- Edited by Neil H. Shubin, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, and approved December 24, 2014 (received for review November 12, 2014)
Significance
Purgatorius
has been considered a plausible ancestor for primates since it was
discovered, but this fossil mammal has been known only from teeth and
jaw fragments. We attribute to Purgatorius the first (to our
knowledge) nondental remains (ankle bones) which were discovered in the
same ∼65-million-year-old deposits as dentitions of this putative
primate. This attribution is based mainly on size and unique anatomical
specializations known among living euarchontan mammals (primates,
treeshrews, colugos) and fossil plesiadapiforms. Results of phylogenetic
analyses that incorporate new data from these fossils support Purgatorius
as the geologically oldest known primate. These recently discovered
tarsals have specialized features for mobility and provide the oldest
fossil evidence that suggests arboreality played a key role in earliest
primate evolution.
Abstract
Earliest Paleocene Purgatorius
often is regarded as the geologically oldest primate, but it has been
known only from fossilized dentitions since it was first described half a
century ago. The dentition of Purgatorius is more primitive
than those of all known living and fossil primates, leading some
researchers to suggest that it lies near the ancestry of all other
primates; however, others have questioned its affinities to primates or
even to placental mammals. Here we report the first (to our knowledge)
nondental remains (tarsal bones) attributed to Purgatorius from
the same earliest Paleocene deposits that have yielded numerous fossil
dentitions of this poorly known mammal. Three independent phylogenetic
analyses that incorporate new data from these fossils support primate
affinities of Purgatorius among euarchontan mammals (primates, treeshrews, and colugos). Astragali and calcanei attributed to Purgatorius
indicate a mobile ankle typical of arboreal euarchontan mammals
generally and of Paleocene and Eocene plesiadapiforms specifically and
provide the earliest fossil evidence of arboreality in primates and
other euarchontan mammals. Postcranial specializations for arboreality
in the earliest primates likely played a key role in the evolutionary
success of this mammalian radiation in the Paleocene.
Evidence
from the fossil record suggests that placental mammals diversified
following the Cretaceous–Paleogene (K–Pg) boundary ∼66 Mya (1, 2). Among the oldest known placental mammals, the putative primate Purgatorius has been documented in the western interior of North America during the first million years after the K–Pg boundary (2⇓⇓–5) to within the first few hundred thousand years of the Paleocene (6). Although the fossil record of Purgatorius has been restricted to dentitions long recognized as uniquely similar to those of primates (3, 4),
these anatomical data are limited. Some researchers who have preferred
to restrict the order Primates to the crown-clade (i.e., Euprimates)
have also questioned the primate affinities of Purgatorius and other Paleogene plesiadapiforms (reputed stem primates) (e.g., refs 7 and 8). Furthermore, several recent phylogenetic analyses have not supported Purgatorius in Primates (9) or even in Placentalia (crown-clade eutherians) (10⇓–12). New evidence supporting Purgatorius
as the oldest plesiadapiform primate is derived from tarsal bones
collected at the late Puercan (Pu3; ∼65 Mya) Garbani Channel fauna
localities in Garfield County, northeastern Montana. Four decades of
fieldwork have resulted in the recovery of hundreds of Purgatorius teeth and fragmentary jaws (13). Here we attribute tarsals (astragali and calcanei) to Purgatorius based on size and diagnostic euarchontan and plesiadapiform features (Fig. 1 and SI Appendix). This taxonomic attribution is supported further by the absence of other euarchontan taxa from the Garbani Channel fauna.
Fig. 1.
Micro-CT scan images of tarsal bones attributed to Purgatorius
from the late Puercan (Pu3; ∼65 Mya) Garbani Channel fauna localities
in northeastern Montana. UCMP 197509, left astragalus, and UCMP 197517,
right calcaneus, are shown in dorsal (A and G), plantar (B and H), lateral (C and I), medial (D and J), distal (E and K), and proximal (F and L) views, respectively. (Scale bar, 1 mm.) See SI Appendix for institutional abbreviations.
Phylogenetic Analysis
Results
from recent broad cladistic analyses that focused on relationships
among eutherian mammals do not support primate affinities of Purgatorius and instead place Purgatorius in a clade directly outside Placentalia with the contemporary condylarths (archaic ungulates) Protungulatum and Oxyprimus (10⇓–12). However, the addition of new tarsal data for Purgatorius
and increased taxon sampling, including a colugo and four
plesiadapiforms, using this same matrix, results in a strict consensus
tree that supports a monophyletic Euarchonta with Sundatheria
(treeshrews and colugos) as the sister group to a fairly unresolved
Primates clade that includes Purgatorius (Fig. 2A). This result is driven mainly by the addition of euarchontan taxa rather than by new character data for Purgatorius, which strongly suggests that the previous support for Purgatorius outside Placentalia and Euarchonta is primarily an artifact of taxon sampling (10, 14). To address this issue further, we included the new Purgatorius tarsal data in two additional analyses that were designed to evaluate relationships within Euarchonta (15) or more broadly within Euarchontoglires (16). Results from both analyses support Purgatorius as the most basal primate (Fig. 2 B and C).
Fig. 2.
Hypotheses of evolutionary relationships of Purgatorius and other eutherian mammals. (A) Simplified resulting strict consensus cladogram based on data modified from ref. 12, Purgatorius tarsals, and five additional euarchontan taxa (colugo Cynocephalus, the micromomyid plesiadapiforms Foxomomys, Dryomomys, and Tinimomys, and the carpolestid plesiadapiform Carpolestes).
Asterisks indicate results from a previously published analysis with
Laurasiatheria excluding Eulipotyphla and Afrotheria excluding
Afrosoricida (12). (B) Simplified resulting single-most-parsimonious cladogram based on data from ref. 15 and Purgatorius tarsals. (C) Simplified resulting strict consensus cladogram based on data from ref. 16 and Purgatorius
tarsals. In all cladograms, Sundatheria is supported and indicated in
green, Primates is supported and indicated in violet, and Purgatorius is supported as a primate and indicated in orange. See SI Appendix for methods, full tree topologies, and support values.
Description and Comparison of Tarsal Bones
Although previously published cladistic analyses support a close relationship between Purgatorius and the condylarth Protungulatum (10⇓–12), the tarsals attributed to Purgatorius differ considerably from those of Protungulatum by having many characteristics of euarchontan mammals that relate to arboreality (Fig. 3). As in other euarchontans, the upper ankle joint of Purgatorius is more mobile than that of Protungulatum, which has a contact between the fibula and calcaneus that restricts medial–lateral movements at this joint (17). The astragalar trochlea (lateral tibial facet) of Purgatorius is relatively longer than that of Protungulatum, allowing a greater range of dorsi- and plantarflexion (Fig. 3). The trochlea of Purgatorius
is medially sloping, is aligned oblique to the long axis of the
astragalus, and extends slightly onto the dorsal surface of the
astragalar neck, as is consistent with mammals whose feet abduct during
dorsiflexion for climbing on vertical supports (18). The lower ankle joint of Purgatorius also is considerably more mobile than that of Protungulatum, especially in having increased capacity for movements between the sustentacular facets of the astragalus and calcaneus. Purgatorius
has a saddle-shaped astragalar ectal facet that articulates with and
rotates along a longer, moderately proximodistally aligned calcaneal
ectal facet (Fig. 1).
This morphology suggests a pronounced capacity for inversion and
eversion of the foot, which is supported further by the presence of a
well-developed distal calcaneal sustentacular facet and a distally
extensive astragalar sustentacular facet that contacts the navicular
facet (Fig. 3).
These distal articular regions would have come into close contact only
during strong inversion of the foot. Such movements are facilitated
further at the transverse tarsal joint of Purgatorius by the
rounded, concave, gliding articulation of the calcaneocuboid facet and
its fairly transverse orientation and by the pronounced, rounded
navicular facet on the medial side of the astragalar head (Fig. 1). In contrast, Protungulatum
has a more ovoid, asymmetrical calcaneocuboid facet that is oriented
more obliquely to the long axis of the calcaneus and a less pronounced
medial side of the astragalar head, suggesting that Protungulatum
had less capacity for pedal inversion and used level-oriented foot
positions for locomotion on a flat substrate, as do terrestrial
quadrupeds (Fig. 3) (17).
Fig. 3.
