consequently, both mean and median values were calculated for Titanichthys, whereupon the value of the respective metrics could be assessed. Averaging has the advantage of enabling comparison of total stress and strain resistance with a far greater degree of precision than from a purely visual comparison. When combined with visual comparison, particularly weak or robust sections of the structure can still be identified. In addition, the Kruskal–Wallis tests were used to assess for significance in any disparities between species’ median von Mises stress values, although the massive sample sizes of the underlying data, with some models having over 200 000 elements, are likely to imbue even small differences with statistical significance.

However, averaging results can be skewed by element size, with smaller elements typically yielding more accurate results. To combat this, an ‘intervals method’ has been proposed, which incorporates element volumes. This method could allow for considerably more effective comparison of finite-element models and, consequently, more precise distinction between feeding strategies.

The full method is described in the original paper, but will be outlined in brief here. Following finite-element analysis, all elements in the model are sorted by their von Mises stress value. These are then grouped into a number of ‘intervals’, each of which has an equal range of stress values. Fifty intervals proved the optimal amount in the original experiment, so are used in this test (however, as few as 15 intervals were still broadly effective at discriminating between dietary functions).

The cumulative volume of the elements represented in each of the 50 intervals can be calculated, then represented as a percentage of the total model volume. This represents the distribution of stresses across a model, characterizing the proportion of the elements experiencing particular stress levels. A principal component analysis is performed, based on the percentage of jaw volume represented in each interval, plotting the jaw models on two axes (principal components) that should describe the majority of variation in stress distribution. Species with similar diets should group together to an extent, if the differences in stress distribution between feeding strategies can be categorized. This method has successfully distinguished between different dietary preferences in jaw models previously, although using species within the same genus, much more closely related than the species tested by Coatham et al. Experimentally, it was observed that the Whale jaw models were poorly suited for direct comparison with the other species, as the considerable morphological disparity resulted in some models being represented in less than half of the stress intervals. Consequently, Whales were removed from the principal component analysis, to prevent skewing of the results.

The magnitudes of von Mises stress vary significantly between the placoderm inferognathals, but the general stress distribution patterns are relatively consistent. The highest von Mises stress values for all three species occur in the posterior bladed region; particularly close to the jaw attachment point, probably as a result of the constraint applied there. Higher stress values are experienced on the lateral aspects of each jaw rather than on the medial. The fixed anterior point is also associated with high stress, but these regions are much more localized than at the jaw and muscle attachment points. Titanichthys exhibits the least resistance to von Mises stress among the Placoderms, with Dunkleosteus proving the most resistant.

Von Mises stress distributions in the lower jaws of selected Placoderm, Shark and Whale species, calculated using finite-element analysis. Coatham et al. (2020).

Visually, Carcharodon appears to be the least resistant to von Mises stress of the three Shark lower jaws, with Heterodontus probably the most resistant. In Whales, the mandible of Orcinus is clearly more resistant than Balaenoptera, which is characterized by extremely high levels of von Mises stress, experienced across the majority of the structure.

Averaging the per element von Mises stress values produced differing results depending on whether the median or mean was used. However, while the actual values produced diverged, the proportional differences between the species remained relatively consistent. Consequently, either method seems equally applicable; to simplify the results, the median will henceforth be used as the method of averaging.

Among the Placoderms, the inferognathal of Titanichthys was the least resistant by some margin. The median elemental von Mises stress value for the inferognathal of Tafilalichthys represented 71% of the equivalent figure for Titanichthys, while in Dunkleosteus, it was just 37%.

In general, the average von Mises stress values for Shark jaws were lower than in Placoderms, with the highest value in Sharks (in Cetorhinus) only slightly (0.1 MPa) higher than the lowest value in Placoderms, for Dunkleosteus. While the jaws are typically more robust in Sharks, there are some similar patterns when comparing proportional differences between the Sharks. The suspension-feeding basking Shark displays the highest average stress, although the difference between it and the macropredatory great white shark is notably smaller than the (potentially) corresponding disparity between Titanichthys and Dunkleosteus. The median von Mises stress for Carcharodon is 75% of the equivalent for Cetorhinus, a disparity dwarfed by the much greater resistance to stress observed in Heterodontus (28% of Cetorhinus).

