Boyer diss 2009 1046..
Boyer diss 2009 1046.. Boyer diss 2009 1046..
carpolestid bulla is not split into chambers, and carpolestids must be considered as exhibiting the “absent” state for cranial character 24 of Bloch and Silcox (2006). For postcranial character 4, “Position of deltopectoral crest on humerus,” Bloch et al. (2007) coded plesiadapids as polymorphic (0, 1) with some having a laterally positioned crest and others having an anteriorly positioned crest. They based this polymorphic coding on P. cookei (UM 87990) exhibiting an anteriorly positioned crest, as contrasted with P. tricuspidens, P. walbeckensis and N. intermedius (USNM 442229) which exhibit a laterally positioned crest. Additional specimens including those of cf. Pr. gaoi (UALVP 49114) and P. rex (UM 64588) are observed to also have a laterally positioned crest. This allows the ancestral node for Plesiadapidae to be optimized as having the lateral position state. For postcranial character 10, “Morphology of the ulnar trochlea on humerus,” Bloch et al. (2007) coded Plesiadapidae with the “0” state, indicating “only a medial ridge present.” However, Pr. gaoi (UALVP 49114), P. rex (UM 64588) and many P. tricuspidens specimens exhibit a lateral ridge as well. Optimization reconstructs the ancestral node of Plesiadapidae as having a medial and lateral ridge (state “1”). For postcranial character 21, Bloch et al. (2007) coded plesiadapids with a “question mark,” indicating that it was not known whether any plesiadapid had a nail on any of its digits. However, the skeleton of Plesiadapis insignis in Gingerich (1976) illustrates the presence of claws on all pedal digits, and all manual digits except for the pollex, which is obscured. Furthermore, the form of the hallucal and pollical proximal phalanges of P. tricuspidens and Nannodectes (see Chapter 4) suggest the presence of claws, rather than nails. 516
For postcranial character 30, “Plantodistal process of entocuneiform,” Bloch et al. (2007) coded the Plesiadapidae as polymorphic (0, 1) indicating that some taxa have a “strong” process, while others have one that is “reduced or absent.” This was based on the observation that the entocuneiform attributed to the skeleton of P. cookei (UM 87990) lacks a strong plantodistal process. However, my reassessment of this bone is that it is so different from the entocuneiform of other plesiadapids (P. tricuspidens: MNHN R 416, MNHN R 5359, MNHN R 5331; cf. P. anceps AMNH 92011 – see Szalay and Dagosto, 1988) and plesiadapiforms (Sargis et al. 2007), that it must be tentatively considered as incorrectly attributed to UM 87990. Whether or not this is correct, the presence of a strong plantodistal process in P. tricuspidens and cf. P. anceps allows me to re-code plesiadapids as having the “0” state only. For postcranial character 32, Bloch et al. (2007) coded Plesiadapidae as polymorphic (0, 1) for the presence of “cranial buttressing” on the acetabulum. However, all plesiadapids known for this morphology (N. gidleyi AMNH 17409, AMNH 17379; P. tricuspidens MNHN R 448; P. cookei UM 87990) exhibit the “1” state as compared to tupaiid treeshrews, for instance. I therefore re-coded the group in this way. For postcranial character 54, “Length of pubic symphysis,” Bloch et al. (2007) coded plesiadapids with the “0” state, indicating a “long” pubic symphysis. However, the only plesiadapid with a complete symphyseal region on the innominate is P. cookei (UM 87990). In Chapter 4, I discuss its morphology, which is revealed to be more like that of Cynocephalus volans. C. volans has a “short” pubic symphysis compared to those of paromomyid plesiadapiforms, which have a “long” pubic symphysis (Boyer and Bloch 517
- Page 493 and 494: Figure 4.24. Plesiadapis cookei (UM
- Page 495 and 496: Figure 4.25. Surface reconstruction
- Page 497: Figure 4.27. Plesiadapis cookei (UM
- Page 500 and 501: Figure 4.30 472
- Page 502 and 503: Figure 4.31. Measurements of astrag
- Page 504 and 505: Figure 4.33 476
- Page 506 and 507: Figure 4.34. Measurements of calcan
- Page 508 and 509: Figure 4.36. Plesiadapis cookei (UM
- Page 510 and 511: Figure 4.38. Plesiadapis cookei (UM