Comparison of micro-CT scan images of tarsal bones. Columns illustrate tarsals of condylarth Protungulatum (A), colugo Cynocephalus (B), treeshrew Ptilocercus (C), Purgatorius (D), the micromomyid plesiadapiform Dryomomys (E), and the adapoid euprimate Notharctus (F)
right astragali (rows 1–3) and calcanei (rows 4–6) in dorsal (rows 1
and 4), plantar (rows 2 and 5), and distal (rows 3 and 6) views,
respectively. Some elements are reversed for clarity. (Scale bars: 1
mm.) aef, astragalar ectal facet; aff, astragalar groove for tendon of musculus flexor fibularis
(violet); ah, astragalar head (blue); asf, astragalar sustentacular
facet (red); caf, calcaneal fibular facet; cef, calcaneal ectal facet;
cf, calcaneocuboid facet (orange); cff, calcaneal groove for tendon of musculus flexor fibularis;
csf, calcaneal sustentacular facet (red); ltf, lateral tibial facet
(yellow); nav, astragalonavicular facet (red); pt, peroneal tubercle.
See SI Appendix for specimen numbers.
Among euarchontans, the tarsals attributed to Purgatorius
are uniquely similar to those of other plesiadapiforms in having an
astragalus with a medially sloping trochlea and a relatively broad head
and a calcaneus with a large peroneal tubercle (Figs. 3 and 4 and SI Appendix) (18).
However, it should be noted that currently euarchontan tarsal
comparisons outside Primates are limited to the presumably more derived
morphologies of extant colugos and treeshrews, given the paucity of
postcranial fossils representing these clades. Unlike the level
astragalar trochlea of colugos and the most basally divergent treeshrew Ptilocercus, the medially sloping trochlea of Purgatorius
may have reduced the potential for lateral sheer of the tibia on the
astragalus when inverted foot postures were used during locomotion on
large-diameter supports (Fig. 3). The astragalar head of Purgatorius
and other plesiadapiforms is broad and ovoid, suggesting frequent use
of inverted and everted postures. The large medial aspect of the
astragalonavicular facet of Purgatorius likely reflects forces frequently transmitted on the medial side of the head during habitual pedal inversion (17), but the more spherical head of colugos, Ptilocercus, and many euprimates indicates even greater emphasis on inverted postures in these taxa (Fig. 3). Purgatorius also differs from colugos, Ptilocercus, and euprimates in having a calcaneus with a much larger and more laterally projecting peroneal tubercle (Fig. 3), which provides more leverage for tendons of peroneal muscles that contribute to eversion (musculus peroneus longus) and abduction (musculus peroneus brevis) and counterbalance forces that invert the foot (19).
The smaller peroneal tubercle in other euarchontans suggests less
emphasis on the peroneal muscles for eversion movements and rotational
stability, possibly as a mechanical consequence of the greater degree of
distal calcaneal elongation present in these taxa (18, 20).
Fig. 4.
Results of principal component analysis of 23 astragalar measurements for 34 species (A) and 25 calcaneal measurements for 33 species (B) (SI Appendix).
Lines connecting data points reflect a minimum-spanning tree computed
from a Euclidean distance matrix. Polygons encompass taxa including
living strepsirrhine and haplorhine euprimates (red), treeshrews (blue),
and colugos (yellow). Gray polygons encompass fossil groups including
adapoid and omomyoid euprimates, plesiadapiforms, and earliest Paleocene
mammals Protungulatum donnae (Pd) and Procerberus formicarum (Pf). Results support tarsals attributed to Purgatorius (starred) as a plesiadapiform, which, like Protungulatum and Cretaceous Deccanolestes (D. hislopi, Dh; D. robustus, Dr), has tarsal features that may be plesiomorphic, such as a large calcaneal peroneal tubercle. See SI Appendix for eigenvalue, percentage variance, and variable component loadings for each principal component.
