No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Phylogenetic relationships among nassariid gastropods
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 May 2016
Abstract
Phylogenetic relationships within the neogastropod family Nassariidae are poorly understood as are relationships between the Nassariidae and other fossil and extant buccinid taxa. The poor resolution of nassariid and buccinoidean relationships is due to: 1) the complex distribution among these gastropods of characters commonly used in classification; 2) a number of Mesozoic and Paleogene genera whose relationships to extant buccinoidean lineages are poorly constrained; and 3) a lack of previous efforts to address these problems on a rigorous, phylogenetic basis.
The results of a phylogenetic analysis of nassariid genera did not decisively support the monophyly of the family. The buccinid subfamily Photinae was an extant sister group to the Nassariinae in a phylogenetic analysis of extant taxa and on many cladograms from an analysis combining fossil and extant taxa. In addition, Buccitriton (representing the Paleogene Tritiaria group) was a sister taxon to the Nassariinae in all analyses in which it was included, regardless of the identity of the extant nassariine sister group. This suggests that the photines, which likely arose from a Tritiaria ancestor, are the closest living relatives to the Nassariinae. Many Paleogene fossil “buccinoid” taxa appear to be more distantly related to the Nassariinae and possibly to the rest of the nassariids as well. Stratigraphic range data combined with the results of this study suggest that the Nassariinae diversified rapidly in the early Miocene and achieved a cosmopolitan distribution early in their history. A largely Indo-Pacific subclade was consistently deeply-nested within the Nassariinae, suggesting that nassariines invaded the Indo-Pacific region most recently. The timing of this invasion is difficult to estimate but had occurred by the end of the Miocene. Further analyses using molecular sequence data, relative stratigraphic position, or focusing in more detail on the Paleogene taxa are required to resolve the identity of the sister group to the Nassariinae with greater confidence.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Paleontological Society
References
Adams, H., and Adams, A.
1853. The genera of Recent Mollusca, volume 1. London, 484 p.Google Scholar
Addicott, W. O.
1965. Some western American Cenozoic gastropods of the genus Nassarius
. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 503-B:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allmon, W. D.
1990. Review of the Bullia Group (Gastropoda: Nassariidae) with comments on its evolution, biogeography, and phylogeny. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 99:1–179.Google Scholar
Amitrov, O. V.
1996. Gastropods of the Sivash and questionable Bishkin Beds of the Dnieper Donets Depression. Paleontological Journal, 30:344–347.Google Scholar
Báldi, T.
1973. Mollusc fauna of the Hungarian upper Oligocene (Egerian). Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 511 p.Google Scholar
Beu, A. G., and Maxwell, P. A.
1990. Cenozoic Mollusca of New Zealand. New Zealand Geological Survey Paleontological Bulletin
58, 518 p.Google Scholar
Boss, K. J.
1982. Phylum Mollusca, p. 945–1166. In
Parker, S. P. (ed.), Synopsis and classification of living organisms, volume 1. McGrawHill, New York.Google Scholar
Bouvier, E. L.
1888. Observations anatomiques et systématiques sur quelques families de mollusques Prosobranches Sténoglosses. Bulletins de la Société Malacologique de France, 1:251–286.Google Scholar
Bremer, K.
1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution, 42:795–803.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, A. C.
1982. The biology of sandy-beach whelks of the genus Bullia (Nassariidae). Annual Review of Oceanography and Marine Biology, 20:309–361.Google Scholar
Brown, S. C.
1969. The structure and function of the digestive system of the mud snail Nassarius obsoletus (Say). Malacologia, 9:447–500.Google Scholar
Bruguière, J. G.
1789. Encyclopédie methodique ou par ordre de matiéres. Histoires Naturelle des Vers, des Mollusques… volume 1, Paris. 344 p.Google Scholar
Campbell, L. D.
1993. Pliocene molluscs from the Yorktown and Chowan River Formations in Virginia. Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy Division of Mineral Resources, Charlottesville, 259 p.Google Scholar
Carlson, S. J., and Vermeij, G. J.