- Page 512 and 513: Figure 4.40. Stereophotographic vie
- Page 514 and 515: Figure 4.42. Plesiadapis cookei (UM
- Page 516 and 517: Figure 4.44. Plesiadapis cookei (UM
- Page 518 and 519: Figure 4.46. 490
- Page 520 and 521: Figure 4.47 492
- Page 522 and 523: Figure 4.48. Plesiadapis cookei (UM
- Page 524 and 525: Figure 4.50. 496
- Page 526 and 527: Figure 4.51. Surface reconstruction
- Page 528 and 529: INTRODUCTION Bloch et al. (2007) an
- Page 530 and 531: have a lacrimal bone that retains i
- Page 532 and 533: Institutional abbreviations AMNH, A
- Page 534 and 535: level cladogram. A total of 33 cran
- Page 536 and 537: plesiadapiform Ignacius graybullian
- Page 538 and 539: RESULTS Phylogenetic reconstruction
- Page 540 and 541: Optimization of postcranial traits
- Page 542 and 543: Therefore, character optimization r
- Page 546 and 547: 2008). I therefore changed the codi
- Page 548 and 549: Re-coding and optimization of crani
- Page 550 and 551: and paromomyids. This, however, is
- Page 552 and 553: REFERENCES Beard, K.C., 1989. Postc
- Page 554 and 555: Novacek, M.J., 1986. The skull of l
- Page 556 and 557: TABLES Table 5.1. Dental characters
- Page 558 and 559: Table 5.2. Dental character matrix.
- Page 560 and 561: asisphenoid and basioccipital bones
- Page 562 and 563: 111 (p3). Deltopectoral crest of hu
- Page 564 and 565: 158 (p50). Metatarsal I facet on en
- Page 566 and 567: Table 5.4C. Postcranial characters
- Page 568 and 569: Table 5.7. Posterior carotid forame
- Page 570 and 571: Figure 5.2. 542
- Page 572 and 573: Figure 5.3 544
- Page 574 and 575: Figure 5.4. Plot of posterior carot
- Page 576 and 577: ostral end of the nasals) and prema
- Page 578 and 579: its body size would fit predictions
- Page 580 and 581: vertically-to-caudally projecting t
- Page 582 and 583: More generally speaking, this disse
- Page 584 and 585: Figure 6.1. CT reconstruction of Pl
- Page 586 and 587: BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, R.M., Jayes
- Page 588 and 589: Coleman, M. N. and Boyer, D.M. 2008
- Page 590 and 591: Godinot, M., Beard, K.C., 1991. Fos
- Page 592 and 593: MacPhee, R.D.E., 1981. Auditory Reg
carpolestid bulla is not split into chambers, and carpolestids must be considered as<br />
exhibiting the “absent” state for cranial character 24 of Bloch and Silcox (2006).<br />
For postcranial character 4, “Position of deltopectoral crest on humerus,” Bloch et<br />
al. (2007) coded plesiadapids as polymorphic (0, 1) with some having a laterally<br />
positioned crest and others having an anteriorly positioned crest. They based this<br />
polymorphic coding on P. cookei (UM 87990) exhibiting an anteriorly positioned crest,<br />
as contrasted with P. tricuspidens, P. walbeckensis and N. intermedius (USNM 442229)<br />
which exhibit a laterally positioned crest. Additional specimens including those of cf.<br />
Pr. gaoi (UALVP 49114) and P. rex (UM 64588) are observed to also have a laterally<br />
positioned crest. This allows the ancestral node for Plesiadapidae to be optimized as<br />
having the lateral position state.<br />
For postcranial character 10, “Morphology of the ulnar trochlea on humerus,”<br />
Bloch et al. (2007) coded Plesiadapidae with the “0” state, indicating “only a medial<br />
ridge present.” However, Pr. gaoi (UALVP 49114), P. rex (UM 64588) and many P.<br />
tricuspidens specimens exhibit a lateral ridge as well. Optimization reconstructs the<br />
ancestral node of Plesiadapidae as having a medial and lateral ridge (state “1”).<br />
For postcranial character 21, Bloch et al. (2007) coded plesiadapids with a<br />
“question mark,” indicating that it was not known whether any plesiadapid had a nail on<br />
any of its digits. However, the skeleton of Plesiadapis insignis in Gingerich (1976)<br />
illustrates the presence of claws on all pedal digits, and all manual digits except for the<br />
pollex, which is obscured. Furthermore, the form of the hallucal and pollical proximal<br />
phalanges of P. tricuspidens and Nannodectes (see Chapter 4) suggest the presence of<br />
claws, rather than nails.<br />
516