The Origin of Rodents and Lagomorphs

  • Li Chuan-Kuei
  • Robert W. Wilson
  • Mary R. Dawson
  • Leonard Krishtalka

Abstract

Although the two major groups of gliriform mammals, the rodents and lagomorphs, are frequently grouped together by nonspecialists, the opinion of both paleontologists and neomammalogists has long been that the two orders are not closely related. Now, new evidence on this question has come from recent fossil discoveries in China and from reevaluation of other evidence, especially developmental. After a review of the past interpretations and new evidence, we return to the view that the Lagomorpha and Rodentia can be traced to a common ancestral group and that the Cohort Glires is a valid taxonomic unit.

Keywords

Migration Europe Cretaceous Miocene Stratigraphy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bohlin, B., 1951, Some mammalian remains from Shih-ehr-ma-cheng, Kui-hui-pu area, Western Kansu, Rep. Sino-Swedish Expedition, Vertebr. Paleontol. 5:1–47.Google Scholar
  2. Dawson, M. R., 1967, Lagomorph history and the stratigraphie record, in: Essays in Paleontology and Stratigraphy, R. C. Moore Commemorative Volume (C. Teichert and E. L. Yockelson, eds.), Department of Geology, University of Kansas Special Publication 2, University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, Kansas, pp. 287–316.Google Scholar
  3. Dawson, M. R., Li, C.-K., and Qi, T., 1984, Eocene ctenodactyloid rodents (Mammalia) of Eastern and Central Asia, in: Papers in Vertebrate Paleontology Honoring Robert Warren WiJson (R. M. Mengel, ed.), Carnegie Museum of Natural History Special Publication 9, pp. 138-150.Google Scholar
  4. Dene, H., Goodman, M., McKenna, M. C., and Romero-Herrera, A. E., 1982, Ochotona princeps (pika) myoglobin: An appraisal of lagomorph phylogeny, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 79:1917–1920.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eastman, C. B., and Bleefeld, A. R., 1980, Lagomorph and rodent affinities reexamined (Abstract), in: Program, Annual Meeting of the American Society of Mammalogists, University of Rhode Island.Google Scholar
  6. Ehik, J., 1926, The right interpretation of the cheekteeth tubercles of Titanomys, Ann. Mus. Nat. Hung. 23:178–186.Google Scholar
  7. Friant, M., 1932, Contribution à l’étude de la differentiation des dents jugales chez les mammifères, Publ. Mus. Hist. Nat. 1:1–132.Google Scholar
  8. Gidley, J. W., 1906, Evidence bearing on tooth-cusp development, Proc. Wash. Acad. Sci. 8:91–110.Google Scholar
  9. Gidley, J. W., 1912, The lagomorphs as an independent order, Science 36(922):285–286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gingerich, P. D., and Gunnell, G. F., 1979, Systematics and evolution of the genus Esthonyx (Mammalia, Tillodontia) in the early Eocene of North America, Contrib. Mus. Paleontol. Univ. Michigan 25:125–153.Google Scholar
  11. Gingerich, P. D., and McKenna, M. C., 1980, Mammalian paleontology in China, News Bull. Soc. Vertebr. Paleontol. 118:42–44.Google Scholar
  12. Gregory, W. K., 1910, The Orders of Mammals, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 27:1–524.Google Scholar
  13. Grevstad, H. J., and Selvig, K. A., 1986, Ultrastructure of lingual enamel epithelium in rabbit permanent incisors, Scand. J. Dent. Bes. 93:409–420.Google Scholar
  14. Hartenberger, J.-L., 1977, À propos de l’origine des rongeurs, Géobios Mem. Spec. 1:183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hartenberger, J.-L., 1980, Données et hypothèses sur la radiation initiale des rongeurs, in: Palaeovertebrata, Mémoire Jubilaire en homage à René Lavocat, (Jacques Michaux, ed.), Paleovertebrata Festschrift, pp. 285-301.Google Scholar
  16. Hinton, M. A. C., 1926, Monograph of Voles and Lemmings, Vol. 1, British Museum (Natural History).Google Scholar
  17. Hürzeler, J., 1936, Osteologie und Odontologie der Caenotheriden, Abh. Schweiz Palaeontol. Ges. 58:1–89.Google Scholar
  18. Korth, W. W., 1984, Earliest Tertiary evolution and radiation of rodents in North America, Bull. Carnegie Mus. Nat. Hist. 24:1–71.Google Scholar
  19. Korvenkontio, V. A., 1934, Mikroskopische Untersuchungen an Nagerincisiven unter Hinweis auf die Schmelzstruktur der Backenzahne, Ann. Zool. Soc. Zool.-Bot. Fenn. Vanamo 2:1–274.Google Scholar
  20. Landry, S. O., Jr., 1974, The fundamental relationship of the Lagomorpha and Rodentia (Abstract), in: First International Theriological Congress Transactions, Volume 2, N-Z, Moscow, pp. 202-203.Google Scholar
  21. Li, C.-K., 1977, Paleocene eurymyloids (Anagalida, Mammalia) of Qianshan, Anhui, Vertebr. PalAsiat. 15(2):103–118.Google Scholar
  22. Li, C.-K., and Ting, S.-Y., 1985, Possible phylogenetic relationship of Asiatic eurymylids and rodents, with comments on mimotonids, in: Evolutionary Belationships among Bodents (W. P. Luckett and J.-L. Hartenberger, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 35–58.Google Scholar
  23. Li, C.-K., and Yan, D.-F., 1979, The systematic position of eurymylids (Mammalia) and the origin of Rodentia, in: Abstracts of Papers, 12th Annual Conference and 3rd National Congress Paleontological Society of China, pp. 155-156.Google Scholar
  24. Lillegraven, J. A., 1969, Latest Cretaceous mammals of upper part of Edmonton Formation of Alberta, Canada, and review of marsupial-placental dichotomy in mammalian evolution, Univ. Kans. Paleontol. Contrib. Vertebr. 12:1–122.Google Scholar
  25. Luckett, W. P., 1985, Superordinal and intraordinal affinities of rodents: Developmental evidence from the dentition and placentation, in: Evolutionary Relationships among Bodents (W. P. Luckett and J.-L. Hartenberger, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 227–276.Google Scholar
  26. Luckett, W. P., and Hartenberger, J.-L. (eds.), 1985, Evolutionary Relationships among Rodents, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  27. Major, C. J. F., 1893, On some Miocene squirrels, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1893:179–215.Google Scholar
  28. Matthew, W. D., and Granger, W., 1925, Fauna and correlation of the Gashato Formation of Mongolia, Am. Mus. Novit. 189:1–12.Google Scholar
  29. Matthew, W. D., Granger, W., and Simpson, G. G., 1929, Additions to the fauna of the Gashato Formation of Mongolia, Am. Mus. Novit. 376:1–12.Google Scholar
  30. McKenna, M. C., 1961, A note on the origin of rodents, Am. Mus. Novit. 2037:1–5.Google Scholar
  31. McKenna, M. C., 1975, Toward a phylogenetic classification of the Mammalia, in: Phylogeny of the Primates (W. P. Luckett and F. S. Szalay, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 21–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Novacek, M. J., 1985, Cranial evidence for rodent affinities, in: Evolutionary Relationships among Rodents (W. P. Luckett and J.-L. Hartenberger, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 59–81.Google Scholar
  33. Olson, E. C., 1971, Vertebrate Paleozoology, Wiley-Interscience, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Osborn, H. F., 1902, American Eocene primates, and the supposed rodent family Mixodectidae, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 17:169–214.Google Scholar
  35. Patterson, B., and Wood, A. E., 1982, Rodents from the Deseadan Oligocene of Bolivia and the relationships of the Caviomorpha, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harv. Univ. 149:371–543.Google Scholar
  36. Simpson, G. G., 1945, The principles of classification and a classification of Mammalia, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 85:350.Google Scholar
  37. Sych, L., 1971, Mixodontia, a new order of mammals from the Paleocene of Mongolia, in: Results of the Polish-Mongolian Paleontological Expeditions, Part III, Palaeontol. Pol. 25:147–158.Google Scholar
  38. Szalay, F. S., 1977, Phylogenetic relationships and a classification of the eutherian mammals, in: Major Patterns in Vertebrate Evolution (M. K. Hecht and P. C. Goody, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 315–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Szalay, F. S., 1985, Rodent and lagomorph morphotype adaptations, origins, and relationships: Some postcranial attributes analyzed, in: Evolutionary Relationships among Rodents (W. P. Luckett and J.-L. Hartenberger, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 83–132.Google Scholar
  40. Szalay, F. S., and McKenna, M. C., 1971, Beginning of the age of mammals in Asia: The late Paleocene Gashato fauna, Mongolia, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 144:269–318.Google Scholar
  41. Tullberg, T., 1899, Ueher das System der Nagethiere, eine phylogenetische Studie, Akademischen Buchdruckerei, Upsala.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Van Valen, L., 1966, Deltatheridia, a new order of mammals, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 132:1–126.Google Scholar
  43. Von Koenigswald, W., 1985, Evolutionary trends in the enamel of rodent incisors, in: Evolutionary Relationships among Rodents (W. P. Luckett and J.-L. Hartenberger, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, pp. 403–422.Google Scholar
  44. Wilson, R. W., 1949, Early Tertiary rodents of North America, Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 584:67–164.Google Scholar
  45. Wood, A. E., 1942, Notes on the Paleocene lagomorph, Eurymylus, Am. Mus. Novit. 1162:1–7.Google Scholar
  46. Wood, A. E., 1957, What, if anything, is a rabbit?, Evolution 11:417–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wood, A. E., 1977, The Rodentia as clues to Cenozoic migrations between the Americas and Europe and Africa, in: Paleontology and Plate Tectonics, North American Paleontological Convention II, Lawrence, Milwaukee Public Museum, Special Publications in Biology and Geology, No. 2, pp. 95-109.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Li Chuan-Kuei
    • 1
  • Robert W. Wilson
    • 2
  • Mary R. Dawson
    • 3
  • Leonard Krishtalka
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and PaleoanthropologyAcademia SinicaBeijingChina
  2. 2.Museum of Natural HistoryUniversity of KansasLawrenceUSA
  3. 3.Section of Vertebrate FossilsCarnegie Museum of Natural HistoryPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations