Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Foreword
- 1 Rodentia: a model order?
- 2 A synopsis of rodent molecular phylogenetics, systematics and biogeography
- 3 Emerging perspectives on some Paleogene sciurognath rodents in Laurasia: the fossil record and its interpretation
- 4 Phylogeny and evolutionary history of hystricognathous rodents from the Old World during the Tertiary: new insights into the emergence of modern “phiomorph” families
- 5 The history of South American octodontoid rodents and its contribution to evolutionary generalisations
- 6 History, taxonomy and palaeobiology of giant fossil rodents (Hystricognathi, Dinomyidae)
- 7 Advances in integrative taxonomy and evolution of African murid rodents: how morphological trees hide the molecular forest
- 8 Themes and variation in sciurid evolution
- 9 Marmot evolution and global change in the past 10 million years
- 10 Grades and clades among rodents: the promise of geometric morphometrics
- 11 Biogeographic variations in wood mice: testing for the role of morphological variation as a line of least resistance to evolution
- 12 The oral apparatus of rodents: variations on the theme of a gnawing machine
- 13 The muscles of mastication in rodents and the function of the medial pterygoid
- 14 Functional morphology of rodent middle ears
- 15 Variations and anomalies in rodent teeth and their importance for testing computational models of development
- 16 The great variety of dental structures and dynamics in rodents: new insights into their ecological diversity
- 17 Convergent evolution of molar topography in Muroidea (Rodentia, Mammalia): connections between chewing movements and crown morphology
- 18 Developmental mechanisms in the evolution of phenotypic traits in rodent teeth
- 19 Diversity and evolution of femoral variation in Ctenohystrica
- 20 Morphological disparity of the postcranial skeleton in rodents and its implications for palaeobiological inferences: the case of the extinct Theridomyidae (Rodentia, Mammalia)
- Index
- References
6 - History, taxonomy and palaeobiology of giant fossil rodents (Hystricognathi, Dinomyidae)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2015
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Foreword
- 1 Rodentia: a model order?
- 2 A synopsis of rodent molecular phylogenetics, systematics and biogeography
- 3 Emerging perspectives on some Paleogene sciurognath rodents in Laurasia: the fossil record and its interpretation
- 4 Phylogeny and evolutionary history of hystricognathous rodents from the Old World during the Tertiary: new insights into the emergence of modern “phiomorph” families
- 5 The history of South American octodontoid rodents and its contribution to evolutionary generalisations
- 6 History, taxonomy and palaeobiology of giant fossil rodents (Hystricognathi, Dinomyidae)
- 7 Advances in integrative taxonomy and evolution of African murid rodents: how morphological trees hide the molecular forest
- 8 Themes and variation in sciurid evolution
- 9 Marmot evolution and global change in the past 10 million years
- 10 Grades and clades among rodents: the promise of geometric morphometrics
- 11 Biogeographic variations in wood mice: testing for the role of morphological variation as a line of least resistance to evolution
- 12 The oral apparatus of rodents: variations on the theme of a gnawing machine
- 13 The muscles of mastication in rodents and the function of the medial pterygoid
- 14 Functional morphology of rodent middle ears
- 15 Variations and anomalies in rodent teeth and their importance for testing computational models of development
- 16 The great variety of dental structures and dynamics in rodents: new insights into their ecological diversity
- 17 Convergent evolution of molar topography in Muroidea (Rodentia, Mammalia): connections between chewing movements and crown morphology
- 18 Developmental mechanisms in the evolution of phenotypic traits in rodent teeth
- 19 Diversity and evolution of femoral variation in Ctenohystrica
- 20 Morphological disparity of the postcranial skeleton in rodents and its implications for palaeobiological inferences: the case of the extinct Theridomyidae (Rodentia, Mammalia)
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Among the great diversity of the order Rodentia, the “New World Hystricognathi”, or caviomorphs are a very characteristic group from the Neotropical region. This group, whose fossil record begins in the late Eocene (Antoine et al., 2011), and is included in the infraorder Hystricognathi (Huchon and Douzery, 2001; Woods and Kilpatrick, 2005), comprises more than 50 genera in 13 families. One of the peculiarities of the extant caviomorphs is their wide range of size, between ∼200 g and ∼60 kg (Sánchez-Villagra et al., 2003). The latter is the maximum body mass among extant rodents (Mones and Ojasti, 1986) and occurs in Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris (known colloquially as capybaras), considered the giant of the group. South America is also home of the pacarana, Dinomys branickii, a large, enigmatic caviomorph rodent that can be found in the rainforests of Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru (Figure 6.1). This is the only living member of the family Dinomyidae, which is notorious for its great past diversity (Frailey, 1986; Mones, 1986; Rinderknecht et al., 2011).
