Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T11:46:47.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recognizing species of Late Cenozoic Scleractinia and their evolutionary patterns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2017

Ann F. Budd  and
Kenneth G. Johnson
Ann F. Budd
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242
Kenneth G. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Applied Geology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, United Kingdom
Get access

Abstract

New morphometric methods for distinguishing morphologically similar species of Recent colonial scleractinian corals involve the analysis of three dimensional landmarks digitized on calical surfaces. Variables suitable for multivariate statistical analysis are derived from the landmark data by applying various geometrical techniques, including Bookstein size and shape coordinates and generalized resistant fitting. Cluster analyses of these variables and study of the relative positions of replicates from the same colony on the resulting dendrograms are used to recognize clusters of colonies representing morphospecies. Comparisons with the results of genetic analyses on the same specimens suggest that these morphospecies correspond closely with biological species.

Although slightly less effective, similar analyses of two dimensional landmark data collected on thin sections of the same specimens also distinguish species, and suggest that biological species can be approximated in the fossil record. Multivariate statistical analyses show that variables derived from two dimensional landmarks can be used to trace the stratigraphic ranges of these fossil species. The appropriate method for tracing ranges depends of the evenness of sampling in different geologic horizons. Preliminary comparisons of observed stratigraphic ranges determined by this approach with those determined by cladistic analysis suggest that overall patterns in evolutionary rates through geologic time are the same for both approaches. Thus, nontraditional morphologic characters determined by subsequent examination of morphometrically-defined species have potential for providing sufficient resolution for phylogenetic analysis.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Paleontological Society Papers , Volume 1: Paleobiology and Biology of Corals , October 1996 , pp. 59 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by The Paleontological Society 

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

Bookstein, F. L. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 435 p.Google Scholar
Brakel, W. H. 1977. Corallite variation in Porites and the species problem in corals. Proceedings of the 3rd International Coral Reef Symposium, Miami, 1:457–462.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F. 1990. Longterm patterns of morphological variation within and among species of reef-corals and their relationship to sexual reproduction. Systematic Botany, 15:150–165.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F. 1993. Variation within and among morphospecies of Montastraea. Courier Forschungs-institut Senckenberg, 164:241–254.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F., Bosellini, F., and Stemann, T. A. In press a. Systematics of the Oligocene to Miocene reef coral Tarbellastraea (Aquitaine Basin, western Mediterranean, and central Paratethys). Palaeontology.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F., and Coates, A. G. 1992. Non-progressive evolution in a clade of Cretaceous Montastraea-like corals. Paleobiology, 18:425–446.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F., Johnson, K. G., and Potts, D. C. 1994a. Recognizing morphospecies in colonial reef corals: 1. Landmark-based methods. Paleobiology, 20:484–505.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F., Johnson, K. G., and Stemann, T. A. In press b. Plio-Pleistocene turnover and extinctions in the Caribbean reef coral fauna. In Jackson, J. B. C., Budd, A. F., and Coates, A. G. (eds.), Evolution and Environment in Tropical America. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F., Stemann, T. A., and Johnson, K. G. 1994b. Stratigraphic distributions of genera and species of Neogene to Recent Caribbean reef corals. Journal of Paleontology, 68:951–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheetham, A. H. 1986. Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: rates of morphometric change within and across species boundaries. Paleobiology, 12: 190–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, A. B. 1979. Phenotypic plasticity in the reef corals Montastraea annularis (Ellis & Solander) and Siderastrea siderea (Ellis & Solander). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 39:25–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, A. B. 1980. Environmental variation in skeletal morphology within the Caribbean reef corals Montastraea annularis and Siderastrea siderea. Bulletin of Marine Science, 30:678–709.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. B. C., and Cheetham, A. H. 1990. Evolutionary significance of morphospecies: a test with cheilostome Bryozoa. Science, 248:579–583.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, K. G., and Budd, A. F. In press. Three-dimensional landmark techniques for the recognition of reef coral species. In Marcus, L. F., Corti, M., Loy, A., Slice, D., and Naylor, G. (eds.), Advances in Morphometrics. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
Johnson, K. G. and Stemann, T. A. 1995. Extinction selectivity and ecology of Neogene Caribbean reef corals. Paleobiology 21:52–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klecka, W. R. 1980. Discriminant Analysis. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, Calif., 70 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knowlton, N. 1993. Sibling species in the sea. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 24:189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knowlton, N. and Jackson, J. B. C. 1994. New taxonomy and niche partitioning on coral reefs: jack of all trades or master of some? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 9:7–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Knowlton, N. and Weigt, L. A. In press. Species of marine invertebrates: a comparison of the biological and phylogenetic species concepts. In Claridge, M. F., Dawah, H. A., and Wilson, M. R. (eds.), Species: the Units of Biodiversity. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
Knowlton, N., Weil, E., Weigt, L. A., and Guzman, H. M. 1992. Sibling species in Montastraea annularis, coral bleaching, and the coral climate record. Science, 255:330–333.Google ScholarPubMed
Potts, D. C., Budd, A. F., and Garthwaite, R. L. 1993. Soft tissue vs. skeletal approaches to species recognition and phylogeny reconstruction in corals. Courier Forschungs-institut Senckenberg, 164:221–231.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. 1994. Systematics and the Fossil Record: Documenting Evolutionary Patterns. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 223 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swofford, D. L. 1993. PAUP: Phylogenetic Analysis using Parsimony, Version 3.1. Computer program distributed by the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.Google Scholar
Vaughan, T. W. 1918. Some shoal-water corals from Murray Island, Cocos-Keeling Islands, and Fanning Island. Papers of the Department of Marine Biology, Carnegie Institute of Washington, 9:49–234.Google Scholar
Veron, J. E. N. 1995. Corals in Space and Time: the Biogeography and Evolution of the Scleractinia. UNSW Press, Sydney, Australia, 321 p.Google Scholar
Veron, J. E. N. and Pichon, M. 1976. Scleractinia of Eastern Australia. Part I. Australian Institute of Marine Science Monograph Series, 1:1–84.Google Scholar
Wallace, C. C., and Willis, B. L. 1994. Systematics of the coral genus Acropora: implications of new biological findings for species concepts. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 25:237–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weil, E. 1992. Genetic and morphological variation in Caribbean and eastern Pacific Porites (Anthozoa: Scleractinia). Preliminary results. Proceedings of the 7th International Coral Reef Symposium, Guam, 2:643–655.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Knowlton, N. 1994. A multi-character analysis of the Caribbean coral Montastraea annularis (Ellis and Solander, 1786) and its two sibling species, M. faveolata (Ellis and Solander, 1786) and M. franksi (Gregory, 1895). Bulletin of Marine Science, 55:151–175.Google Scholar
Wood Jones, F. 1907. On the growth-forms and supposed species in corals. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1907:518–556.Google Scholar
Zlatarski, V. N., and Estalella, N. M. 1982. Les Scléractiniaires de Cuba avec des données sur les organismes associés. Editions de l'Académie bulgare des Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria, 472 p.Google Scholar