Search for: All records

Abstract Although convergence is often recognized as a ubiquitous feature across the Tree of Life, whether the underlying traits also exhibit similar evolutionary pathways towards convergent forms puzzles biologists. In carnivoran mammals, “elongate,” “slender,” and “long” are often used to describe and even to categorize mustelids (martens, polecats, and weasels), herpestids (mongooses), viverrids (civets and genets), and other carnivorans together. But just how similar these carnivorans are and whether there is convergence in the morphological component that contribute to elongation has never been assessed. Here, I found that these qualitatively described elongate carnivorans exhibited incomplete convergence towards elongate bodies compared to other terrestrial carnivorans. In contrast, the morphological components underlying body shape variation do not exhibit convergence despite evidence that these components are more elongate in elongate carnivorans compared to nonelongate carnivorans. Furthermore, these components also exhibited shorter but different phylogenetic half-lives towards more elongate adaptive peaks, indicating that different selective pressures can create multiple pathways to elongation. Incorporating the fossil record will facilitate further investigation of whether body elongation evolved adaptively or if it is simply a retained ancestral trait.[Axial skeleton; body elongation; convergent evolution; macroevolution; phylogenetic comparative methods; thoracolumbar vertebrae.] 

Abstract Researchers are increasingly using museum collections for taxonomy, systematics, phylogenetics, and faunal analyses, and they assume that taxonomic identifications on museum labels are correct. However, identifications may be incorrect or out of date, which could result in false conclusions from subsequent research. A recent geometric morphometrics analysis of skulls of African canids by Machado and Teta (2020) suggested that Canis lupaster soudanicus is a junior synonym of Lupulella adusta. However, the holotype of soudanicus was not measured and further investigation of the putative soudanicus specimens used in this study showed that these originally were identified as L. adusta. This original identification was confirmed by dental measurements, which also confirm that the holotype of soudanicus is Canis lupaster. Hence, soudanicus should not be synonymized with L. adusta. This example highlights the importance of careful checking of species identifications of museum specimens prior to research and, where possible, including (holo)types of taxa, before making taxonomic changes that could have important consequences for species conservation and management.