With a body mass that varies from 10 kg to 15 kg (White and Alberico, 1992), the pacarana is one of the biggest living rodents. However, dinomyid rodents used to be much larger. Many taxa from this family achieved extraordinary body sizes, especially those that belong to the extinct subfamily Eumegamyinae (Rinderknecht and Blanco, 2008). This subfamily contains the biggest rodents that ever existed (see Figures 6.2–6.4).
Recorded since the middle Miocene (but see Krapovickas and Nasif, 2011), the diversity of the Dinomyidae has been repeatedly corroborated with a great number of findings. Nowadays, approximately 60 extinct species are known, all of them distributed within South America (Mones, 1986; Rinderknecht and Blanco, 2008; Rinderknecht et al., 2011). In this chapter we summarize the principal aspects of the history, anatomy, systematics and taxonomy of these enigmatic rodents. All texts shown in square brackets and italics are translations from Spanish.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Evolution of the RodentsAdvances in Phylogeny, Functional Morphology and Development, pp. 164 - 185Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015
References
(1981). Factors of safety in the structure of animals. Science Progress, 67, 109–130.Google ScholarPubMed
(1916). Algunas observaciones curiosas sobre una cabeza del género Tetrastylus de Catamarca. Physis, 2, 429–430. Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
(1883a). Sobre una colección de mamíferos fósiles del piso mesopotámico de la formación patagónica, recogidos en las barrancas del Paraná, por el profesor Pedro Scalabrini. Boletín de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias en Córdoba, 5, 101–116.Google Scholar
(1883b). Sobre una nueva colección de mamíferos fósiles recogidos por el Profesor Scalabrini en las barrancas del Paraná. Boletín de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias en Córdoba, 5, 257–306.Google Scholar
(1886). Contribuciones al conocimiento de los mamíferos fósiles de los terrenos terciarios antiguos del Paraná. Boletín de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias en Córdoba, 9, 5–228.Google Scholar
(1889). Contribución al conocimiento de los mamíferos fósiles de la República Argentina. Actas de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias, 6, XXXII + 1–1027.Google Scholar
(1891a). Caracteres diagnósticos de cincuenta especies nuevas de mamíferos fósiles argentinos. Revista Argentina de Historia Natural, 1, 129–167.Google Scholar
(1891b). Mamíferos y aves fósiles argentinas. Especies nuevas, adiciones y correcciones. Revista Argentina de Historia Natural, 1, 240–259.Google Scholar
, , , et al. (2011). Middle Eocene rodents from Peruvian Amazonia reveal the pattern and timing of caviomorph origins and biogeography. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B), 279, 1319–1326.Google ScholarPubMed
(2008). The uncertainties of the largest fossil rodent. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 275, 1957–1958.Google Scholar
, , , et al. (2009). Rodent phylogeny revised: analysis of six nuclear genes from all major rodent clades. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 9, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (1987). Novedosos restos de Neoepiblemidae (Rodentia, Caviomorpha) del Mioceno de Venezuela. Inferencias paleoambientales. Boletín Informativo, Asociación Paleontológica Argentina, 16, 11.Google Scholar
(1978). La presencia del género Carlesia (Rodentia, Dinomyidae, Eumegamyinae) en la formación Arroyo Chasicó (Plioceno Temprano), Provincia de Buenos Aires. Publicaciones del Museo Municipal de Ciencias Naturales de Mar del Plata “Lorenzo Scaglia”, 2, 198–206.Google Scholar