Micromomyids are the most primitive plesiadapiforms known from skeletons (Fig. 2 B and C) and have been reconstructed as being most similar to Ptilocercus among extant mammals (15). Thus it is significant that Purgatorius, which has teeth very similar to those of primitive micromomyids (21, 22),
also shares with that group unique tarsal features including a slightly
grooved astragalar trochlea with a relatively high medial ridge and a
fairly consistent mediolateral width (Fig. 3), whereas other stem primates have a flat and more medially sloping trochlea that is widest distally. Purgatorius and micromomyids also are most similar in tarsal features related to the tendon of musculus flexor (digitorum) fibularis,
which contributes to digital flexion and plantarflexion of the foot and
is important for pedal grasping. These taxa have a very large and
mediolaterally wide flexor fibularis groove on the astragalus (Fig. 3),
as is consistent with the large origination areas indicating sizeable
flexor muscles on the tibia and fibula of micromomyids (23). However, the corresponding groove for the tendon of flexor fibularis on the plantar aspect of the calcaneal sustentaculum is shallow in Purgatorius and micromomyids, as it is in treeshrews and colugos (Fig. 3). The presence of a deep flexor fibularis
groove on the calcaneal sustentaculum has been considered a
synapomorphy for primates related to stronger hallucal grasping, whereas
this muscle has been considered to play a less active role in
treeshrews and colugos (18). In fact, a deep flexor fibularis
groove is present on the calcaneus of euprimates and more derived
plesiadapiforms (including paromomyids and plesiadapoids). The
combination of a large groove for the tendon of the flexor fibularis on the astragalus and absence of a deep groove on the calcaneus in Purgatorius and micromomyids may be a primitive retention in these taxa. Similar characteristics are present in Protungulatum and the Cretaceous eutherian Deccanolestes, whose affinities lie well outside the Euarchonta (Fig. 2).
Discussion
The
evolution of diagnostic euprimate traits associated with grasping,
leaping, and an enhanced visual system has long been thought to relate
in part to arboreality (24),
although substrate preferences of our earliest primate ancestors have
been less clear. Certain features of euprimates, such as grasping hands
and feet, already had evolved to various degrees among plesiadapiforms (15, 20, 23, 25⇓⇓–28).
Nearly all plesiadapiform species are known only from fossil
dentitions, and the several known partial skeletons belong to fairly
derived and relatively late-occurring members of their respective clades
(23).
Based on ecological inferences from the shape of the skull and teeth,
it has been suggested that arboreality and herbivory evolved
independently in plesiadapiforms and euprimates following their
divergence from a ground-dwelling, insectivorous ancestor (29). However, tarsals of Purgatorius reported here indicate instead that arboreality was characteristic of the oldest and most primitive known stem primate. Purgatorius
is more primitive than other plesiadapiforms and euprimates in
retaining three lower incisors, four lower premolars, and molars with
taller trigonids and more acute cusps that likely reflect an omnivorous
diet that included a large proportion of insects (3, 13). Like the dentition (3, 4), the tarsals of Purgatorius
reflect a plesiomorphic state that is sufficiently primitive to have
given rise to the more derived morphologies present in all later
primates.
The major radiation of angiosperms in the Late
Cretaceous continued throughout the earliest Paleocene and dominated
megafloras in the North American western interior (30, 31). Within this context, the immigration of Purgatorius
represents the infusion of a unique arboreal mammal into North America
during the first million years following the K–Pg boundary (32).
Increased size of seeds and fruits is correlated with increases in the
proportions of animal-dispersed taxa during this time (33) and would have provided an arboreal and omnivorous primate such as Purgatorius with angiosperm products including fruits, flowers, and associated insect pollinators (15, 34⇓–36). Therefore, the postcranial specializations for arboreality documented in Purgatorius
would have allowed this animal to access resources that were not
directly available to many contemporary terrestrial mammals, such as Protungulatum. The fossil record provides a direct test to evaluate adaptive scenarios, however incremental (8),
and future recovery and analysis of early euarchontan fossils will
continue to improve our understanding of primate origins. The previously
unidentified fossils of Purgatorius described here suggest
that the divergence of primates from other mammals was not a dramatic
event. Instead, the beginning of primate evolutionary history likely
involved subtle changes in the postcranial skeleton that allowed easier
navigation and improved access to food resources in an arboreal setting.
Materials and Methods
Regression Analysis.
To assess whether tarsals described here (SI Appendix, Table S1) are of a size consistent with their attribution to the Purgatorius dental sample from the Garbani Channel fauna (SI Appendix, Fig. S1),
least squares linear regression analyses were run in Microsoft Excel to
evaluate the scaling relationship between the natural log area of the
second lower molar and astragalar tibial trochlea width, as well as
between the natural log second lower molar area and calcaneal cuboid
facet area for euarchontan mammals. Skeletal elements from a sample of
60 dentally associated skeletons of euarchontans including extant taxa
and fossil plesiadapiforms were microCT scanned, and digital
reconstructions were measured using Avizo 6 software (SI Appendix, Table S2).
