Regional differentiation of felid vertebral column evolution: a study of 3D shape trajectories
- 340 Downloads
Recent advances in geometric morphometrics provide improved techniques for extraction of biological information from shape and have greatly contributed to the study of ecomorphology and morphological evolution. However, the vertebral column remains an under-studied structure due in part to a concentration on skull and limb research, but most importantly because of the difficulties in analysing the shape of a structure composed of multiple articulating discrete units (i.e. vertebrae). Here, we have applied a variety of geometric morphometric analyses to three-dimensional landmarks collected on 19 presacral vertebrae to investigate the influence of potential ecological and functional drivers, such as size, locomotion and prey size specialisation, on regional morphology of the vertebral column in the mammalian family Felidae. In particular, we have here provided a novel application of a method—phenotypic trajectory analysis (PTA)—that allows for shape analysis of a contiguous sequence of vertebrae as functionally linked osteological structures. Our results showed that ecological factors influence the shape of the vertebral column heterogeneously and that distinct vertebral sections may be under different selection pressures. While anterior presacral vertebrae may either have evolved under stronger phylogenetic constraints or are ecologically conservative, posterior presacral vertebrae, specifically in the post-T10 region, show significant differentiation among ecomorphs. Additionally, our PTA results demonstrated that functional vertebral regions differ among felid ecomorphs mainly in the relative covariation of vertebral shape variables (i.e. direction of trajectories, rather than in trajectory size) and, therefore, that ecological divergence among felid species is reflected by morphological changes in vertebral column shape.
KeywordsGeometric morphometrics Morphological evolution Regionalisation Phenotypic trajectory analysis Ecomorphology Axial skeleton
We thank the two peer reviewers for their excellent, constructive criticisms of the first draft of this paper. For access to museum collections, we thank R. Portela Miguez and R. Sabin at the Natural History Museum, London; M. Lowe and R. Asher at the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge; C. Lefèvre at the Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris; J. Chupasko at the Harvard Museum of Natural History, Cambridge; E. Westwig at the American Museum of Natural History, New York; W. Stanley at the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago; and D. Lunde at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, Washington D.C. This work was supported by Leverhulme Trust grant RPG 2013-124 to AG and JRH. This research received support from the SYNTHESYS project http://www.synthesys.info/ which is financed by European Community Research Infrastructure Action under the FP7 ‘Capacities’ Program. The SYNTHESYS grant was awarded to MR.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- Adams, D. C., Rohlf, F. J., & Slice, D. E. (2013). A field comes of age: geometric morphometrics in the 21st century. Hystrix, 24(1), 1-10.Google Scholar
- Adams, D. S., Collyer, M., & Sherrat, E. (2015). geomorph: software for geometric morphometric analyses. R package version 2.1.x. (2.1.x ed.).Google Scholar
- Böhmer, C., Rauhut, O. W., & Wörheide, G. (2015). Correlation between Hox code and vertebral morphology in archosaurs. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 282(1810), doi: 10.1098/rspb.2015.0077.
- Chatzigianni, A., & Halazonetis, D. J. (2009). Geometric morphometric evaluation of cervical vertebrae shape and its relationship to skeletal maturation. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 136(4), 481.e481–481.e489.Google Scholar
- De Iuliis, G., & Pulerà, D. (2006). The cat. In The dissection of vertebrates: a laboratory manual (1st ed., pp. 131–226). Burlington, MA USA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Dumont, M., Wall, C. E., Botton-Divet, L., Goswami, A., Peigne, S., & Fabre, A. C. (2015). Do functional demands associated with locomotor habitat, diet, and activity pattern drive skull shape evolution in musteloid carnivorans? Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 117(4), 858–878. doi: 10.1111/bij.12719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ercoli, M. D., Prevosti, F. J., & ÁLvarez, A. (2012). Form and function within a phylogenetic framework: locomotory habits of extant predators and some Miocene Sparassodonta (Metatheria). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 165(1), 224–251. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00793.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Figueirido, B., Serrano-Alarcon, F. J., Slater, G. J., & Palmqvist, P. (2010). Shape at the cross-roads: homoplasy and history in the evolution of the carnivoran skull towards herbivory. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 23(12), 2579–2594. doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02117.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Foth, C., Brusatte, S. L., & Butler, R. J. (2012). Do different disparity proxies converge on a common signal? Insights from the cranial morphometrics and evolutionary history of Pterosauria (Diapsida: Archosauria). Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 25(5), 904–915. doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02479.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Galis, F., Carrier, D. R., van Alphen, J., van der Mije, S. D., Van Dooren, T. J., Metz, J. A., et al. (2014). Fast running restricts evolutionary change of the vertebral column in mammals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 111(31), 11401–11406. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1401392111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goswami, A., & Polly, P. D. (2010). The influence of character correlations of phylogenetic analyses: a case study of the carnivoran cranium. In A. Goswami & A. Friscia (Eds.), Carnivoran evolution: new views on phylogeny, form, and function (pp. 141–164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gray, H., Standring, S., Ellis, H., & Berkovitz, B. (2005). Gray’s anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice. (39th ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Harmon, L., Weir, J., Brock, C., Glor, R., Challenger, W., Hunt, G., et al. (2014). Analysis of evolutionary diversification. (2.0.6 ed., pp. Methods for fitting macroevolutionary models to phylogenetic trees.).Google Scholar
- Hua, S. (2003). Locomotion in marine mesosuchians (Crocodylia): the contribution of the ‘locomotion profiles’. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie Abhandlungen, 227, 139–152.Google Scholar
- Johnson, D. R., McAndrew, T. J., & Oguz, O. (1999). Shape differences in the cervical and upper thoracic vertebrae in rats (Rattus norvegicus) and bats (Pteropus poiocephalus): can we see shape patterns derived from position in column and species membership ? Journal of Anatomy, 194(2), 249–253.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Lauder, G. V. (1995). On the inference of function from structure. In J. J. Thomason (Ed.), Functional anatomy of vertebrates: an evolutionary perspective (pp. 11–18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Müller, J., Scheyer, T. M., Head, J. J., Barrett, P. M., Werneburg, I., Ericson, P. G., et al. (2010). Homeotic effects, somitogenesis and the evolution of vertebral numbers in recent and fossil amniotes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(5), 2118–2123. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0912622107.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Pierce, S. E., Angielczyk, K. D., & Rayfield, E. J. (2008). Patterns of morphospace occupation and mechanical performance in extant crocodilian skulls: a combined geometric morphometric and finite element modeling approach. Journal of Morphology, 269(7), 840–864. doi: 10.1002/jmor.10627.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pierce, S. E., Angielczyk, K. D., & Rayfield, E. J. (2009). Shape and mechanics in thalattosuchian (Crocodylomorpha) skulls: implications for feeding behaviour and niche partitioning. Journal of Anatomy, 215(5), 555–576. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2009.01137.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Piras, P., Maiorino, L., Teresi, L., Meloro, C., Lucci, F., Kotsakis, T., et al. (2013). Bite of the cats: relationships between functional integration and mechanical performance as revealed by mandible geometry. Systematic Biology, 62(6), 878–900. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syt053.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- R Foundation (2015). The R project for statistical computing. (3.2.3 ed.).Google Scholar
- Smeathers, J. E. (1981). A mechanical analysis of the mammalian lumbar spine. Thesis dissertation. University of ReadingGoogle Scholar
- Sunquist, M., & Sunquist, F. (2002). Wild cats of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar