A cranial morphometric study od deer [Mammalia, Cervidae] from Argentina using three-dimensional landmarks

• Autorzy: Merino M. L. , Milne N. , Vizcaino S.F.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This study examines morphological variation in the crania (n = 70) of eight cervid species from Argentina. Forty 3-dimensional landmarks were acquired on each adult cervid cranium. The data were analysed using Morphologika software. The co-ordinates were registered and scaled to remove size differences by Procrustes analysis, and then principal components analysis was applied to examine shape variation. Shape variation associated with each principal component can be visualised in the program. The first principal component correlates strongly with the centroid size of the crania and also with the body mass and height of each species. The larger species were distinguished by relatively longer snouts and relatively smaller brains. The smallerMazama andPudu species cluster closely on the first as well as the other principal components. Among the larger species, the twoHippocamelus species, which live at higher altitudes, were clearly distinguished from the lowland species,Ozotoceros bezoarticus andBlastocerus dichotomus, on the basis of cranial flexion and the orientation of the occipital region. FinallyO. bezoarticus andB. dichotomus were compared directly and small differences were noted in the orbital region. The shape data was used to produce a distance matrix and a phenogram, which we relate to some of currently accepted phylogenetic relationships of this group of cervids.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

phylogenesis; diet; morphological variation; Mammalia; skull shape; morphometry; Cervidae; cervid; deer; South America

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Theriologica
• Rocznik: 2005
• Tom: 50
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.91-108,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Merino M. L.

• Museo de La Plata, Paseo del Bosque s-n, B1900FWA, La Plata, Argentina

autor

Milne N.

autor

Vizcaino S.F.

Bibliografia

• Anderson S. 1997. Mammals of Bolivia, Taxonomy and Distribution. Bulletin of American Museum of Natural History 231: 1–652.
• Beade M. S., Pastore H. and Vila A. R. 2000. Morfología y mortalidad de venados de las pampas (Ozotoceros bezoarticus celer) en la Bahía Samborombón. Boletín Técnico de la Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina 50: 1–31.
• Beccaceci M. D. 1996. Dieta del ciervo de los pantanos (Blastocerus dichotomus), en la Reserva Iberá, Corrientes, Argentina. Mastozoología Neotropical 3(2): 193–198.
• Beccaceci M. D and Merino M. L. 1994. Dieta del ciervo de los pantanos en la Reserva Iberá, Corrientes, Argentina. [In: Population and habitat viability assessment for Cervo-do-pantanal (Blastocerus dichotomus). L. Pinder and U. Seal, eds]. Minnesota, Conservation Breeding Specialist Group SSC/IUCN: 129–136.
• Bianchini J. J. and Delupi L. H. 1978. El estado sistemático de los ciervos neotropicales de la tribu Odocoileini Simpson 1945. Physis C (38) 94: 83–89.
• Bodmer R. 1997. Ecologia e conservacao dos veados mateiro e catingueiro no amazonia. [In: Biologia e Conservacao de Cervideos Sul-americanos;Blastocerus, Ozotoceros e Mazama. J. M. Barbanti Duarte, ed]. FUNEP, Jaboticabal: 70–77.
• Bookstein F. L. 1989. Principal warps: thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformations. IEEE transactions in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 11: 567–585.
• Cabrera A. 1941. Cranial and dental characters of some South American Cervidae. Field Museum of Natural History Zoology Series XXVII (511): 125–135.
• Cabrera A. and Yepes J. 1961. Los mamíferos Sudamericanos. Ediar, Buenos Aires: 1–370.
• Chapman R. 1990. Conventional Procrustes approaches. [In: Proceeding of the Michigan Morphometrics Workshops. F. J. Rohlf and F. L. Bookstein, eds]. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Special Publication 2: 251–267.
• Colomes Gonzalez A. A. 1978. Biología y ecología del huemul chileno (Hippocamelus bisulcus). Estudio de sus hábitos alimentarios. Tesis de Licenciatura, Facultad de Agronomia. Universidad de Chile: 1–87.
• Czernay S. 1987. Spießhirsche und Pudus, Die gattungen Mazama und Pudu. Wittenberg, Verlag: 1–84.
• Delupi L. H. and Bianchini J. J. 1995. Análisis morfológico comparado de los caracteres craneo-faciales en el ciervo de las pampasOdocoileus bezoarticus y formas relacionadas. Physis C 50 (118–119): 23–36.
• Diaz N. I. and Smith-Flueck J. A. 2000. The Patagonian Huemul. A mysterious deer on the brink of extinction. L.O.L.A., Buenos Aires: 1–150.
• Dryden I. L. and Mardia K. V. 1998. Statistical shape analysis. John Wiley, London: 1–250.
• Duarte J. M. B. 1996. Guia de Identificaçde Cervídeos Brasileiros. FUNEP, Jaboticabal: 1–8.
• Duarte J. M. B. and Merino M. L. 1997. Taxonomia e evolução. [In: Biologia e conservação de cervídeos Sul-Americanos:Blastocerus, Ozotoceros e Mazama. J. M. B. Duarte, ed]. FUNEP Jaboticabal: 1–21.
• Gagnon M. and Chew A. M. 2000. Dietary preferences in extant african bovidae. Journal of Mammalogy 81: 490–511.
• Galaz Leigh J. L. 1998. Conservación de la Taruca (Hippocamelus antisensis, d’Orbigny, 1834) en la Región de Tarapaca, Chile. [In: La Conservación de la Fauna nativa de Chile. Logros y Perpectivas. S. E. Valverde, ed]. Conaf, Santiago de Chile: 27–36.
• Galliari C. A., Pardiñas U. F. J. and Goin F. J. 1996. Lista comentada de los mamíferos Argentinos. Mastozoología Neotropical 3(1): 39–61.
• Gonzalez S. 1997. Estudio de la variabilidad morfológica, genética y molecular de poblaciones relictuales de venado de campoOzotoceros bezoarticus (L. 1758) y sus consecuencias para la conservación. PhD thesis, Universidad de la Republica, Montevideo: 1–174.
• Gonzalez S., Alvarez-Valin F. and Maldonado J. E. 2002. Morphometric differentiation of endangered pampas deer (Ozotoceros bezoarticus), with description of new subspecies from Uruguay. Journal of Mammalogy 83: 1127–1140.
• Gonzalez S., Gravier A. and Brum-Zorrilla N. 1992. A systematic subspecifical approach onOzotoceros bezoarticus (L. 1758) ( Pampas Deer) from Southamerica. [In: Ongules /Ungulates 91. F. Spitz, G. Janeau, G. Gonzalez and S. Aulagnier, eds]. Societe Francais pour l’Etude et la Protection des Mammiféres an Toulouse Institute de Recherche sur les Grandes Mammiféres, Paris: 129–132.
• Gonzalez S., Gravier A. and Kaladjian R. 1989. Estudio craneométrico deOzotoceros bezoarticus (“venado de campo”). Boletín Sociedad Zoológica del Uruguay 5: 29–30.
• Good P. 2000. Permutation tests: a practical guide to resampling methods for testing hypotheses. 2nd Edition Springer-Verlag. New York: 1–265.
• Groves C. P. and Grubb P. 1987. Relationships of living deer. [In: Biology and management of the Cervidae. C. M. Wemmer, ed]. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C: 21–59.
• Haltenorth T. 1963 Klassifikation der Säugetiere: Artiodactyla. Handbuch der Zoologie, Leiferung 8 (32/1): 1–167.
