Supplementary information Cranial ontogenetic variation in early saurischians and the role of heterochrony in the diversification of predatory dinosaurs



Download 1.17 Mb.
Page1/4
Date conversion16.05.2018
Size1.17 Mb.
  1   2   3   4
Supplementary information

Cranial ontogenetic variation in early saurischians and the role of heterochrony in the diversification of predatory dinosaurs
Christian Foth1,2,3, Brandon P. Hedrick4, Martín D. Ezcurra2,5,6
1 SNBS, Bayerische Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und Geologie, Richard Wagner-Str. 10, D-80333 München

2 Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Richard-Wagner-Str. 10, D-80333 München, Germany

3 Department of Geosciences, University of Fribourg/Freiburg, Chemin du Musée 6, 1700 Fribourg, Switzerland

4 Department of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Pennsylvania, 251 Hayden Hall, 240 S 33rd Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA

5 School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK

6 Sección Paleontología de Vertebrados, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”, Buenos Aires C1405DJR, Argentina


Content

  1. Landmark description

  2. Landmark error after Singleton (2002)

  3. Taxon sampling

  4. Comments on sliding semi-landmarks

  5. Phylogeny

  6. Additional data

  7. Influence of nasal crests on the results

  8. Influence of semi-landmarks on the results

  9. References


1. Landmark description

Table S1 List of landmarks and semi-landmark description. Semi-landmarks (semi-LMs) are marked with a ‘S’.

LMs

Description

1

Most anterior point of the premaxilla along the tooth row (This point is reconstructed for Alioramus and Zupaysaurus).

2

Contact between premaxilla and maxilla along the tooth row.

3

Contact between the maxilla and jugal along the ventral margin of the skull

4

Contact between the nasal process of the premaxilla and the anterodorsal process of the nasal along the dorsal margin of the external naris

5

Most anterior point of the antorbital fossa (in those taxa without an antorbital fossa, the most anterior point of the antorbital fenestra was marked).

6

Most anterior point of the anterior process of the lacrimal along the dorsal margin of the antorbital fenestra.

7

Most ventral point of the ventral process of the lacrimal along the posteroventral margin of the antorbital fenestra.

8

Most posterior point of the jugal process of the maxilla along the ventral margin of the antorbital fenestra.

9

Most anterior point of the jugal (Depending on the configuration of maxilla, lacrimal and jugal, the landmarks 7, 8 and 9 can be similarly located).

10

Contact between the ventral process of the lacrimal and the jugal along the anteroventral margin of the orbit.

11

Contact between the jugal and the postorbital along the posterior margin of the orbit.

12

Most dorsal point of the anterior process of the postorbital along the posterodorsal margin of the orbit.

13

Contact between the jugal and the postorbital along the anterior margin of the lateral temporal fenestra.

14

Ventral contact between postorbital and squamosal along the dorsal margin of the lateral temporal fenestra.

15

Contact between the descending process of the squamosal with the quadratojugal along the posterior margin of the lateral temporal fenestra (For those taxa, where these bones do not contact to each other, e.g. the juvenile Coelophysis, the most anteroventral point of the descending process of the squamosal was marked.

16

Contact between jugal and quadratojugal along the ventral margin of the lateral temporal fenestra.

17

Dorsal contact between postorbital and squamosal.



18

Contact between the descending process of the squamosal with the quadratojugal along the posterior margin of the skull (For those taxa, where these bones do not contact to each other, e.g. the juvenile Coelophysis, the most posteroventral point of the descending process of the squamosal was marked.



19

Posteroventral corner of the quadratojugal.

S20-S22

Three semi-LMs on the ventral margin of the maxilla from LM 2 to LM 3.

S23-S27

Five semi-LMs along the narial margin starting and ending in LM 4.

S28-S30

Three semi-LMs along the anterior margin of the antorbital fenestra from LM 6 to LM 8.

S31

One semi-LM along the posterior margin of the antorbital fenestra from LM 6 to LM 7.

S32

One semi-LM along the ventral margin of the orbit from LM 10 to LM 11.

