Project 5263: P. J. Wagner. 2001. Gastropod phylogenetics: Progress, problems, and implications. Journal of Paleontology. 75 (6):1128-1140.
Abstract
Twentieth century fossil gastropod systematics relied extensively on neontological paradigms. However, recent appreciation of the extant gastropod diversity suggests that those early paradigms provided very unsound models. This likely is a greater problem for Paleozoic taxa than for Meso-Cenozoic gastropods because Meso-Cenozoic taxa frequently have easily recognized extant relatives whereas Paleozoic taxa frequently do not. Also, many of the taxa that apparently diverged in the Paleozoic now are limpets and retain little information about the morphologies of their coiled ancestors. Snails could be a model taxon for investigating macroevolutionary patterns because of the clade's dense fossil record. However, paleontologists usually study only adult shells (teleoconchs), and many malacologists maintain that teleoconch characters reflect phy- logeny poorly if at all. This is important because many macroevolutionary hypotheses make their most specific predictions given phylogeny. Studies evaluating species- or genus-level relationships typically use more shell characters and states than do studies evaluating suprageneric relationships, as expected if shells evolve rapidly. Monte Carlo tests reject a null hypothesis that rates of homoplasy are equal among shell and soft-anatomy characters for two neogastropod clades, but suggest that these rates differ by less than an order of magnitude. Finally, teleoconch characters fail to unite bellerophontiform species with gastropod muscle scars but successfully unites clusters bellerophontiform species with tergomyan muscle scars. These results corroborate the conventional wisdom that teleoconch character distributions reflect abundant homoplasy, but the results also suggest that these distributions reflect phylogeny, too. If we can control the effects of homoplasy, then gastropods are an excellent ''model'' group for testing macroevolutionary hypotheses such as changing rates of evolution. Two obvious candidates are rates of morphologic evolution among basal neogastropods, and rates of molecular evolution within clades radiating after the K/T mass extinction.Read the article »
Article DOI: 10.1666/0022-3360(2001)075<1128:GPPPAI>2.0.CO;2
Project DOI: 10.7934/P5263, http://dx.doi.org/10.7934/P5263
This project contains | Matrices |
---|---|
Download Project SDD File | Total scored cells: 1987 Total media associated with cells: 0 Total labels associated with cell media: 0 |
Characters | |
Total characters: 95 Total characters with associated media: 0 Total characters with media with labels: 0 Total character states: 424 Total character states with associated media: 0 Total character states with media with labels:0 Total unordered/ordered characters:64/31 |
Currently Viewing:
MorphoBank Project 5263
MorphoBank Project 5263
- Creation Date:
27 May 2024 - Publication Date:
02 July 2024
This research
supported by
Members
member name | taxa | specimens | media | chars | character
| cell scorings (scored, NPA, "-") | cell
| rules | ||||||
Shreya Jariwala Project Administrator | 22 | 2 | 2 | 95 | 0 | 0 | 1987 (1298, 0, 689) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Taxonomic Overview for Matrix 'M29838' (22 Taxa)
taxon | unscored cells |
scored cells |
no cell support |
NPA cells |
"-" cells | cell images | labels on cell images |
member access |
[1] † Telamocornu cambriense Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 48 | 42 | 0 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[2] † Cyrtonellopsis huzzahensis Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 41 | 41 | 0 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[3] † Sinuitella norvegica Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 15 | 40 | 39 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[4] † Carcassonnella courtessolei Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 1 | 61 | 59 | 0 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[5] † Thoralispira laevis Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 1 | 69 | 66 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[6] † Carcassonnella viscainoi Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 1 | 57 | 55 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[7] † Quasisinuites rapax Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 1 | 54 | 51 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[8] † Sinuitopsina plasi Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 10 | 51 | 49 | 0 | 34 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[9] † Sinuitopsis neglecta Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 1 | 54 | 52 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[10] † Cyrtodiscus nitidus Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 1 | 67 | 61 | 0 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[11] † Gamadiscus procer Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 7 | 61 | 60 | 0 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[12] † Temnodiscus nitidula Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 10 | 55 | 54 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[13] † Cyrtolites grandis Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 0 | 60 | 59 | 0 | 35 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[14] † Cyrtolites retrorsus Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 68 | 66 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[15] † Cyrtolites nodosus Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 7 | 65 | 61 | 0 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[16] † Cyrtolites ornatus Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 0 | 64 | 63 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[17] † Cyrtolites hornyi Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 66 | 64 | 0 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[18] † Cyrtolites claysferryensis Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 68 | 66 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[19] † Cyrtolites thraivensis Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 65 | 56 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[20] † Paracyrtolites subplanus Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 66 | 64 | 0 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[21] † Paracyrtolites carinatus Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 6 | 58 | 57 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
[22] † Cyrtolites aff. ornatus Taxon name last Modified on 05/27/24 | 0 | 60 | 56 | 0 | 35 | 0 | 0 | 1 |