Browsing by Author "Patterson, Colin."
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item The intermuscular system of acanthomorph fishes : a commentary. American Museum novitates ; no. 3312(New York, NY : American Museum of Natural History, 2001) Johnson, G. David.; Patterson, Colin.This paper is a response to Gemballa and Britz (1998), who presented a new interpretation of the intermuscular bones of acanthomorphs, homologizing them with the epicentrals of lower teleosts. We argue that their identification of epineural ligaments above the intermuscular bones in many acanthomorphs is mistaken; the structures in question are fanlike arrays of collagen fibers, not true intermuscular ligaments. We show also that undisputed epineural intermusculars penetrate or enter the horizontal septum in lower acanthomorphs (Velifer, Polymixia, beryciforms), and reiterate arguments for regarding the single series of intermusculars in most acanthomorphs as epineurals, secondarily displaced into the horizontal septum.Item Jurassic fishes from the western United States, with comments on Jurassic fish distribution. American Museum novitates ; no. 2796(New York, N.Y. : American Museum of Natural History, 1984) Schaeffer, Bobb, 1913-; Patterson, Colin."Seven genera of fishes from the Jurassic (Upper Bathonian-Callovian) Sundance and Wanakah formations of western United States are described and their relationships discussed together with a review of their stratigraphic occurrence. The assemblage includes isolated teeth of the chondrichthyans Hybodus sp. and Ischyodus sp., in part from unrecorded Sundance localities near Hulett, Wyoming. Most common is the generalized neopterygian Hulettia americans (Eastman), new genus of unknown relationship, which occurs in the Sundance of Montana and Wyoming, and in the Wanakah of Colorado (including the Pony Express Limestone) and New Mexico (Todilto Limestone). Lepidotes sp. and Caturus dartoni (Eastman), which belong to a monophyletic species group within the genus Caturus, are both present in the Sundance and the Wanakah. Occithrissops willsoni, new genus, new species from the Sundance, is an ichthyodectiform teleost, but not assignable to suborder. Todiltia schoewei (Dunkle), new genus from the Wanakah, is a teleost compared with Ascalabos and Leptolepis, but its affinities remain unknown. The problem of incertae sedis genera and species (e.g., the monotypic Hulettia) is discussed in regard to identification and relationships of Jurassic fishes from other parts of the world. Included tables and paleogeographic maps show temporal and spatial distribution of these fishes, but variable preservation, inadequate description, and superficial systematic analysis usually preclude detailed comparisons of Jurassic taxa from the literature. It is probable, however, that most Jurassic fish assemblages, like those of the Sundance-Wanakah, are mixtures of form genera and monotypic genera whose relationships are imprecisely known"--P. 2.Item Lungfishes, tetrapods, paleontology, and plesiomorphy. Bulletin of the AMNH ; v. 167, article 4(New York : American Museum of Natural History, 1981) Rosen, Donn Eric, 1929-; Forey, Peter L.; Gardiner, Brian G.; Patterson, Colin."We conclude that the internal (excurrent) nostril of Recent lungfishes is a true choana, as judged by its comparison with (1) the internal nostril of a Devonian lungfish species which opens through the bony palate internal to an arcade of maxillary and premaxillary teeth; (2) the choana of the Devonian ichthyostegid amphibians, and (3) nostril development in Recent urodeles. The idea that lungfishes might therefore be the sister group of tetrapods is compared with the competing, deeply entrenched theory that rhipidistian fishes and eusthenopterids in particular include the ancestor of tetrapods. Our own theory, derived from study of Recent and fossil material, and an analysis of literature spanning 140 years, is framed in the context of a classification of the main groups of fossil and living gnathostomes: acanthodians, chondrichthyans, cladistians, actinopterygians, rhipidistians, actinistians, dipnoans, and tetrapods. In formulating our proposal we have reviewed the anatomy of the nasal capsule, nostrils and related structures, paired fins and their girdles, dermal bones of the skull, palate and jaw suspension, hyoid and gill arches, ribs and vertebrae, and scale and tooth structure. We hypothesize, in agreement with most nineteenth- and many twentieth-century biologists, and in disagreement with the current paleontological view, that lungfishes are the sister group of tetrapods, and further that actinistians are the sister group of those two, and that Eusthenopteron is the sister group of those three. We also conclude that the characters used formerly to link Eusthenopteron with tetrapods either (1) are primitive for