With a median von Mises stress value of 9.32 MPa, the mandible of Balaenoptera musculus is markedly less resistant to stress than all other jaws investigated. There is a large inter-lineage disparity with the von Mises stress resistance of Orcinus, the median of which is 19% of that of Balaenoptera.

The Kruskal–Wallis tests revealed the differences between the median von Mises stress values for each species to be highly significant.

The intervals method principal component analysis attempts to differentiate between species based on the distribution of stress across the jaw models. The method groups Titanichthys with the planktivorous Cetorhinus and the closely related Tafilalichthys. There is little obvious diet-based grouping of the macrophagous species, with the non-Cetorhinus Shark species relatively close together.

The inferognathal of Titanichthys was less resistant to von Mises stress than those of either Dunkleosteus or Tafilalichthys. Dunkleosteus terrelli has been substantively established as an apex predator, while Tafilalichthys can be considered to have been durophagous with some confidence, due to its morphological resemblance to, and close relatedness with, known durophagous Arthrodires. The comparatively high levels of stress observed in the inferognathal of Titanichthys suggest that neither feeding strategy would have been possible for Titanichthys, as its inferognathal would probably have failed (either by ductile yielding or brittle fracture) if exposed to the forces associated with the alternative feeding strategies. This strongly suggests that it was indeed a suspension feeder, as predicted based on its jaw morphology.

If Titanichthys were a suspension feeder, the primary function of its jaw would have been to maximize the water taken into the oral cavity during feeding, thereby increasing the rate of prey intake. Morphologically, the inferognathal of Titanichthys seems ideally suited for this purpose, its elongation increased the maximum capacity of the oral cavity, which correlates with water filtration rate. The perceived elongation of Titanichthys’ inferognathal can be demonstrated by comparing its size with an inferognathal of the similarly sized Dunkleosteus terrelli, which is clearly wider and shorter, the specimen used by Coatham et al. is less than half the length of the corresponding Titanichthys inferognathal. The narrowing of Titanichthys’ inferognathal, associated with elongation, would have reduced its mechanical robustness (as displayed in this study). This adaptation would probably be unfeasible for a species reliant upon consuming large or hard-shelled prey, as it would result in a fitness reduction from an adaptive peak. 

While the inferognathals of both species were considerably more mechanically resilient than that of Titanichthys, there is still a sizable disparity between the von Mises stress values observed in Dunkleosteus terrelli and Tafilalichthys lavocati. Biomechanical analyses have suggested that Dunkleosteus was capable of feeding on both highly mobile and armoured prey, due to its high bite force and rapid jaw kinematics. In Rodents, species with generalist diets have been shown to be more resistant to stresses across the skull than their more specialist relatives. It is possible the comparatively generalist Dunkleosteus had a more stress-resistant inferognathal than the specialist durophage Tafilalichthys for the same reason.

In Ssharks, the highest values of stress are seen in the suspension-feeding Basking Shark. This adds weight to the conclusion that Titanichthys was a suspension feeder, as the obligate planktivorous Shark is significantly less resistant to stress than its durophagous and macropredatory relatives. The disparity in stress resistance between the lower jaws of Carcharodon and Cetorhinus is smaller than the equivalent disparity between Titanichthys and Dunkleosteus. The Basking Shark’s lower jaw retains the same basic structure, albeit with less complexity, of the other Shark species; whereas the lower jaw of Titanichthys is more morphologically divergent from the other Placoderm species investigated, probably causing the more disparate results.

