Larval development in Oligocene palaeobatrachid frogs

• Autorzy: Rocek Z
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

A detailed account of the development of skeletal and some soft−tissue structures is based on 171 fossil tadpoles and metamorphosing froglets of Palaeobatrachus sp. from the Late Oligocene of the Czech Republic (locality Bechlejovice). Their exceptionally good preservation resulted from fossilization in diatomites. The fossil developmental series was compared with normal development of the contemporary anuran Xenopus laevis (Pipidae) represented by cleared and stained (alizarin/toluidin−blue) whole−mount specimens. The comparison revealed that in spite of differences in the sequence of ossification and its timing (e.g., ossification of the otic capsules and ribs was retarded in Xenopus whereas dermal ossification was retarded in Palaeobatrachus), in the number of free ribs, and in composition of the sacral region (the synsacrum in Palaeobatrachus involves two posterior presacrals, whereas there is a single sacral in Xenopus), both genera were similar in great number of anatomical features that appear during development. The most important difference is the shape of vertebral centrum (procoelous in Palaeobatrachus, opisthocoelous in all Pipidae) which is formed in comparatively early developmental stages. A view that could result from anatomical comparisons is that Palaeobatrachus could be derived from the Pipidae, but this is doubtful due to biostratigraphic and palaeogeographic discrepancies. The earliest palaeobatrachids were recorded from the Late Cretaceous of Europe but pipids could not invade northern continents after the Early Cretaceous when the Tethys Sea prevented interchanges of anuran faunas. Also, all palaeobatrachids retain primitive anatomical features (e.g., five pairs of ribs) that were more derived even in the earliest pipids from the Lower Cretaceous of Israel.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

anuran fauna; palaeobatrachid frog; Czech Republic; frog; Palaeobatrachidae; Anura; Oligocene; larval development; larva; paleontology

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Palaeontologica Polonica
• Rocznik: 2003
• Tom: 48
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.595-607,fig.