all bony fishes (including cladistians and actinopterygians) or for living gnathostomes (including chondrichthyans); (2) are convergent with those of several groups of gnathostomes; (3) only justify the inclusion of Eusthenopteron in a group with actinistians, dipnoans and tetrapods; or (4) are spurious. We attribute the century of confusion about the structure and position of lungfishes to the traditional paleontological preoccupation with the search for ancestors, to the interpretation of Eusthenopteron in the light of tetrapods and the reciprocal interpretation of fossil amphibians in the light of Eusthenopteron, and to the paleontological predilection for using plesiomorphous characters to formulate schemes of relationships"--P. 163.Item On Müller's and Cuvier's concepts of pharyngognath and labyrinth fishes and the classification of percomorph fishes : with an atlas of percomorph dorsal gill arches. American Museum novitates ; ; no. 2983.(New York, N.Y. : American Museum of Natural History, 1990) Rosen, Donn Eric, 1929-; Patterson, Colin.Item Review of ichthyodectiform and other Mesozoic teleost fishes, and the theory and practice of classifying fossils. Bulletin of the AMNH ; v. 158, article 2(New York : American Museum of Natural History, 1977) Patterson, Colin.; Rosen, Donn Eric, 1929-"The ichthyodectiform fishes are a nominal order of Mesozoic teleosts that have been assigned to three of the four extant teleostean cohorts in one or another recent work, and whose monophyly and composition have not previously been established. From a detailed anatomical survey, it is concluded that the Ichthyodectiformes is monophyletic, and is characterized by an endoskeletal ethmo-palatine bone (a new term) in the floor of the nasal capsule, and by uroneurals that cover the lateral faces of the preural centra. Ichthyodectiform subgroups are the Allothrissopoidei (new name, Allothrissops, Upper Jurassic, only) and Ichthyodectoidei, the latter containing the Ichthyodectidae (nine nominal genera, Upper Jurassic-Upper Cretaceous) and Saurodontidae (two genera, Cretaceous). The Crossognathidae (two genera, Cretaceous) share the ichthyodectiform uroneural character, but show no other ichthyodectiform features, and have certain synapomorphies with higher teleosts. They are placed as Teleostei incertae sedis. A new scheme of teleostean interrelationships is proposed, in which the Euteleostei and Clupeomorpha are sister-groups, these two combined (Clupeocephala, new usage) are the sister-group of the Elopomorpha, and those two combined (Elopocephala, new usage) are the sister-group of the Osteoglossomorpha. Ichthyodectiforms cannot be assigned to any of these teleostean subgroups. This outline of teleostean relationships is extended by specifying a sequence of derived character states shared by extant Teleostei and the Jurassic forms Tharsis dubius, Leptolepis coryphaenoides, Proleptolepis spp., Pholidolepis dorsetensis, and Pholidophorus bechei. From these character states a corresponding phyletic sequence is inferred such that each named taxon is the sister-group of all those preceding it. Within this scheme, the ichthyodectiforms are the sister-group of Tharsis and extant teleosts. Ichthyodectiform relationships therefore lie between members of the Leptolepididae, as that group is currently defined, making it polyphyletic. Various other Mesozoic teleosts are reviewed, and their relationships specified in this scheme as precisely as the available information permits. One 'leptolepid,' Leptolepides, is the sister-group of extant clupeocephalans. Another, 'Leptolepis' bahiaensis, is a clupeocephalan incertae sedis. 'Leptolepis' macrophthalmus and 'L.' talbragarensis are Teleostei incertae sedis, with relationships in the region of Tharsis and the ichthyodectiforms. The nominal genus Anaethalion contains one Lower Cretaceous elopomorph, 'A.' vidali, and an unnamed Jurassic elopomorph, whereas the remaining species are Elopocephala incertae sedis. The Jurassic 'leptolepid' Ascalabos and the Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous form genus Pachythrissops are Teleostei incertae sedis, in the same way as 'Leptolepis' macrophthalmus. With these and other relationships proposed in a cladogram (fig. 54), possible methods of classifying such extended sister-group systems, including series of fossils in which each is the sister of a group containing extant taxa of high tank, are discussed. To avoid naming taxa of high rank for single paleospecies, and to avoid frequent changes in the names and ranks of extant taxa, a new convention for dealing with fossils is proposed. We recommend that those fossil taxa whose relationships can be inferred be incorporated in the hierarchy of extant taxa simply by listing them in sequence, within the extant taxon of lowest rank to which they belong. A particular list of sequenced fossils is established according to the convention that each listed fossil group is the plesiomorph sister-group of everything beneath it in the taxon. These listed fossil taxa may have names indicative of any rank, whatever rank may have existed by previous convention, but sequenced fossil taxa are always distinguished by the prefix plesion (new term). Within a monophyletic group of extinct species, however, usual sister-group ranking procedures are followed. The use of plesions is a convention or compromise which makes it unnecessary to rank extinct taxa formally in the same hierarchy as extant taxa. Many of the fossils we have investigated are too poorly known for their relationships to be specified unambiguously. These fossil taxa are incertae sedis, at a specified level in the hierarchy. We recommend that the term incertae sedis be restricted to fossils, and discuss the implications of that recommendation"--P. 85.Item The structure and relationships of the paracanthopterygian fishes. Bulletin of the AMNH ; v. 141, article 3(New York : [American Museum of Natural History], 1969) Rosen, Donn Eric, 1929-; Patterson, Colin."The aim of this work has been to discover whether the superorder Paracanthopterygii is a monophyletic group, and, if so, to find its limits and relationships. The supposed members of this superorder are the Percopsiformes, Gadiformes, Batrachoidiformes, Lophiiformes, and Gobiesociformes. The paper contains illustrated anatomical accounts of the living and fossil members of these groups, and detailed descriptions of the fossil percopsiforms Trichophanes (Oligocene, Aphredoderidae), Amphiplaga, Erismatopterus (both Eocene, Percopsidae), and Sphenocephalus (Upper Cretaceous, Sphenocephalidae), and the possibly related Asineops (Eocene). 2. Although no single character or combination of characters can be found which occurs in all paracanthopterygians and in no other fish, the conjunction of a distinctive type of jaw musculature and caudal skeleton in all living percopsiforms (percopsids, aphredoderids, amblyopsids), most gadiform suborders (gadoids, muraenolepoids, ophidioids), and batrachoidiforms (batrachoidids) justifies the hypothesis that these three orders are members of a monophyletic group distinct from the acanthopterygians. 3. The most distinctive feature of the paracanthopterygian jaw is the presence of a levator maxillae superioris muscle, which seems to be derived in phylogeny from the upper part of the outer division of the adductor mandibulae. The levator maxillae superioris originates on the palatoquadrate and inserts near the head of the maxilla, serving as a tensor which positions and restrains the maxilla during opening of the mouth. The presence of this muscle limits the degree of jaw protrusion; rather than a truly protrusile mouth paracanthopterygians tend to develop a large, circular gape by pivoting the maxilla and premaxilla. 4. Correlated with the presence of the levator maxillae superioris are a number of features of the skull and jaws, especially the tendency to develop a broad, shallow head, with consequent modifications of the skull roof, occipital condyle, and operculum. 5. A levator maxillae superioris muscle and jaws of paracanthopterygian type also occur in macrouroids and zoarcoids (the remaining gadiform suborders) and in antennarioid and some ceratioid lophiiforms. The remaining lophiiforms and the gobiesocids are without a levator maxillae superioris. Outside the Paracanthopterygii, a levator maxillae superioris is known to occur only in myctophid myctophoids and in some cyclopterid scorpaeniforms. 6. The paracanthopterygian caudal skeleton is characterized by the presence of a second ural centrum which is fused with the upper hypurals, two or fewer epurals, and a full neural spine on the second pre-ural centrum. This neural spine appears to be a primary structure, not the result of fusion between an epural and a neural arch. In addition to the percopsiforms, gadoids, muraenolepoids, ophidioids, and batrachoidids, a caudal skeleton of this type also occurs in at least one zoarcoid, although most zoarcoids and the macrouroids have the caudal skeleton reduced beyond recognition. It does not occur in lophiiforms or gobiesociforms, in which the caudal supports are fused in such a way that they resemble those of some advanced acanthopterygians. In Eocene and Cretaceous percopsiforms and in a few living gadoids the caudal skeleton is more primitive, having the upper hypurals autogenous (four upper hypurals in percopsiforms, three in gadoids). 7. Lophiids and gobiesocids, which lack the paracanthopterygian pattern both in the jaw musculature and the caudal skeleton, are linked with batrachoidids and more generalized lophiiforms by a large number of specializations, especially in the skull and shoulder girdle. 