The 95% confidence limits on the prediction interval of tooth size from
postcranial element dimensions were generated using equation 17.29 of ref. 37. Dimensions from isolated tarsals and teeth of Purgatorius (SI Appendix, Table S3) then were plotted on the resulting regression equations (SI Appendix, Fig. S2).
Principal Component Analysis.
To evaluate our qualitative observations that the tarsals attributed to Purgatorius
are generally similar to those of euarchontan mammals and are
specifically similar to those of plesiadapiforms, we ran principal
component analysis on the correlation matrix derived from 18 linear and 5
angular astragalar measurements (SI Appendix, Fig. S3A) following ref. 38 for 48 individuals representing 34 species (SI Appendix, Table S4) and 19 linear and 6 angular calcaneal measurements (SI Appendix, Fig. S3B) following ref. 39 for 54 individuals representing 33 species (SI Appendix, Table S5).
Additionally, we ran a cluster analysis using the correlation matrix as
our similarity metric and using the paired group method for linking
cases. All analyses were run using PAST v. 2.16 (40).
All linear measurements were size-standardized using the geometric mean
of a subset of the measures. Angular measurements are reported in
degrees but were analyzed in radians. The expanded taxonomic sample
includes Puercan mammals, fossil plesiadapiforms and euprimates, and
extant euarchontans (SI Appendix, Tables S4 and S5).
All tarsals were microCT scanned, and digital reconstructions were
created and measured using Avizo 6 software. Eigenvalue, percentage
variance, and variable component loadings were recorded for each
principal component (SI Appendix, Tables S6 and S7).
Phylogenetic Analysis.
Cladistic analysis using maximum parsimony was performed in TNT (41) on three revised character matrices (12, 15, 16). Four plesiadapiforms, one colugo, and new Purgatorius tarsal data were added to the character matrix of ref. 12, and new Purgatorius tarsal data were added to the character matrices of refs. 15 and 16.
In all analyses, New Technology Search was used to obtain the
stabilized consensus five times, and resulting most parsimonious trees
(MPTs) were used as starting trees in a Traditional Heuristic Search
that was carried out using tree bisection reconnection (TBR). All
resulting MPTs were used to obtain a strict consensus, and, following
the methods of ref. 12,
the Pruned Trees function was used to identify the least stable taxa,
which were removed using the Prune Taxa function if large polytomies
were present. The Tree Filter function was used to delete longer trees
and duplicate MPTs. Bremer branch supports were calculated using the
Traditional Search option (10 replicates per run with TBR enforced) from
50,000 suboptimal trees up to 10 steps longer than the most
parsimonious tree. See SI Appendix for more detailed methodology, list of specimens analyzed, and specific modifications to character matrices (SI Appendix, Tables S8–S10).
Acknowledgments
We
thank P. Holroyd, E. Sargis, C. Manz, G. Wilson, L. Debey, K. Pugh, C.
Sprain, P. Renne, W. Mitchell III, M. Silcox, and A. Hill for helpful
discussions; eight anonymous reviewers and the editor for helpful
comments; the Engdahl family and Bureau of Land Management for help with
fieldwork; J. VanHouten, S. Judex, and C. Ruben for CT scanning
assistance; and G. Yapuncich, A. Garberg, J. Butler, and J. Lovoi for
segmenting CT scans. S.G.B.C. was supported by National Science
Foundation (NSF) Grant SBE-1028505 (to E. J. Sargis and S.G.B.C.), the
Leakey Foundation, and a Brooklyn College Tow Faculty Travel Fellowship.
J.I.B. was supported by NSF Grant SBR-9616194 (to G. F. Gunnell, P. D.
Gingerich, and J.I.B.) and Yale Institute for Biospheric Studies. D.M.B.
was supported by NSF Grant BCS 1317525 (to E. Seiffert and D.M.B.).
W.A.C. was supported by NSF Grant EAR 9505847. This work also was
supported by the Doris O. and Samuel P. Welles Research Fund, University
of California Museum of Paleontology.
Footnotes
- ↵1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: stephenchester@brooklyn.cuny.edu.
- Author contributions: S.G.B.C., J.I.B., D.M.B., and W.A.C. designed research, performed research, analyzed data, and wrote the paper.
- The authors declare no conflict of interest.
- This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.
- This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1421707112/-/DCSupplemental.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Observação: somente um membro deste blog pode postar um comentário.