Twórcy

autor

Rocek Z

• Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• Astibia, H., Buffetaut, E., Buscalioni, A.D., Cappetta, H., Corral, C., Estes, R., Garcia−Garmilla, F., Jaeger, J., Jimenez−Fuentes, E., Le Leuff, J., Mazin, J.M., Orue−Etxebarria, X., Pereda−Suberbiola, J., Powell, J.E., Rage, J.C., Rodriguez−Lazaro, J., Sanz, J.L., and Tong, H. 1990. The fossil vertebrates from Laño (Basque Country, Spain); new evidence on the composition and affinities of the Late Cretaceous continental faunas of Europe. Terra Nova 2: 460–466.
• Báez, A.M. 1981. Redescription and relationships of Saltenia ibanezi, a Late Cretaceous pipid frog from northwestern Argentina. Ameghiniana 18: 127–154.
• Báez, A.M. and Trueb, L. 1997. Redescription of the Paleogene Shelania pascuali from Patagonia and its bearing on the relationships of fossil and recent pipoid frogs. Scientific Papers. Natural History Museum, The University of Kansas 4: 1–41.
• Bellon, H., Bůžek, Č., Gaudant, J., Kvaček, Z., and Walther, H. 1998. The České Středohoří magmatic complex in Northern Bohemia 40K–40Ar ages for volcanism and biostratigraphy of the Cenozoic freshwater formations. Newsletters on Stratigraphy 36: 77–103.
• Böhme, W., Roček, Z., and Špinar, Z.V. 1982. On Pelobates decheni Troschel, 1861, and Zaphryssa eurypelis Cope, 1866 (Amphibia: Salientia: Pelobatidae) from the Early Miocene of Rott near Bonn, West Germany. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 2: 1–7.
• Branham, A.E. and List, J.C. 1979. Development of urostyle during metamorphosis in five species of Anura. Journal of Morphology 159: 311–330.
• Buffetaut, E., Costa, G., Le Loeuff, J., Martin, M., Rage, J.−C., Valentin, X., and Tong, H. 1996. An Early Campanian vertebrate fauna from the Villeveyrac Basin (Hérault, Southern France). Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Mitteilungen 1996: 1–16.
• Chipman, A.D. and Tchernov, E. 2002. Ancient ontogenies: larval development of the Lower Cretaceous anuran Shomronella jordanica (Amphibia: Pipoidea). Evolution and Development 3: 86–95.
• Dijk, D.E., van 1960. Segmentation of the pelvic region of Anura with particular reference to the urostyle of Ascaphus. South African Journal of Science 56: 78–80.
• Dijk, D.E., van 2002. Longitudinal sliding articulations in pipid frogs. South African Journal of Science 98: 555–556.
• Estes, R. 1977. Relationships of the South African fossil frog Eoxenopoides reuningi (Anura, Pipidae). The Annals of the South African Museum 73: 49–80.
• Estes, R., Špinar, Z.V., and Nevo, E. 1978. Early Cretaceous pipid tadpoles from Israel (Amphibia: Anura). Herpetologica 34: 374–393.
• Fejérváry, G.J. 1917. Anoures fossiles des couches préglaciaires de Püspökfürdö en Hongrie. Földtani közlöni (Budapest) 47: 141–172.
• Gaudant, J. 1985. Mise au point sur les Vertébrés inférieurs de l’Oligocène de Sieblos (Hesse, Allemagne).Comptes Rendus de l‘Academie des Sciences, Paris 300 (2): 185–188.
• Henrici, A.C. and Báez, A.M. 2001. First occurrence of Xenopus (Anura: Pipidae) on the Arabian Peninsula: a new species from the Upper Oligocene of Yemen. Journal of Paleontology 75: 870–882.
• Jones, M.E.H., Evans S.E., and Sigogneau−Russel, D. 2003. Early Cretaceous frogs from Morocco. Annals of Carnegie Museum 72: 65–97.
• Hodler, F. 1949. Untersuchungen über die Entwicklung von Sacralwirbel und Urostyl bei den Anuren. Ein Beitrag zur Deutung des anuren Amphibientypus. Revue suisse de zoologie 56: 747–756.
• Howes, G.B. 1886. On some abnormalities of the Frog's vertebral column. R. temporaria. Anatomischer Anzeiger 1: 277–281.
• Kovalenko, E.E. 1992. Anomalii pozvonočnika behvostyh amfibij. 108 pp. Izdatel'stvo Sankt Petersburgskogo Universiteta, Sankt Petersburg.
• Maus, M. and Wuttke, M. (in press). Investigations on the ontogenetical development of the tadpoles of Pelobates cf. dechenifrom the Upper Oligocene of Enspel (Westerwald/Germany). Senckenbergiana lethaea.
• Meyer, H. 1860. Frösche aus Tertiär−Gebilden Deutschland’s. Palaeontographica 7: 123–182.
• Mookerjee, H.J. and Das, S.K. 1939. Further investigations on the development of the vertebral column in Salientia (Anura). Journal of Morphology 64: 167–209.
• Nevo, E. 1968. Pipid frogs from the Early Cretaceous of Israel and pipid evolution. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 136: 255–318.
• Nieuwkoop, P.D. and Faber, J. 1967. Normal Table of Xenopus laevis (Daudin). 238 pp. North−Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
• Paicheler, J.−C., Broin, F., de, Gaudant, J., Mourer−Chauviré, C., Rage, J.−C., and Vergnaud−Grazzini, C. 1978. Le bassin lacustre Miocène de Bes−Konak(Anatolie, Turquie): géologie et introduction à la paléontologie des vertébrés. Geobios 11: 43–65.
• Peters, W. 1877. Über zwei fossile Wirbelthiere, Protobatrachus vicetinus und Hemitrichas schisticola, aus den Tertiärbildungen von Ponte bei Laverda im Vicentinischen. Monatsberichte der königlichen preussischen Akademie des Wissenschaften Berlin 1877: 678–682.
• Portis, A. 1885. Resti di Batraci fossili italiani. Atti della Accademia delle scienze di Torino 20: 1173–1201.
• Ramaswami, L.S. 1933. The vertebral column of some South Indian frogs. Current Science 1: 306.
• Reuss, A.E. 1855. Mittheilungen an Professor Bronn gerichtet. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie,Geognosie,Geologie und Petrefactenkunde 1855: 53–54.
• Ridewood, W.G. 1897. On the development of the vertebral column in Pipa and Xenopus. Anatomischer Anzeiger 13: 359–374.
• Ritland, R. 1955. Studies on the post−cranial morphology of Ascaphus truei. I. Skeleton and spinal nerves. Journal of Morphology 97: 119–178.
• Roček, Z. and Rage, J.−C. 2000. Tertiary Anura of Europe, Africa, Asia, North America, and Australia. Chapter 15. In: H. Heatwole and R.L. Carroll (eds.), Amphibian Biology. Vol. 4: Palaeontology, 1332–1387. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton, Australia.
• Sedláčková, L. 1999. Srovnání ontogenetického vývoje skeletu kuňky obecné (Bombina bombina) a kuňky žlutobřiché (Bombina variegata). 67 pp. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis. MasarykUniversity, Brno.
• Smit, A.L. 1953. The ontogenesis of the vertebral column of Xenopus laevis (Daudin) with special reference to the segmentation of the metotic region of the skull.Annals of the University of Stellenbosch A 29: 81–136.
• Špinar, Z.V. 1972. Tertiary Frogs from Central Europe. 286 pp. Academia, Prague.
• Špinar, Z.V. 1980. The discovery of a new species of pipid frog (Anura, Pipidae) in the Oligocene of Central Libya. In: M.J. Salem and M.T. Busrevil (eds.), The Geology of Libya 1, 327–348. Academic Press, London.
• Stephenson E.M. 1960. The skeletal characters of Leiopelma hamiltoni McCulloch, with particular reference to the effects of heterochrony on the genus. Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand 88 (3): 473–488.
• Stephenson, N.G. 1951. Observations on the development of the amphicoelous frogs, Leiopelma and Ascaphus. Journal of the Linnean Society, London (Zoology) 42: 18–28.
• Trueb, L. and Hanken, J. 1992. Skeletal development in Xenopus laevis (Anura: Pipidae). Journal of Morphology 214: 1–41.
• Trueb, L., Púgener, L.A., and Maglia, A.M. 2000. Ontogeny of the bizarre: An osteological description of Pipa pipa (Anura: Pipidae), with an account of skeletal development in the species. Journal of Morphology 243: 75–104.
• Vergnaud−Grazzini, C. and Hoffstetter, R. 1972. Présence de Palaeobatrachidae (Anura) dans des gisement tertiaires français. Caractérisation, distribution et affinités de la famille. Palaeovertebrata 5: 157–177.
• Wassersug, R.J. and Wake, D.B. 1995. Fossil tadpoles from the Miocene of Turkey. Alytes 12: 145–157.
• Wolterstorff, W. 1886. Ueber fossile Frösche, insbesondere das Genus Palaeobatrachus. Jahresberichte des naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins zu Magdeburg 1: 1–94.