8. Apart from the primary specializations of the jaw musculature and caudal skeleton, other paracanthopterygian group trends is include: reduction in the bony cover of the cephalic sensory canals, the development of large, well-separated, exoccipital condyles, crowding of the anterior vertebrae, loss of supramaxillae, development of a deep notch behind the postmaxillary process of the premaxilla, shortening of the basibranchials so that the gill arches converge ventrally, development of projections on the heads of the posterior branchiostegals, increase in the number of pectoral radials, extension of the median fins, and reduction of the squamation. 9. Primitive features of paracanthopterygians that distinguish the group from the acanthopterygians include the presence of an adipose fin, pelvic splint (both in percopsiforms only), basibranchial teeth and second ural centrum, and the absence of a subocular shelf, predorsal bones, and a pelvic spine (a spinelet, questionably homologous with the acanthopterygian spine, present in some ophidioids, batrachoidids, lophiiforms, and gobiesocids). 10. Morphological and paleontological analysis of the paracanthopterygians indicates that the Percopsiformes, which existed in Cretaceous seas, stand near the origin of the group, occupying much the same position as do the Beryciformes among acanthopterygians. The closest relatives of the percopsiforms are the gadiforms, especially the merlucciid gadoids, with which they share many specializations. Within the Gadiformes, two main lineages are recognizable, the gadoid lineage and the ophidioid-zoarcoid lineage. These two lines must have separated in the Cretaceous. The position of the macrouroids and muraenolepoids in relation to these two lineages is still obscure: the Macrouroidei may contain convergently modified gadoid and ophidioid derivatives. The batrachoidiforms, lophiiforms, and gobiesociforms, the precise interrelationships of which remain to be discovered, form a separate lineage which must have diverged from the percopsiform-gadiform line during the Cretaceous or Paleocene. 11. The fossil record of the percopsiforms shows that some trends followed during the evolution of this group (and probably also in the gadiform and batrachoidiform-lophiiform-gobiesociform lineages) are the reverse of those typical of acanthopterygian evolution, notably reduction in the depth of head and trunk and reduction in fin spines and in spination of the skull bones and scales. A corollary of these trends is that the paracanthopterygians must have shared a closer common ancestry with the acanthopterygians than with the myctophoids. 12. The higher euteleosteans are envisaged as comprising three main radiations, the myctophoid radiation, stemming from aulopid-like ancestors, the paracanthopterygians stemming from percopsiform-like ancestors, and the acanthopterygians from berycoid-like ancestors. The distinctions between these are blurred by parallelism and convergence among the three (e.g., development of a subocular shelf, levator maxillae superioris, and fin spines in myctophid myctophoids; convergent resemblance between ophidioids and blennies and between batrachoidids and some scorpaeniforms) and by the existence of groups that appear to be equally ancient but do not fit easily into any of the three radiations, being in many ways intermediate between them (ctenothrissoids intermediate between myctophoids and acanthopterygians; polymixioids, lampridiforms, and Asineops intermediate between paracanthopterygians and acanthopterygians; atherinomorphs resembling but clearly distinct from acanthopterygians). 13. Some groups, previously placed in the protacanthopterygian order Cetomimiformes, seem to belong with these higher euteleosteans; the kasidoroids and cetomimoids are beryciforms, the ateleopoids, mirapinnids, and eutaeniophorids may be lampridiforms. 14. These conclusions are expressed in a new classification (p. 460) which incorporates a new category, 'series,' between order and superorder. 15. New taxa proposed are as follows: Sphenocephalus brachypterygius, new species; suborder Sphenocephaloidei (Percopsiformes); order Polymixiiformes (= Polymixioidei); series Polymixiomorpha, Salmopercomorpha, Atherinomorpha, Percomorpha; superorder Scopelomorpha (= Myctophiformes). 16. Erismatopterus endlichi Cope and E. rickseckeri Cope are synonyms of Amphiplaga brachyptera Cope and E. levatus (Cope), respectively. The family Trichophanidae Cockerell is synonymous with the Aphredoderidae; the family Erismatopteridae Jordan is synonymous with the Percopsidae; the family Kasidoroidae Robins and De Sylva is synonymous with the Gibberichthyidae. The suborder Amblyopsoidei is merged with the Aphredoderoidei; the members of the Cretaceous beryciform suborder Dinopterygoidei are distributed between the Lampridiformes and the Polymixiiformes"--P. 462-463.