• Hershkovitz P. 1982. Neotropical deer (Cervidae) Part I. Pudus genus Gray. Fieldiana Zoology (n.s.) 11: 1–86.
• Jackson J. E. and Giulietti J. 1988. The food habits of pampas deerOzotoceros bezoarticus celerin relation to its conservation in a relict natural grassland in Argentina. Biological Conservation 45: 1–10.
• Janis C. M. 1995. Correlations between craniodental morphology and feeding behavior in ungulates: reciprocal illumination between living and fossil taxa. [In: Functional morphology in vertebrate paleontology. J. J. Tomason, ed]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 76–98.
• Kent J. T. 1994. The complex Bingham distribution and shape analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society series B. 56: 285–299.
• Marcus L. F., Corti M., Loy A., Naylor G. J. P. and Slice D. 1996. Advances in morphometrics. Nato ASI series. Plenum Press New York: 1–300.
• Merino M. L., Gonzalez S., Leeuwenbreg F., Rodrigues F. H. G, Pinder L. and Tomas W. M. 1997. Veado campeiro (Ozotoceros bezoarticus Linneus 1758). [In: Biologia e Conservacao de Cervideos Sul-Americanos;Blastocerus, Ozotoceros e Mazama. J. M. Barbanti Duarte, ed]. FUNEP, Jaboticabal: 42 -55.
• Merkt J. R. 1987. Reproductive seasonaly and grouping patterns of the north Andean Deer or Taruca (Hippocamelus antisensis) in Southern Perú. [In: Biology and management of the Cervidae. C. M. Wennner, ed]. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington D.C.: 388–401.
• Milne N. and O’Higgins P. 2002. Interspecific variation inMacropus crania: form, function and phylogeny. Journal of Zoology, London 256: 523–535.
• Neitzel H. 1987. Chromosome evolution of Cervidae: Karyotypic and molecular aspect. [In: Cytogenetics, basic and applied aspects. G. Obe and A. Basler, eds]. Springer-Verlag, New York: 90–112.
• O’Higgins P. 2000a. Quantitative approaches to the study of craniofacial growth and evolution: advances in morphometric techniques. [In: Vertebrate ontogeny and phylogeny: Implications for the study of hominid skeletal evolution. P. O’Higgins and M. Mohn, eds]. Academic Press, London: 163–185.
• O’Higgins P. 2000b. Advances in approaches to the study of morphological variation in the hominid fossil record: biology, landmarks and geometry. Journal of Anatomy 197: 103–120.
• O’Higgins P. and Jones N. 1998. Facial growth inCercocebus torquatus: An application of three dimensional geometric morphometric techniques to the study of morphological variation. Journal of Anatomy 193: 251–272.
• O’Higgins P. and Strand Vidarsdottir U. 1999. New approaches to the quantitative analysis of craniofacial growth and variation. [In: Human Growth in the Past. R. Hoppa and C. Fitzgerald, eds]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 28–160.
• Putman R. 1988. The natural history of deer. Cristopher Helm, London: 1–191.
• Redford K. and Eisenberg J. 1992. Mammals of the neotropics. The Southern Cone. Vol. 2. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 1–430.
• Rohlf J. 1994. NTSYS-pc Numerical taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System Applied Biostatistics Inc., New York.
• Rossi R. V. 2000. Taxonomia deMazama Rafinesque, 1917 do Brasil (Artiodactyla, Cervidae). MSc thesis, Universidad de Sao Pablo, Sao Pablo: 1–320.
• Smith-Flueck J. A. 2000. The current situation of patagonian huemul. [In: The Patagonian Huemul. A mysterious deer on the brink of extinction. N. I. Diaz and J. A. Smith-Flueck, eds]. L.O.L.A, Buenos Aires: 67–76.
• Spencer L. M. 1995. Morphological correlates of dietary resource partitioning in the African bovidae. Journal of Mammalogy 76: 448–471.
• Stallings J. R. 1984. Notes on feeding habits ofMazama gouazoubira in the Chaco Boreal of Paraguay. Biotropica 16: 155–157.
• Stehli F. G. and Webb S. D. 1985. The great American Biotic Interchange. Plenum Press, New York and London: 1–540.
• Tomas W., Beccaceci M. D. and Pinder L. 1997. Cervo do pantanal (Blastocerus dichotomus). [In: Biologia e Conservacao de Cervideos Sul-Americanos;Blastocerus, Ozotoceros e Mazama. J. M. Barbanti Duarte, ed]. FUNEP, Jaboticabal: 25–40.
• Underwood R. 1983. Feeding behavior of grazing African ungulates. Behaviour 84: 201–243.
• Van Soest P. T. 1996. Allometry and ecology of feeding behavior and digestive capacity in herbivores: a review. Zoo Biology 15: 455–479.
• Webb S. D. 2000. Evolutionary history of New World Cervidae. [In: Antelopes, deer and relatives. E. Vrba and G. Schaller, eds]. Yale University Press, New Haven and London: 38–65.
• Wemmer C. and Wilson D. 1987. Cervid brain size and natural history. [In: Biology and management of the Cervidae. C. M. Wennner, ed]. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington: 189–199.
• Wilson D. E and Reeder D. 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington: 1–1206.
• Ximenez A., Langguth A. and Praderi R. 1972. Lista sistemática de los mamíferos del Uruguay. Anales del Museo de Historia Natural de Montevideo 5 (VII): 1–49.