S33-S36

Four semi-LMs along the anterodorsal margin of the orbit from LM 10 to LM 12.

S37-S39

Three semi-LMs along the posterodorsal margin of the orbit from LM 12 to LM 11.

S40

One semi-LM along the anterodorsal margin of the lateral temporal fenestra from LM 13 to LM 14.

S41-S42

Two semi-LMs along the posterodorsal margin of the lateral temporal fenestra from LM 14 to LM 15.

S43-S44

Two semi-LMs along the posteroventral margin of the lateral temporal fenestra from LM 15 to LM 16.

S45-S46

Two semi-LMs along the anteroventral margin of the lateral temporal fenestra from LM 16 to LM 13.

S47-S48

Two semi-LMs along the ventral margin of the skull from LM 3 to LM 19.

S49-S50

Two semi-LMs along the posterior margin of the quadratojugal from LM 19 to LM 18.

51

Most posterior point of the descending process of the maxilla contacting the nasal and/or the lacrimal.

S52-S56

Five semi-LMs along the anterodorsal margin of the maxilla from LM 2 to LM 51.

S57-S71

Fifteen semi-LMs along the dorsal margin of the skull from LM 1 to LM 18.




Figure S1 Illustration of the landmarks and semi-landmarks positions on the skull of Sciurumimus albersdoerferi. Landmarks are shown as red dots, while semi-landmarks are marked with a ‘S’ and are shown as yellow dots.


2. Landmark error after Singleton (2002)

The percent error for digitizing landmarks and semi-landmarks by hand was estimated for the skull reconstruction of the juvenile Coelophysis (with n = 10 repetitions) using the method described by Singleton (2002). On the basis of the Procrustes coordinates the mean Procrustes distances to the respective consensus coordinates of each landmark were calculated. Then the relation of these distances to the mean distance of the consensus landmarks to the centroid of the consensus shape was calculated as a percentage of the former from the latter. Landmark and semi-landmark error varies between 0.117 percent (LM 51) and 0.738 percent (LM 3) with a mean of 0.283 percent, having no significant effect on shape analyses.


Table S2 Percent error for each landmark for the skull of the juvenile specimens of Coelophysis with n = 10.

(semi-)LMs

%Error

(semi-)LMs

%Error

(semi-)LMs

%Error

1

0.28511

S25

0.41778

S49

0.38979

2

0.25529

S26

0.34182

S50

0.73158

3

0.73792

S27

0.43597

51

0.11650

4

0.30159

S28

0.21879

S52

0.23100

5

0.17860

S29

0.28964

S53

0.20120

6

0.26985

S30

0.24673

S54

0.17211

7

0.24677

S31

0.29661

S55

0.19311

8

0.26012

S32

0.40849

S56

0.20648

9

0.16171

S33

0.26439

S57

0.20882

10

0.29555

S34

0.21973

S58

0.22091

11

0.35026

S35

0.15236

S59

0.23261

12

0.26430

S36

0.16457

S60

0.16824

13

0.28801

S37

0.25899

S61

0.18348

14

0.42348

S38

0.22989

S62

0.22272

15

0.19567

S39

0.26141

S63

0.21164

16

0.30716

S40

0.25160

S64

0.15887

17

0.27963

S41

0.26707

S65

0.23221

18

0.24562

S42

0.25013

S66

0.20976

19

0.20556

S43

0.65251

S67

0.19035

S20

0.27621

S44

0.24868

S68

0.20543

S21

0.36408

S45

0.20666

S69

0.27989

S22

0.50359

S46

0.26769

S70

0.22417

S23

0.32357

S47

0.52043

S71

0.27301

S24

0.35938

S48

0.38044

MEAN

0.28303

3. Taxon sampling

Table S3 List of taxa used in the present analyses with data of occurrences (in million of years, Myr) and sources of images. Bold taxa mark ontogenetic series used for the study.

