Paleontological Journal

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 114–126 | Cite as

The operational approach to the problem of tetrapodization

  • E. I. VorobyevaEmail author


The problem of tetrapodization is considered as a part of the general problem of the formation of large higher taxa on the basis of morphophysiological and morphogenetic organization of ancestors. It is shown that the formation of tetrapod-like characters in Paleozoic crossopterygians followed the patterns of preadaptation, parallel and mosaic development. The main task of the operational approach to the problem is the reconstruction of the sequence and rates of the formation of tetrapod-like characters in crossopterygians, the loss of fish characters at the tetrapod level, and the mechanisms of these processes.

Key words

Morphofunctional approach morphogenesis ecosystem approach parallel development preadaptation heterochronies principle of actualism Paleozoic 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    P. E. Ahlberg, J. A. Clack, and E. Luk>sevi>cs, “Rapid Braincase Evolution between Panderichthys and the Earliest Tetrapods,” Nature 381, 61–64 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. E. Ahlberg, E. Luk>sevi>cs, and O. Lebedev, “The First Tetrapod Finds from the Devonian (Upper Famennian) of Latvia,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 343, 303–328 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    W. E. Bemis, “Paedomorphosis and the Evolution of the Dipnoi,” Palaeobiology 10 (3), 293–307 (1984).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. A. Boisvert, “The Pelvic Fin and Girdle of Panderichthys and the Origin of Tetrapod Locomotion,” Nature 438 (22/29), 1145–1147 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. D. Brazeau and P. E. Ahlberg, “Tetrapod-like Middle Ear Architecture in a Devonian Fish,” Nature Letters 439 (19), 318–321 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M.-M. Chang and X. Yu, “Structure and Phylogenetic Significance of Diabolichthys speratus gen. et sp. nov., a New Dipnoan-like Form from Lower Devonian of Easts ern Yunnan, China,” Proc. Linn. Soc. NSW 197, 171–184 (1984).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Y. Charig, “Systematics in Biology: A Fundamental Comparison of Some Major Schools of Thought,” in Problems of Phylogenetic Reconstruction, Ed. by K. A. Yoysey and A. E. Friday (Academic, London, 1982), pp. 364–440.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. A. Clack, “Acanthostega gunnari, a Devonian Tetrapod from Greenland: The Snout, Palate and Ventral Parts of the Braincase, with Discussion of Their Significance,” Medd. Grønl. Geosci. 31, 1–24 (1994).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    E. B. Daeschler, N. H. Shubin, and F. A. Jenkins, “A Devonian Tetrapod-like Fish and the Evolution of the Tetrapod Body Plan,” Nature 440 (6/7085), 757–763 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    V. A. Dogel, Comparative Anatomy of Invertebrates (Uchpedgiz, Leningrad, 1940), Vol. 2 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. S. Gilyarov, Patterns of Adaptation of Arthropods to the Life on Land (Nauka, Moscow, 1970) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Jarvik, “On the Structure of the Snout of Crossopterygians and Lower Gnathostomes in General,” Zool. Bidr. Uppsala 21, 237–675 (1942).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    E. Jarvik, Basic Structure and Evolution of Vertebrates (Academic, London, 1980), Vol. 1.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    E. Jarvik, “The Devonian Tetrapod Ichthyostega,” Fos. Strata 4, 1–213 (1996).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Krivetskii, “On the Question on the Morphology of Elements of the Hyoid Arch of Selachians,” Tr. Sravn.- Anat. Inst. Mosk. Univ., No. 12, 1–19 (1917).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    O. A. Lebedev, “The First Quadruped: Search and Discoveries,” Priroda, No. 11, 26–36 (1985).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. A. Long, “Heterochrony and the Origin of Tetrapods,” Lethaia 23, 157–166 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    L. A. Lyarskaja, Placoderms from the Devonian of the Baltic Region: Asterolepididae (Zinatne, Riga, 1981) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. G. Ponomarenko, “Paleobiology of Angiospermatization,” Paleontol. Zh., No. 4, 3-10 (1998) [Paleontol. J., 32 (4), 348–355 (1998)].Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. G. Ponomarenko, “Paleontological Data on the Origin of Arthropods,” in Evolutionary Factors of the Formation of Faunal Diversity (KMK, Moscow, 2005), pp. 146–153 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    D. E. Rosen, P. Forey, B. C. Gardiner, and C. Patterson, “Lungfishes, Tetrapods, Paleontology and Plesiomorphy,” Bull. Am. Mus. Natur. Hist. 167 (4), 162–275 (1981).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    H.-P. Schultze, “Juvenile Specimens of Eusthenopteron foordi Whiteaves (Osteolepiform Rhipidistian, Pisces) from the Late Devonian of Miguasha, Quebec, Canada,” J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 4, 1–16 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    H.-P. Schultze and M. Arsenault, “The Panderichthyid Fish Elpistostege a Close Relative of Tetrapods?,” Palaeontology 28, 193–309 (1985).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. N. Severtsov, Morphological Patterns of Evolution (Akad. Nauk SSSR, Moscow-Leningrad, 1939) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. A. Shishkin, “Morphology of Early Amphibians and Problems of Evolution of Lower Tetrapods,” Tr. Paleontol. Inst. Akad. Nauk SSSR 137, 1–260 (1973).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    N. H. Shubin, E. B. Daeschler, and M. I. Coates, “The Early Evolution of the Tetrapod Humerus,” Science 304, 90–93 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    N. H. Shubin, E. B. Daeschler, and F. A. Jenkins, “The Pectoral Fin of Tiktaalik roseae and the Origin of the Tetrapod Limb,” Nature 440 (6), 764–771 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    P. Sordino and D. Duboule, “A Molecular Approach to the Evolution of Vertebrate Paired Appendages,” Tree 11 (3), 114–119 (1996).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “Morphology and Evolutionary Features of Crossopterygians,” Tr. Paleontol. Inst. Akad. Nauk SSSR 163, 1–239 (1977).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “Panderichthyida, a New Order of Crossopterygians,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 306 (1), 188–190 (1989).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, The Problem of the Origin of Terrestrial Vertebrates (Nauka, Moscow, 1992) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “The Shoulder Girdle of Panderichthys rhombolepis (Gross) (Crossopterygii), Upper Devonian, Latvia,” Geobios 19, 285–288 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “The Humeral Morphology of Rhipidistian Crossopterygians in Connection with the Origin of Tetrapods,” Paleontol. Zh., No. 6, 49-59 (2000) [Paleontol. J. 34 (6), 624–634 (2000)].Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “Subclass Crossopterygii,” in Fossil Vertebrates of Russia and Adjacent Countries: Agnathans and Early Fishes, Ed. by L. I. Novitskaya (GEOS, Moscow, 2004), pp. 271–371[in Russian].Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “Phylogenetic Principles and Criteria, Using the Model of Sarcopterygii,” in Evolutionary Factors of the Formation of Fauna Diversity (KMK, Moscow, 2005), pp. 44–58 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “Morphological Evolution: Estimation Principles, Patterns, and Mechanisms,” Paleontol. Zh., No. 6, 18-33 (2006a) [Paleontol. J. 40 (6), 593–608 (2006a)].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    E. I. Vorobyeva, “The Problem of Tetrapodization,” in Materials of the Conference Devoted to 100th Anniversary of the Birthday of Academician A.V. Ivanov (St. Petersburg, 2006b), pp. 17-182006b [in Russian].Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    E. I. Vorobyeva and J. R. Hinchliffe, “From Fins to Limbs: Developmental Perspectives on Paleontological and Morphological Evidence,” Evol. Biol. 29, 263–311 (1996).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    E. I. Vorobyeva and A. A. Kuznetsov, “The Locomotor Apparatus of Panderichthys rhombolepis (Gross), a Supplement to the Problem of Fish-Tetrapod Transition,” in Fossil Fishes As Living Animals, Ed. by E. Mark-Kurik (Inst. Geol. Acad. Sci. Estonia, Tallinn, 1992), pp. 131–140.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    E. Vorobyeva and H.-P. Schultze, “Description and Systematics of Panderichthyid Fishes with Comments on Their Relationship to Tetrapods,” in Origin of the Higher Categories of Tetrapods, Ed. by L. Trueb and H.-P. Schultze (Cornell. Univ. Press, Ithaca, 1991), pp. 69-108.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    E. I. Vorobyeva and A. A. Tsessarskii, “On the Origin of Vertebrae in Lower Tetrapoda,” Zh. Obshch. Biol. 67 (6), 735–746 (1986).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    T. S. Westoll, “Ancestry of the Tetrapods,” Nature 141, 127–128 (1938).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    E. Worobyeva, “Einige Besonderheiten im Schadelbau von Panderichthys rhombolepis (Gross) (Pisces, Crossopterygii),” Palaeontogr. Abt. A 143, 221–229 (1973).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© MAIK Nauka 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Severtsov Institute of Ecology and EvolutionRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations