comment on this calibration
Oryzias, Cichlidae – Gasterosteus, Takifugu, Tet
Lineage (NCBI):
root
» Eukaryota
» Opisthokonta
» Metazoa
» Eumetazoa
» Bilateria
» Coelomata
» Deuterostomia
» Chordata
» Craniata <chordata>
» Vertebrata <Metazoa>
» Gnathostomata <vertebrate>
» Euteleostomi
» Actinopterygii
» Actinopteri
» Neopterygii
» Teleostei
» Clupeocephala
» Euteleostei
» Euacanthomorpha
» Euacanthopterygii
» Percomorpha
| node name Oryzias, Cichlidae – Gasterosteus, Takifugu, Tet Look for this name in NCBI Wikipedia Animal Diversity Web | ||
|
recommended citations http://palaeo-electronica.org/content/fc-1 Benton et al. 2015 |
||
|
node minimum age 69.71 Ma The fish-bearing limestones at Nardò are generally referred to the ‘Calcari di Melissano’, a name historically applied to the Late Cretaceous platform carbonates of Salento (Martinis, 1967). However, usage has since been restricted to one part of the Late Cretaceous carbonate succession in the Apulian platform (e.g., Bosellini and Parente, 1994; Schlüter et al., 2008). Medizza and Sorbini (1980) provide a list of calcareous nannofossil species recovered from the fish-bearing layers, the most biostratigraphically relevant of which is Uniplanarus trifidus (reported as Quadrum trifidum). The first appearance of this species marks the beginning of Calcareous Nannoplankton Zone CC23, and it makes its last appearance in the middle of CC24. The top of CC24 is roughly equivalent to the top of the Baculites clinolobatus Ammonite Zone of the Western Interior Seaway, which contains a bentonite horizon dated as 70.08 Ma ± 0.37 Myr (Ogg et al., 2012b). It is from this value that we derive our minimum age estimate of 69.71 Ma. | ||
|
node maximum age 130.8 Ma Percomorphs, and acanthomorphs more generally, are unknown from a series of fish faunas of mid-late Early Cretaceous age that represent a range of depositional settings from fully marine to lacustrine: the Gault Clay of England (Albian; Gale and Owen, 2010; Forey and Longbottom, 2010; Nolf, 2010), Helgoland in Germany (Aptian; Taverne, 1981b), the Crato Formation of Brazil (Martill, 1993; early interpretations of Araripichthys as a lampridiform have been decisively rejected by Patterson, 1993a and Maisey and Moody, 2001), and the Coquiero Seco Formation of Brazil (Gallo and Cohelo, 2008). The oldest of these deposits, the Coquiero Seco Formation of Brazil, yields the oldest putative representative of Eurypterygii (the clade containing Aulopiformes, Myctophiformes, and Acanthomorpha), and provides the basis for our estimated maximum age divergence between Tetraodontiformes and Ovalentaria. The Barremian is dated to approximately 130.8-126.3 Ma (Ogg et al., 2012b); we derive our soft maximum from the oldest limit. | ||
| primary fossil used to date this node | ||
MCSNV 1377 | ||
|
phylogenetic justification
olecular hypotheses of teleost relationships indicate that the clade defined by the divergence between Ovalentaria and Tetraodontiformes comprises much of Percomorpha (Near et al., 2013; Betancur-R. et al., 2013). Many generalized percomorphs and ‘perciforms’ are known from Late Cretaceous deposits (e.g., Patterson, 1993a; López-Arbarello et al., 2003; Arratia et al., 2004; Taverne, 2010). However, none of these has been placed with any precision within percomorph phylogeny, and as such are not appropriate calibrations. The oldest fossils that can be placed with any confidence within Ovalentaria are all late Paleocene-Eocene in age (Patterson, 1993b; Bellwood and Sorbini, 1996; see node 37). However, there are several reports of Cretaceous tetraodontiforms (Patterson, 1993b; Tyler and Sorbini, 1996; Santini and Tyler, 2003; Gallo et al., 2009; Friedman, 2012; Tyler and Križnar, 2013). We select Cretatriacanthus, from Nardò, Italy as a conservative minimum constraint for the divergence between Tetraodontiformes and Ovalentaria. Cretatriacanthus represents the youngest putative tetraodontiform of Cretaceous age represented by body-fossil remains. The absence of an elaborate dermal carapace in Cretatriacanthus means that key tetraodontiform features like the absence of pleural ribs and geometry of the pelvic girdle are readily apparent in this genus, whereas they are generally obscured by an elaborate bony carapace in other Cretaceous examples. |
||
|
phylogenetic reference(s)
The linked fossil has no phylogentic references. |
||
| tree image (click image for full size) | ||
|
FIgure 6 from Benton et al. (2014).
|