Taxa




Age (Myr)

Source

Eoraptor

Sauropodomorpha

228.95

Sereno, Martínez & Alcober, 2013

Pampadromaeus

Sauropodomorpha

228.95

Cabreira et al., 2011

Unaysaurus

Sauropodomorpha

222.45

Leal et al., 2004

Melanorosaurus

Sauropodomorpha

214.15

Yates, 2007

Plateosaurus

Sauropodomorpha

209.65

Yates, 2003

Jingshanosaurus

Sauropodomorpha

200.30

Yates, 2012

Massospondylus


Sauropodomorpha


196.05


Gow, Kitching & Raath, 1990; Reisz et al., 2010

Adeopapposaurus

Sauropodomorpha

187.70

Martínez, 2009

Shunosaurus

Sauropodomorpha

166.90

Rauhut et al., 2011

Mamenchisaurus

Sauropodomorpha

160.40

Ouyang & Ye, 2002

Herrerasaurus

basal Theropoda

228.95

Nesbitt, 2011

Tawa

basal Theropoda

209.50

Nesbitt, 2011

Zupaysaurus

basal Theropoda

216.00

modified after Ezcurra, 2007

Coelophysis

basal Theropoda

209.50

Nesbitt, 2011; own reconstruction

Syntarsus

basal Theropoda

191.00

Tykoski, 2005

Limusaurus

Ceratosauria

160.40

Xu et al., 2009

Carnotaurus

Ceratosauria

77.85

Rauhut, 2003

Majungasaurus

Ceratosauria

69.05

Sampson & Witmer, 2007

Megalosaurid taxon

basal Tetanurae

166.2

Allain 2002; own reconstruction

Monolophosaurus

basal Tetanurae

164.80

Rauhut, 2003

Sinraptor

basal Tetanurae

160.40

Currie & Zhao, 1993

Allosaurus

basal Tetanurae

151.15

Loewen, 2009

Acrocanthosaurus

basal Tetanurae

118.52

Eddy & Clarke, 2011

Spinosaurid taxon

basal Tetanurae

127.73

Rauhut, 2003

Haplocheirus

Coelurosauria

160.40

own reconstruction

Compsognathus

Coelurosauria

148.55

Peyer, 2006

Dilong

Coelurosauria

126.23

own reconstruction

Erlikosaurus

Coelurosauria

92.05

Rauhut, 2003

Garudimimus


Coelurosauria


92.05


Makovicky, Kobayashi & Currie, 2004

Teratophoneus

Coelurosauria

77.05

Loewen et al., 2013

Gorgosaurus

Coelurosauria

77.05

Carr, 1999

Daspletosaurus

Coelurosauria

77.05

Rauhut, 2003

Tarbosaurus


Coelurosauria


74.8


Hurum & Sabbath, 2003; modified after Tsuihiji et al., 2011

Tyrannosaurus

Coelurosauria

74.75

Carr & Williamson, 2004

Alioramus

Coelurosauria

69.05

Brusatte et al., 2009

4. Comments on sliding semi-landmarks

To test the influence of sliding semi-landmarks during general Procrustes analysis (GPA) semi-landmarks were slid in tpsRelW (Rohlf, 2003) to minimize the bending energy and the Procrustes distance, both with a maximal iteration of ten. Afterwards, the resulting Procrustes shapes were compared with that of the regular GPA. The example at hand shows the results for the alignment for the skull of the juvenile Massospondylus. The minimization of the bending energy results on artificial elongation of the external naris and the formation of a frontal “crest”-like structure in front of the orbit, while the minimization of the Procrustes distance leads to deformation of the narial shape, the shape of the orbit and the shape of the skull roof in the postorbital region. As these artificial shape alignments affected several taxa within the data set (e.g. Carnotaurus, Compsognathus, Mamenchisaurus, Shunosaurus, Syntarsus), we decided to treat the semi-landmarks as landmarks. However, to appraise the influence of the semi-landmarks in the original data set, we repeated the shape analyses with a second data set containing only landmark information and compared it with the original results.



  1   2   3   4


The database is protected by copyright ©dentisty.org 2016
send message

    Main page