It is notable that, while there is a large difference in lower jaw robustness between Cetorhinus and Titanichthys (median von Mises stress of 0.78 MPa compared with 1.83 MPa, respectively), Carcharodon and Dunkleosteus performed very similarly. The median von Mises stress for Carcharodon was 85% of the respective value for Dunkleosteus. Dunkleosteus probably occupied the equivalent niche as Carcharodon, but their methods of subduing prey probably differed as a result of very efficient locomotion in the Great White Shark, which is unlikely to have been replicated in the heavy, less streamlined Dunkleosteus. Similarly, some predatory strategies of Carcharodon, like the lateral head shake, may not have been plausible for Dunkleosteus. Consequently, the Great White Shark lower jaw was expected to prove more resistant to stress than the inferognathal of Dunkleosteus, and this may have been seen to a greater extent if cartilaginous properties were applied to the Shark. Treating a Great White Shark jaw as homogeneous bone has previously resulted in underestimated stress resistance, and a lower Young’s modulus associated with calcified cartilage would result in higher jaw strain. On the other hand, prior research indicating that the bite force to body mass ratio of Dunkleosteus is roughly equivalent to that of the Great White Shark, suggests that similar stress resistances, when scaled to length, are to be expected.

The stress resistance of the Great White Shark’s lower jaw may have been roughly equivalent to that of Dunkleosteus, but no such resemblance between potential analogues was observed in the durophagous species. The lower jaw of Heterodontus francisci is a thick structure devoid of ornamentation beyond its dentition, which proved to be substantially more robust than the lower jaw of any other species investigated. The mass-specific bite force of Heterodontus francisci has been shown to markedly exceed that of Carcharodon carcharias , enabling efficient crushing of its hard-shelled prey. Consequently, the disparity in stress resistance between the two species is not unexpected.

What initially seems more surprising is the even larger difference between the jaw robustness of the two durophagous species, with the Horn Shark being far more resilient than Tafilalichthys. Their roughly equivalent diets would suggest similar mechanical requirements of their jaws; however, the disparity may be explained by behavioural differences. Durophagous Placoderms are thought to have primarily broken down the hard shells of their prey using shearing, as opposed to the more mechanically taxing, crushing mechanism seen in Chondrichthyans and other post-Devonian Fish. This suggests that the jaws of Tafilalichthys would have experienced less stress than those of the shell-crushing Heterodontus.

It is worth noting that the Shark finite-element models were produced using surface scans originally created for use in a geometric morphometric study. Consequently, they were not ideally suited to being discretized into a single, uniform surface. Despite extensive remeshing using both Blender and Hypermesh, the shark jaw models were still of poorer quality than the other jaw models. The impact of this on the overall results is difficult to determine, but it should be kept in mind that the broad patterns are of more utility and interest than any specific numerical values.

The fundamental pattern outlined within this study is demonstrated further in Whales: the mandible of the suspension-feeding Blue Whale is less resistant to von Mises stress than that of the macropredatory Killer Whale, but with a far greater disparity than in the other lineages. Jaw elongation is seen to a far greater degree in the Mysticete Whales than the other megaplanktivorous lineages investigated, probably as a consequence of the energetically expensive ‘lunge feeding’ method used by most Mysticetes. This is doubly true for the massive jaws of the Blue Whale, which enable incredibly efficient feeding despite substantial mechanical expenditure. Consequently, resistance to stress may be lowest in the Blue Whale jaw as a result of maximizing feeding efficiency.

The mandible of Orcinus is considerably more resistant to stress than that of Balaenoptera, but the median values are still notably higher than in Carcharodon and Dunkleosteus, the proposed analogues of the Killer Whale. Ecological reasons for this are difficult to determine, with the typical diet of an Orca resembling the diet of a Great White Shark: centring on Marine Mammals, but sufficiently generalist to predate a wide range of species. This ecological similarity would seem to suggest roughly equivalent jaw robustness, a pattern, which is not seen here.

Methodological factors may have impacted the modelling results for the Whale jaws. The Orca’s teeth were not attached to the scanned mandible. Teeth were generally associated with relatively low stress values in this study, removing these regions from the model may have raised the average values. Manually attaching them to the digital model was considered, but the imperfect nature of this would probably have further reduced the validity of the model; similarly, removing the dentition from Basking Shark jaws or the bone parts used for cutting or crushing in Placoderm jaws would have been impossible.

All jaw scans were scaled to the same length, to circumvent the impact of teeth on scaling to the same surface area. While this seemed to improve the validity of comparisons between the model Placoderm and Shark jaws, it may have had the opposite effect with the Whale jaws. Scaling the Blue Whale jaw rendered it extremely narrow relative to the other jaws, to an unrealistic extent. This may partially explain the average stress value calculated in the Blue Whale jaw massively exceeding those of any other species. Indeed, when the Whale jawswere scaled to the same surface area, the average stress values in the Orca’s jaw were around 70% of the equivalent values in the blue whale. By contrast, re-scaling had little impact on the Orca’s jaw robustness compared with the other apex predators. Again, the large-scale trends are much more valuable than any specific numerical values, and using either method revealed that the megaplanktivore jaw was significantly less mechanically resilient than that of the apex predator.

The intervals method is probably better-suited to comparing between more closely related species, as their morphology would probably be more homogeneous—making function-related divergences more central to the analysis. Despite the vast evolutionary distances involved, the method effectively grouped the planktivorous Cetorhinus together with Titanichthys. This may suggest that Titanichthys was a suspension feeder, as the jaws of Titanichthys and Cetorhinus are very distinct morphologically, yet consistent patterns in von Mises stress distribution between them are statistically quantifiable. The close placement of Titanichthys and Tafilalichthys does suggest some caution should be taken with any interpretation, although this is probably more a function of their close relatedness than of a shared ecological niche. The principal component analysis did not group the durophagous or macropredatory species together, although this was predictable to an extent as the stress values of those species seemed to be more influenced by their lineage than their diet. Despite this, the intervals method’s detection of corresponding stress patterns between (potentially) suspension-feeding species is notable. This method should be applied in a variety of contexts moving forward, to assess for mechanical adaptations underlying functional divergences in other lineages.

Complete Tafilalichthys inferognathals have not previously been figured in the literature. Consequently, the specimen described in this study is significant for advancing our understanding of Arthrodiran interrelationships and the evolutionary pathway that seemingly resulted in obligate planktivory in Titanichthys. The morphology and mechanical performance of the inferognathal both indicate that durophagy was the most likely feeding strategy for Tafilalichthys, supporting its proposed phylogenetic position within the Mylostomatidae. With all the major Mylostomatids (excluding Titanichthys) likely to have been durophagous, it seems reasonable to conclude that Titanichthys evolved from durophagous ancestors.

Evolutionary transitions from durophagy to planktivory have occurred a number of times. The suspension-feeding Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus) arose from the typically benthic Orectolobiformes. Its closest relative, the Nurse Shark (Ginglymostoma cirratum), is durophagous, feeding principally on hard-shelled invertebrates. Similarly, the sister taxon of the planktivorous Mobulidae (Manta and Devil Rays) are the durophagous Rhinopteridae (Cownose Rays). In a less clear parallel, the only Pinniped proposed to have been durophagous was relatively closely related to the ancestor of the Lobodontini, Pinnipeds uniquely specialized for planktivory.

The emergence of a megaplanktivore in the Famennian may hold similar clues to the degree and nature of marine primary productivity during the Devonian Period. Modern forms migrate to regions of high seasonal productivity, such as Mysticetes seeking arctic oceans and highly productive upwelling zones. Basking Sharks focus on relatively less productive seasonal blooms in shallow boreal and warm temperate waters, while Whale Sharks are associated with tropical waters and seasonal blooms and spawning events in this realm. The evolution of megaplanktivores coincided with periods of high productivity. For example, the radiation of Mysticete Whales coincides with the Neogene cooling pump and the onset of the circumantarctic polar current, resulting in a stronger thermohaline pump. It has been noted that the emergence of suspension-feeding Pachycormid Fish correlates with the evolution of key phytoplankton: Dinoflagellates, Diatoms and Coccolithosphorids could reflect the increase in primary productivity that led to the Mesozoic Marine Revolution, While perhaps not necessarily being drivers of the revolution, the conditions permissive of such a radiation in marine primary producers may indeed reflect a marked shift in opportunity. Similarly, suspension-feeding Radiodonts during the Cambrian Explosion radiated synchronously with the first establishment of a tiered food chain with several (at least four) levels of consumers. While the Cambrian radiation may be entirely unique with the innovation of micropredation, evidence for increased primary productivity is manifested in global Early Cambrian phosphate deposits, often associated with upwelling systems in modern oceans.

The Devonian saw the first emergence of arborescent Plants on land. This resulted in deeper rooting systems, higher silicate rock weathering and nutrient run off into the oceans. While increasing primary productivity, it also led to near global deep ocean anoxia, black shale deposition and the Frasnian–Famennian Kellwasser event, one of the ‘big five’ mass extinctions. The increased nutrients going into circulation may well have been the necessary push for allowing Arthrodires to explore this ecological niche of megaplanktivory as the first Vertebrates on record.

The apparent punctuation and compelling correlation between major marine radiations, shifts in apparent productivity and megaplanktivores may be of interest for understanding how this unique ecological strategy responds to global perturbations, such as Human-induced climate change. With their potential added sensitivity, megaplanktivores may be ‘Canary Birds’ for ocean ecosystem health. Some caution is advised, however. There may be taphonomic biases preventing the recognition of each and every megaplanktivore in existence at a given time. As with Titanichthys, tell-tale features of ecology may have been lost during fossilisation. As a rule, one would want to have the suspension-feeding apparatus preserved, but otherwise other associated anatomical adaptations or stomach contents will need to be identified.

There are almost certainly other planktivorous species in the fossil record yet to be identified, shown by the recent re-appraisal of the Cretaceous Plesiosaur Morturneria seymourensis as a probable suspension-feeder. Indeed, there are even other Placoderms that may have been planktivorous: the Arthrodire Homostius had a narrow jaw devoid of dentition or shearing surfaces and substantially pre-dated Titanichthys. The common reduction in stress/strain resistance observed here could be used as an indicator of planktivory in such cases where it seems plausible but cannot be identified definitively, due to the absence of fossilised suspension-feeding structures.

Finite-element analysis of the lower jaw of Titanichthys revealed that it was significantly less resistant to von Mises stress than those of related Arthrodires that used macrophagous feeding strategies. This suggests that these strategies would not have been viable for Titanichthys, as its jaw would have been insufficiently mechanically robust. Consequently, it is highly likely that Titanichthys was a suspension feeder; a feeding method that is likely to exert considerably less stress on the jaw than macrophagous feeding modes. The validity of assigning suspension feeding based on jaw mechanical resilience is supported y the roughly equivalent patterns known from lineages containing extant suspension feeders.

Common morphological trends in the convergent evolution of megaplanktivores can not only be observed but quantified mechanically using finite-element analysis. A variety of methods were used to compare between the jaw models, due to imperfections with solely comparing visually or using average stress. The intervals method grouped feeding strategies to an extent, providing an additional perspective.

Tafilalichthys, probably a member of the Mylostomatidae and, therefore, one of Titanichthys’ closest relatives, appears to have been durophagous. Durophagy is the likely feeding mode of all crown-group Mylostomatids except Titanichthys, suggesting that it evolved from a durophagous ancestor. This durophage-to-planktivore transition is surprisingly common among convergently evolved giant suspension feeders: it is also seen inmultiple, independently evolved planktivorous Elasmobranch lineages.

The presence of a megaplanktivore in the Famennian supports the theory that productivity was high in the Late Devonian, which was probably a result of increased eutrophication caused by the diversification of terrestrial Tracheophytes and the advent of arborescence. It reflects the link between the increasing complexity of Devonian marine ecosystems and the functional diversity of Arthrodira, which occupied a wide range of ecological niches. Most significantly, it reveals that vertebrate megaplanktivores probably existed over 150 million years ago prior to the Mesozoic Pachycormids, previously considered the earliest definitive giant suspension feeders.

See also...

http://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/placoderms-from-early-devonian-of.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/unraveling-relationship-between-giant.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/03/trying-to-understand-relationship.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2019/09/megaptera-novaeangliae-how-kermadec.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2018/08/megaptera-novaeangliae-breeding-rates.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2014/08/satellite-tagging-whale-sharks-in-red.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.