Combined otolith morphology and morphometry for assessing taxonomy and diversity in fossil and extant killifish (Aphanius, †Prolebias)
Combined otolith morphology and morphometry for assessing taxonomy and diversity in fossil and extant killifish (Aphanius, †Prolebias)
复制标题
结合耳石形态和形态测量来评估化石和现存鳉鱼（Aphanius，†Prolebias）的分类和多样性
DOI：
10.1002/jmor.10561
复制
发表时间：
2007
影响因子：
1.5
通讯作者：
Nora Fenske
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Reichenbacher;U. Sienknecht;H. Küchenhoff;Nora Fenske
化石耳石的系统分配实际上总是基于对耳石形态的研究以及随后与收集和/或文献中的耳石的比较。虽然这通常是一种实用的方法，但比较和随后的评估可能会受到个人描述中使用的主观标准的影响。在渔业研究中，以现存鱼类耳石形态变化为重点的定量形态计量学研究主要基于傅立叶形状分析及相关方法。然而，对于化石耳石，这些方法通常不适用，主要是由于与保存有关的问题。在此，我们提出了一种新的耳石定量方法，该方法可以用于现有和化石的耳石定量分析，以确定Aphanius Nardo属和†Prolebias Sauvage属的鳉鱼（cyprinodontiforms）种和种群之间的耳石差异。我们的新方法包括从耳石的线性和角度测量和统计分析中定义10个变量。根据耳沟形状（直、弯、S形）将耳石分为三组，获得最佳效果。在这种情况下，典型判别分析（CDA）与jackknifed交叉验证的总体物种分类成功率为86-96%。基于沟形的三个类群根据动物地理模式（即地中海Aphanius，阿拉伯Aphanius，欧洲†Prolebias）分开，可能反映了系统发育谱系。应用CDA比较种群间耳石变异，总体分类成功率（jackknifed）为33-83%。异径棘球蜂和†麦氏Prolebias malzi变异较大，而筋膜棘球蜂和†棘球蜂变异较小。weileri。我们认为，人群之间的耳石差异主要是由地理分离造成的。定性特征（沟形态）与定量方法（耳石形态）的结合为更好地了解化石和现存鳉鱼的分类、多样性和动物地理学提供了新的途径。此外，该方法也可能适用于评估其他物种丰富的类群的分类和多样性，如atheriniforms和许多perciforms，因为这些类群的耳石bauplan与在鳉鱼中看到的相似。j . Morphol。, 2007年。©2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc。
Systematic assignment of fossil otoliths is virtually always based on studies of otolith morphology and subsequent comparisons with otoliths from collections and/or literature. Although this usually represents a practical method, comparisons and subsequent evaluation may be biased by subjective criteria used in the individual descriptions. Quantitative morphometric studies focusing on variations in the otolith morphology of extant fishes have been conducted in fisheries research, mostly based on Fourier shape analysis and related methods. However, with regard to fossil otoliths, these approaches are generally not suitable, mainly due to preservation‐related problems. Here we present a new approach for quantifying otolith variation between species and populations of killifish (cyprinodontiforms) in the genera Aphanius Nardo and †Prolebias Sauvage that can be used with both extant and fossil otoliths. Our new approach includes the definition of 10 variables from linear and angle measurements of an otolith and statistical analyses. Best results were obtained by presorting the otoliths into three groups based on sulcus shape (straight, bent, S‐shaped). In this case, canonical discriminant analysis (CDA) with jackknifed cross‐validation yielded an overall species classification success of 86–96%. The three groups based on sulcus shape separate according to zoogeographic patterns (i.e., Mediterranean Aphanius, Arabian Aphanius, European †Prolebias) and probably reflect phylogenetic lineages. Application of CDA to compare otolith variation between populations resulted in an overall classification success (jackknifed) of 33–83%. High levels of variation were observed for Aphanius dispar and †Prolebias malzi, but not for A. fasciatus and †P. weileri. We suggest that otolith variation between populations results predominantly from geographic separation. Combination of qualitative characters (sulcus morphology) with quantitative approaches (otolith morphometry) presents a new approach for obtaining a better understanding of the taxonomy, diversity, and zoogeography of both fossil and extant killifishes. Moreover, the method may also be suitable for assessing taxonomy and diversity in other species‐rich groups like the atheriniforms and many perciforms because these groups display otolith Bauplans that are similar to those seen in killifishes. J. Morphol., 2007. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.