Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:34:15.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XII.—The Postcranial Skeleton of Rhipidistian Fishes Excluding Eusthenopteron*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

S. Mahala Andrews  and
T. Stanley Westoll
S. Mahala Andrews
Affiliation:
Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh
T. Stanley Westoll
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Synopsis

In a previous paper (Andrews and Westoll 1970) the postcranial skeleton of the best known rhipidistian, Eusthenopteron, was described, and its bearing on the origin of the tetrapod postcranial skeleton discussed. The postcranial remains of other Rhipidistia are now described as far as they are known, and comparisons are made with Eusthenopteron and other forms where relevant. Possible modes of function are considered in relation to the habitats in which these fishes may have lived. These studies have made it necessary to revise rhipidistian classification; the Family Rhizodontidae is re-defined and placed alone in a third Order of Rhipidistia (the Rhizodontida, alongside the better known Osteolepidida and Holoptychiida). Fresh insight has been gained into the following morphological problems: the composition of the osteolepid ring-like centrum, the origin of the tetrapod scapular blade and the diphyletic origin of the tetrapods.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 68 , Issue 12 , 1970 , pp. 391 - 489
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Agassiz, L., 1833–1844. Recherches sur les Poissons Fossiles. Vol. II. Neuchatel et Soleure.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, S. M., and Westoll, T. S., 1970. “The Postcranial Skeleton of Eusthenopteron foordi Whiteaves”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb., 68, 207–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arambourg, C., 1958. “Sous-Classe des Crossopterygiens. Formes Fossiles.” In Grassé, J-P., Ed., Traité de Zoologie, 13, (3), 2541–2552. Paris: Masson.Google Scholar
Ball, H. W., Dineley, D. L., and White, E. I., 1961. “The Old Red Sandstone of Brown Clee Hill and the Adjacent Area”, Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist., (Geol.), 5, 177–310, pl. 33–18.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P., 1873. Illustrated Guide to the Fish, Amphibian, Reptilian and supposed. Mammalian remains of the Northumberland Carboniferous Strata. London: Hutchings.Google Scholar
Berg, L. S., 1940. “A Classification of Fishes, both living and fossil”, Trudy Zool. Inst., Leningr., 5, 85–517 (Russian and English).Google Scholar
Berg, L. S., 1955. “Systema Ryboobraznyk i Ryb, Nyne zhivynstchich i iskopayemych”, Trudy Zool. Inst., Leningr., 20, 1–286.Google Scholar
Birks, S. G., 1914. “Megalichthys: A study incorporating the results of work on previously undescribed material”, Trans. Nat. Hist. Soc. Northumb., 4, 308–330, pl. XII–XVI.Google Scholar
Broom, R., 1913. “On the Origin of the Cheiropterygium”, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 32, 459–464.Google Scholar
Bystrow, A. P., 1944. “Kotlassia prima Amalitzky”, Bull. Geol. Soc. Am., 55, 379–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bystrow, A. P., and Efremov, J. A., 1940. “Benthosuchus sushkini Efr.—A labyrinthodont from the Eotriassic of Sharzhenga River”, Trudy Paleont. Inst., 10, 1–152.Google Scholar
Cope, E. D., 1889. “Synopsis of the Families of Vertebrata”, Am. Nat., 23, 849–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cope, E. D., 1891. “On the Characters of Some Palæozoic Fishes. Part V. On the Paired Fins of Megalichthys nitidus Cope”, Proc. U.S. Natn. Mus., 14, 447–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, B., 1906. “Notes on the Living Specimens of the Australian lungfish, Ceratodus forsteri, in the Zoological Society's collection”, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1, 168–178, pl. IX.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denison, R. H., 1968 a. “Early Devonian lungfishes from Wyoming, Utah and Idaho”, Fieldiana: Geol., 17, 353–413.Google Scholar
Denison, R. H., 1968 b. “The Evolutionary Significance of the Earliest Known Lungfish, Uranolophus”. In Ørvig, T., Ed., Current Problems of Lower Vertebrate Phylogeny, 4th Nobel Symp., June 1967, 247–257. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar
Eastman, C. R., 1917. “Fossil Fishes in the Collection of the United States National Museum”, Proc. U.S. Natn. Mus., 52, 235–304, pl. I–XXIII.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egerton P., de M. G., 1861. “Tristichopterus alatus”. In Figures and Descriptions Illustrative of British Organic Remains. Mem. Geol. Surv. U.K., Decade X, 51–55, pl. 4–5.Google Scholar
Goodrich, E. S., 1930. Studies on the Structure and Development of Vertebrates. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, W. K., 1911. “The Limbs of Eryops and the Origin of Paired Limbs from Fins”, Science, N.Y., 33, 508–509.Google Scholar
Gregory, W. K., 1915. “Present Status of the Problem of the Origin of the Tetrapoda, with special reference to the skull and paired limbs”, Ann. NY. Acad. Sci., 26, 317–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, W. K., 1935 a. “Reduplication in Evolution”, Q. Rev. Biol., 10, 272–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, W. K., 1935 b. “Further Observations on the Pectoral Girdle and Fin of Sauripterus taylori Hall, a crossopterygian fish from the Upper Devonian of Pennsylvania, with special reference to the origin of the pentadactylate extremities of Tetrapoda”, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., 75, 673–690.Google Scholar
Gregory, W. K., 1949. “The Humerus from Fish to Man”, Am. Mus. Novit., 1400, 1–54.Google Scholar
Gregory, W. K., 1951. Evolution Emerging. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gregory, W. K., Miner, R. W., and Noble, G. K., 1923. “The Carpus of Eryops, and the Structure of the Primitive Chiropterygium”, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 48, 279–288.Google Scholar
Gregory, W. K., and Raven, H. C., 1941. “Studies on the Origin and Early Evolution of Paired Fins and Limbs”, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 42, 273–360.Google Scholar
Gregory, W. K., Rockwell, H., and Evans, F. G., 1939. “Structure of the Vertebral Column in Eusthenopteron foordi Whiteaves”, J. Paleont., 13, 126–129.Google Scholar
Gross, W., 1936. “Beiträge zur Osteologie baltischer und rheinischer Devon-Crossopterygier”, Paläont. Z., 18, 129–155, pl. 7–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, J., 1843. Natural History of New York. Part IV. Geology Comprising the Survey of the Fourth Geological District. New York.Google Scholar
Hancock, A., and Atthey, T., 1868. “Notes on the Remains of Some Reptiles and Fishes from the Shales of the Northumberland Coal Field”, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 1, 1–46, pl. XIV–XVI.Google Scholar
Hancock, A., and Atthey, T., 1871. “Note on an Undescribed Fossil Fish from the Newsham Coal Shale, near Newcastle upon Tyne”, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 7, 73–83, pl. VI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J. E., 1938. “The Role of the Fins in the Equilibrium of the Swimming Fish. II. The Role of the Pelvic Fins”, J. Exp. Biol., 15, 32–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbert, S., 1835. “On the Freshwater Limestone of Burdiehouse in the Neighbourhood of Edinburgh belonging to the Carboniferous Group of Rocks. With supplementary notes on other Freshwater Limestones”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb., 13, 169–282, pl. V-XII.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmgren, N., 1933. “On the Origin of the Tetrapod Limb”, Acta Zool., Stockh., 14, 185–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmgren, N., 1940. “Studies on the Head in Fishes. Part I. Development of the Skull in Sharks and Rays”, Acta Zool., Stockh., 21, 51–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussakof, L., 1908. “Catalogue of the Type and Figured Specimens of Fossil Vertebrates in the American Museum of Natural History. Part I. Fishes”, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 25, 1–103.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1937. “On the Species of Eusthenopteron found in Russia and the Baltic States”, Bull. Geol. Instn Univ. Upsala, 27, 63–127.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1942. “On the Structure of the Snout of Crossopterygians and Lower Gnathostomes in General”, Zool. Bidr. Upps., 21, 235–675.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1944. “On the Exoskeletal Shoulder-girdle of Teleostomian Fishes, with special reference to Eusthenopteron foordi Whiteaves”, K. Svenska Vetensk-Akad. Handl., 21, (7), 1–32.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1948 a. “On the Morphology and Taxonomy of the Middle Devonian Osteolepid Fishes of Scotland”, K. Svenska Vetensk-Akad. Handl., 25, (1), 1–301, pl. 1–37.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1948 b. “Note on the Upper Devonian Vertebrate Fauna of East Greenland and on the Age of the Ichthyostegid Stegocephalians”, Ark. Zool., 41A, (13), 1–8.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1948 c. “On the Middle Devonian Crossopterygians from the Hornelen Field in Western Norway”, Univ. Bergen Årb., (Nat. rek.), 8, 1–48, pl. 1–8.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1950. “Middle Devonian Vertebrates from Canning Land and Wegeners Halvö (East Greenland). Part II. Crossopterygii”, Meddr. Grønland, 96, (4), 1–132, pl. 1–24.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1952. “On the Fish-like Tail in the Ichthyostegid Stegocephalians”, Medr Grønland, 114, (12), 1–90, pl. 1–21.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1955. “The Oldest Tetrapods and Their Forerunners”, Scient. Mon., N.Y., 80, 141–154.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1959. “Dermal Fin-rays and Holmgren's Principle of Delamination”, K. Svenska Vetensk-Akad. Handl., 6, (1), 1–51, pl. 1–4.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1960. Théories de l'Évolution des Vertébrés, reconsidérées à la lumière des Récentes Découvertes sur les Vertébrés Inférieures. Paris: Masson.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1962. “Les Porolépiformes et l'Origine des Urodèles”, Colloques Int. Cent. Natn. Rech. Scient., 104, 87–101.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1963. “The Composition of the Intermandibular Division of the Head in Fish and Tetrapods and the Diphyletic Origin of the Tetrapod Tongue”, K. Svenska Vetensk-Akad. Handl., 9, (1), 1–74.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1964, “Specialisations in Early Vertebrates”, Annls Soc. Roy. Zool. Belg., 94, 11–95.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1965. “Die Raspelzunge der Cyclostomen und die pentadactyle Extremität der Tetrapoden als Beweise für monophyletische Herkunft”, Zool. Am., 175, 101–143.Google Scholar
Jarvik, E., 1966. “Remarks on the Structure of the Snout in Megalichthys and Certain Other Rhipidistid Cross-opterygians”, Ark. Zool., 19, 41–98, pl. 1–5.Google Scholar
Jessen, H., 1966. “Die Crossopterygier des Oberen Plattenkalkes (Devon) der Bergisch-Gladbach—Paffrather Mulde (Rheinisches Schiefergebirge) unter Berücksichtigung von amerikanischem und europäischem Onychodus-Material”, Ark. Zool., 18, 305–389, pl. 1–22.Google Scholar
Jollie, M., 1962. Chordate Morphology. New York: Reinhold.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulczycki, J., 1960. “Porolepis (Crossopterygii) from the Lower Devonian of the Holy Cross Mountains”, Acta Palaeont. Pol., 5, 65–101, pl. I–VI.Google Scholar
Marshall, N. B., 1965. The Life of Fishes. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Miall, L. C., 1875. “On the Structure of the Skull of Rhizodus”, Q. Jl Geol. Soc. Lond., 31, 624–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miall, L. C., 1885. Description of the Remains of Megalichthys in the Leeds Museum. Leeds: Phil. Lit. Soc.Google Scholar
Miller, H., 1841. The Old Red Sandstone. London.Google Scholar
Miller, H., 1849. Foot-prints of the Creator: or, the Asterolepis of Stromness. London: Johnstone and Hunter.Google Scholar
Miner, R. W., 1925. “The Pectoral Limb of Eryops and Other Primitive Tetrapods”, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 51, 145–312.Google Scholar
Moy-Thomas, J. A., 1935. “Notes on the Types of Fossil Fishes in the Leeds City Museum. II. Acanthodii, Dipnoi, and Crossopterygii”, Proc. Leeds Phil. Lit. Soc., (Sci. Sect.), 3, 111–116.Google Scholar
Moy-Thomas, J. A., 1939. Palaeozoic Fishes. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Newberry, J. S., 1889. “The Paleozoic Fishes of North America”, Monogr. U.S. Geol. Surv., 16, 1–340, pl. 1–53.Google Scholar
Owen, R., 1860. Palaeontology, or a Systematic Summary of Extinct Animals and their Geological Relations, Edinburgh: Black.Google Scholar
Panchen, A. L., 1967. “The Homologies of the Labyrinthodont Centrum”, Evolution, N.Y., 21, 24–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parrington, F. R., 1967. “The Vertebrae of Early Tetrapods”, Colloques Int. Cent. Natn. Rech. Scient., 163, 269–279.Google Scholar
Parsons, T., and Williams, E. E., 1963. “The Relationships of the Modern Amphibia; a Re-examination”, Q. Rev. Biol., 38, 26–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, D. H., 1963. “The Achanarras Limestone of the Middle Old Red Sandstone, Caithness, Scotland”, Proc. Yorks. Geol. Soc., 34, 117–138, pl. 17–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, A. S., 1922. “The Locomotor Apparatus of Certain Primitive and Mammal-like Reptiles”, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 46, 517–606, pl. XXVII–XLVI.Google Scholar
Romer, A. S., 1945. Vertebrate Paleontology. (2nd Edn.), University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Romer, A. S., 1966. Vertebrate Paleontology. (3rd Edn.), University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Romer, A. S., and Byrne, F., 1931. “The pes of Diadectes: Notes on the Primitive Limb”, Palaeobiologica, 4, 24–48.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, B., 1967. “Osteichthyan Vertebrae”, J. Linn. Soc. (Zool.), 47, 185–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, B., and Rosen, D. E., 1961. “Major Adaptive Levels in the Evolution of the Actinopterygian Feeding Mechanism”, Am. Zool., 1, 187–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, B. G., 1912. “The Embryology of Cryptobranchus allegheniensis, including comparisons with some other vertebrates. II. General Embryonic and Larval Development, with special reference to external features”, J. Morph., 23, 455–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, K. S., 1962. “Rhipidistian Classification in Relation to the Origin of Tetrapods”, Breviora, 117, 1–12.Google Scholar
Thomson, K. S., 1965. “The Endocranium and Associated Structures in the Middle Devonian rhipidistian fish, Osteolepis”, Proc. Linn. Soc. Lond., 176, 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, K. S., 1966 a. “Megalichthys and Rhizodus (Pisces, Rhipidistia): Proposal for the Stabilization of these Generic Names”, Bull. Zool. Norn., 23, 117–120.Google Scholar
Thomson, K. S., 1966 b. “Glyptolepis from the Middle Devonian of Scotland”, Postilla, 99, 1–10.Google Scholar
Thomson, K. S., 1968. “A New Devonian Fish (Crossopterygii: Rhipidistia) considered in Relation to the Origin of the Amphibia”, Postilla, 124, 1–13.Google Scholar
Thomson, K. S., 1969. “The Biology of the Lobe-finned Fishes”, Biol. Rev., 44, 91–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, K. S., and Hahn, K. V., 1968. “Growth and Form in Fossil Rhipidistian Fishes (Crossopterygii)”, J. Zool., Lond., 156, 199–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, K. S., and Vaughn, P. P., 1968. “Vertebral Structure in Rhipidistia (Osteichthyes, Crossopterygii) with Description of a new Permian Genus”, Postilla, 127, 1–19.Google Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1875 a. “On the Structure and Affinities of Tristichopterus alatus Egerton”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb., 27, 383–396, pl. XXXII.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1875 b. “On Some Fossil Fishes from the Neighbourhood of Edinburgh”, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 15, 258–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1877. “On the Structure of the Lower Jaw in Rhizodopsis and Rhizodus”, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 19, 299–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1878. “On the Genus Rhizodus”, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb., 9, 657–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1881. “On the Cranial Osteology of Rhizodopsis”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb., 30, 167–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1884. “Remarks on the Genus Megalichthys (Agassiz), with Description of a New Species”, Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. Edinb., 8, 67–77.Google Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1890. “Notes on the Devonian Fishes of Scaumenac Bay and Campbelltown in Canada”, Geol. Mag., 7, 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H., 1895. “Extinct Vertebrate Animals of the Moray Firth Area”. In Harvie-Brown, J. A. and Buckley, T. E., A Vertebrate Fauna of the Moray Basin, 2, 235–285. Edinburgh: Constable.Google Scholar
Vorobjeva, E. I., 1962. “Rizodontnye Kisteperye Ryby Glavnogo Devonskogo Polya SSSR”, Trudy Paleont. Inst., 94, 1–108, pl. I–XXVIII. (English Translation by N. L. L., No. RTS 3911, “Rhizodont Crossopterygian Fishes from the Main Devonian Area of the USSR.”)Google Scholar
Vorobjeva, E. I., and Obruchev, D. V., 1964. “Podklass Sarcopterygii”. In Osnovy Paleontologii. Tom: Beschelyustnye i Ryby, 267–322, Moscow.Google Scholar
Ward, J., 1890. “The Geological Features of the North Staffordshire Coal Fields, their Organic Remains, their Range and Distribution; with a catalogue of the fossils of the Carboniferous System of North Staffordshire”, Trans. N. Staffs. Inst. Min. Mech. Engrs., 10, 1–189, pl. 1–9.Google Scholar
Waterston, C. D., 1954. “Catalogue of Type and Figured Specimens of Fossil Fishes and Amphibians in the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh, Trans. Edinb. Geol. Soc., 16, 1–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. M. S., 1917. “The Evolution of the Tetrapod Shoulder Girdle and Forelimb”, J. Anat., 52, 1–63.Google ScholarPubMed
Watson, D. M. S., 1926. “The Evolution and Origin of the Amphibia”, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., B, 214, 189–257.Google Scholar
Watson, D. M. S., 1935. “Fossil Fishes in the Orcadian Old Red Sandstone”. In Wilson, G. V., The Geology of the Orkneys. Mem. Geol. Surv. U.K., 157–169.Google Scholar
Watson, D. M. S., and Day, H., 1916. “Notes on Some Palaeozoic Fishes”, Mem. Proc. Manchr Lit. Phil. Soc., 60, 1–52, pl. I–III.Google Scholar
Westoll, T. S., 1937. “The Old Red Sandstone Fishes of the North of Scotland, Particularly of Orkney and Shetland, Proc. Geol. Ass., 48, 13–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westoll, T. S., 1940. “Contribution to discussion on the boundary between the Old Red Sandstone and the Carboniferous” Rep. Br. Ass. Advmt Sci., 1, 258.Google Scholar
Westoll, T. S., 1943. “The Origin of the Tetrapods”, Biol. Rev., 18, 78–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westoll, T. S., 1951. “The Vertebrate-bearing Strata of Scotland”, Int. Geol. Congr., 18, (9), 5–21.Google Scholar
Whiteaves, J. F., 1881. “On Some Remarkable Fossil Fishes from the Devonian Rocks of Scaumenac Bay, P. Q. with descriptions of a new Genus and three New Species”, Can. Nat. 10, 27–35.Google Scholar
Williams, E. E., 1959. “Gadow's Arcualia and the Development of Tetrapod Vertebrae”, Q. Rev. Biol., 34, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williamson, W. C., 1837. “Fossil Salmon”, Phil. Mag., 11, 300, pl. II.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. S., 1890. “Vertebrate Palaeontology in Some American and Canadian Museums”, Geol. Mag., 7, 390–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, A. S., 1891. Catalogue of the Fossil Fishes in the British Museum. 2, London: Br. Mus. Nat. Hist.Google Scholar
Young, J., 1866. “Notice of New Genera of Carboniferous Glyptodipterines”, Q. Jl Geol. Soc. Lond., 22, 596–608.Google Scholar