(1879). Description physique de la République Argentina d'après des observations personnelles et étragères. 3 (animaux vertébrés, 1: Mammifères vivants et éteins). Buenos Aires: P. E. Coni.Google Scholar
(1885). Examen crítico de los mamíferos y reptiles fósiles denominados por D. Augusto Bravard y mencionados en su obra precedente. Anales del Museo Público, Buenos Aires, 3, 95–174.Google Scholar
(2007). Evolutionary implications of bite mechanics and feeding ecology in bears. Journal of Zoology, 272, 423–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2007). Bite forces and evolutionary adaptations to feeding ecology in carnivores. Ecology, 88, 347–358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (1972). Notes on the behaviour and breeding of pacaranas Dinomys branickii in captivity. International Zoo Yearbook, 12, 108–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1964). The Management of Wild Mammals in Captivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1940). The families and genera of living rodents. British Museum (Natural History), 1, XXVI + 1–698.Google Scholar
(1958). Sobre nuevos restos de Eumegamysops praependens (Amegh.) Kragl. Revista de la Asociación Geológica Argentina, 13, 87–104.Google Scholar
(1957). Hystricomorph rodents from the late Miocene of Colombia, South America. University of California Publications in Geological Sciences, 32, 273–404.Google Scholar
(1986). Late Miocene and Holocene mammals, exclusive of the Notoungulata, of the Río Acre region, Western Amazonia. Contributions in Science, 374, 1–46.Google Scholar
and (2008). A simple morphological predictor of bite force in rodents. Journal of Zoology, 275, 418–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006). The phylogeny of living and extinct armadillos (Mammalia, Xenarthra, Cingulata): a craniodental analysis. In Amniote Paleobiology: Perspectives on the Evolution of Mammals, Birds and Reptiles, eds. , , and . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 153–198.Google Scholar
and (1880). Los mamíferos fósiles de la América del Sud. París-Buenos Aires: F. Savy-Igon.Google Scholar
and (1982). On the affinities of the Dinomyidae. Säugetierkundliche Mitteilungen, 30, 151–157.Google Scholar
, , and (2006). The fossil record of Phoberomys pattersoni Mones 1980 (Mammalia, Rodentia) from Urumaco (Late Miocene, Venezuela), with an analysis of its phylogenetic relationships. Journal of Systematic Paleontology, 4, 239–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2001). From the Old World to the New World: a molecular chronicle of the phylogeny and biogeography of hystricognath rodents. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 20, 238–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1926). Los grandes roedores terciarios de la Argentina y sus relaciones con ciertos géneros pleistocenos de las Antillas. Anales del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural, 34, 121–135.Google Scholar
(1930). Descripción de un interesante roedor eumegámido descubierto en el Uruguay. Gyriabrus teisseirei, n. sp. Revista de la Sociedad de Amigos de la Arqueología, 4, 219–224.Google Scholar
(1931). Cuatro notas paleontológicas sobre Octomylodon aversus Amegh., Argyrolagus palmeri Amegh., Tetrastylus montanus Amegh.y Muñizia paranensis n. gen., n. sp. Physis, 10, 242–266.Google Scholar
(1932). Diagnosis de nuevos géneros y especies de roedores cávidos y eumegámidos fósiles de la Argentina. Rectificación genérica de algunas especies conocidas y adiciones al conocimiento de otras. Anales de la Sociedad Científica Argentina, 114(4), 155–181; (5–6), 211–237.Google Scholar
(1934). La antigüedad pliocena de las faunas de Monte Hermoso y Chapalmalal, deducidas de su comparación con las que les precedieron y sucedieron. Pp. 17–133. Montevideo: El Siglo ilustrado.
and (2011). Large caviomorph rodent footprints of the Late Oligocene Vinchina Formation, Argentina. Palaeontologia Electronica, 14, 1–13.Google Scholar
and (1989). Structural constraints, recurrent shapes, and allometry in pocket gophers (genus Thomomys). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 36, 349–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1993). Morphological constraints in the digging apparatus of pocket gophers (Mammalia: Geomyidae). Journal of the Linnean Society, 47, 439–453.Google Scholar
(2011). Basicranial morphology and relationships of antillean Heptaxodontidae (Rodentia, Ctenohystrica, Caviomorpha). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 363, 1–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2002). Maximum bite force and prey size of Tyrannosaurus rex and their relationships to the inference of feeding behavior. Historical Biology, 16, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1984). The pacarana, Dinomys branickii. In One Medicine, eds. and . New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 154–161.Google Scholar
and (1918). Synopsis of the supergeneric groups of rodents. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 8, 431–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2008). The largest among the smallest: the body mass of the giant rodent Josephoartigasia monesi. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 275, 1953–1955.Google ScholarPubMed
(1937). Vom Pacarana (Dinomys branickii Peters). Der Zoologische Garten (Neue Folge), 9, 204–209.
(1981). Sinopsis sistemática preliminar de la familia Dinomyidae (Mammalia: Rodentia: Caviomorpha). Anais do 2º Congresso Latino–Americano de Paleontología, pp. 605–619. Porto Alegre.
(1986). Palaeovertebrata sudamericana. Catálogo sistemático de los vertebrados fósiles de América del Sur. Parte I. Lista preliminar y bibliografía. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 82, 1–625.Google Scholar
(1989). Primer hallazgo de Euphilus Ameghino, 1889. (Mammalia: Rodentia: Neoepiblemidae) en el neógeno del Estado de Acre, Brasil. Comunicaciones Paleontológicas del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural de Montevideo, 21, 1–15.Google Scholar
(1997). Estudios sobre la familia Dinomyidae, II. Aportes para una osteología comparada de Dinomys branickii Peters, 1873 (Mammalia: Rodentia). Comunicaciones Paleontológicas del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural de Montevideo, 29, 1–40.Google Scholar
and (1986). Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris. Mammalian Species, 246, 1–7.
(1967). Familia Dinomyidae. In Paleontografía Bonaerense, ed. . La Plata: Comisión de Investigación Científica IV, pp. 123–127.Google Scholar
(2002). How big is a giant? The importance of method in estimating body size of extinct mammals. Journal of Mammalogy, 83, 321–332.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2008). The largest fossil rodent. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 275, 923–928.Google ScholarPubMed
, and (2011). New genus of giant Dinomyidae (Rodentia: Hystricognathi: Caviomorpha) from the late Miocene of Uruguay. Journal of Mammalogy, 92, 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1914). Los estratos araucanos y sus fósiles. Anales del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural de Buenos Aires, 25, 1–247.Google Scholar
, and (2003). The anatomy of the world's largest extinct rodent. Science, 301, 1708–1710.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , and (1999). Predicting bite size selection of mammalian herbivores: a test of a general model of diet optimization. Oikos, 84, 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2005a). Mandibular force profiles of extant carnivorans and implication for the feeding behaviour of extinct predators. Journal of Zoology, 267, 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2005b). Feeding behaviour and bite force of sabretoothed predators. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 145, 393–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
& (2003). Evidence for advanced carnivory in fossil armadillos (Mammalia: Xenarthra: Dasypodidae). Paleobiology, 29, 123–138.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1992). Dinomys branickii. Mammalian Species, 410, 1–5.
(1984). Hystricognath rodents. In Orders and Families of Recent Mammals of the World, eds. and New York: John and Sons, pp. 389–446.Google Scholar
and (2005). Infraorder Hystricognathi. In Mammal Species of the World, eds. and . The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 1538–1600.Google Scholar
, and (2005). Bite club: comparative bite force in big biting mammals and the prediction of predatory behaviour in fossil taxa. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B. Biological Sciences, 272, 619–625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
- 11
- Cited by