1996. A total evidence approach in reconstructing the phylogeny of the Rapaninae (Gastropoda). Geological Society of America—Abstracts with Programs, 28:292–293.Google Scholar
Carpenter, J. M.
1988. Choosing among multiple equally parsimonious cladograms. Cladistics, 4:291–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, J. M.
1994. Successive weighting, reliability and evidence. Cladistics, 10:215–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cernohorsky, W. O.
1981. The Family Buccinidae, Part 1: The genera Nassaria, Trajana, and Neoteron,
p. 1–52. In
Abbott, R. T. (ed.), Monographs of the Marine Mollusca, 2. American Malacologists, Inc., Melbourne, Florida.Google Scholar
Cernohorsky, W. O.
1984. Systematics of the family Nassariidae. Bulletin of the Auckland Institute and Museum, 14. 356 p.Google Scholar
Clark, W. B., Shattuck, G. B., and Dall, W. H.
1904. The Miocene Deposits of Maryland. Maryland Geological Survey, 543 p.Google Scholar
Conrad, T. A.
1857. Description of Cretaceous and Tertiary fossils
In
Emory, W. H. (ed.), Report of the U.S. and Mexican boundary survey, volume 1, 141–165.Google Scholar
Conrad, T. A.
1862. Descriptions of new genera, subgenera and species of Tertiary and Recent shells. Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 14:284–291.Google Scholar
Conrad, T. A.
1865. Catalogue of the Eocene and Oligocene Testacea of the United States. American Journal of Conchology, volume 1.Google Scholar
Cossmann, M.
1901. Essais de Paléoconchologie Comparée, volume 4. Self-published, Paris, 293 p.Google Scholar
D'Asaro, C. N.
1993. Gunnar Thorson's world-wide collection of prosobranch egg capsules: Nassariidae. Ophelia, 38:149–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Frias Martins, A. M.
1996. Anatomy and systematics of the western Atlantic Ellobiidae (Gastropoda: Pulmonata). Malacologia, 37:163–332.Google Scholar
De Gregorio, A.
1890. Monographie de la Fauna Eocénique de l'Alabama et surtout de celle de Claiborne de l'Étage Parisien (Horizon à Venericardia planicosta Lamarck). Annales de Géologie et Paléontologie, volumes 7–8, 316 p.Google Scholar
De Pinna, M. C. C.
1991. Concepts and tests of homology in the cladistic paradigm. Cladistics, 7:367–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donoghue, M. J., Doyle, J. A., Gauthier, J., Kluge, A., and Rowe, T.
1989. The importance of fossils in phylogeny reconstruction. Annual Reviews in Ecology and Systematics, 20:431–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doyle, J. A., and Donoghue, M. J.
1987. The importance of fossils in elucidating seed plant phylogeny and macroevolution. Reviews in Paleobotany and Palynology, 50:63–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duméril, A. M. C.
1806. Zoologie Analytique, ou méthode naturelle de classification des Animaux, etc.
Paris, 344 p.Google Scholar
Efron, B.
1979. Bootstrapping methods: another look at the jackknife. The Annals of Statistics, 7:1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faith, D. P.
1991. Cladistic permutation tests for monophyly and nonmonophyly. Systematic Zoology, 40:366–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faith, D. P., and Cranston, P. S.
1991. Could a cladogram this short have arisen by chance alone?: on permutation tests for cladistic structure. Cladistics, 7:1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farris, J. S.
1969. A successive approximations approach to character weighting. Systematic Zoology, 18:374–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felsenstein, J.
1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution. 39:783–791.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fretter, V., and Graham, A.
1962. British prosobranch molluscs. Ray Society, London, 755 p.Google Scholar
Gabb, W. M.
1876. Notes on American Cretaceous fossils with descriptions of some new species. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 28:276–324.Google Scholar
Gardner, J. A.
1948. Mollusca from the Miocene and lower Pliocene of Virginia and North Carolina, Part 2, Scaphopoda and Gastropoda. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 199B:179–310Google Scholar
Garvie, C. L.
1996. The molluscan macrofauna of the Reklaw Formation, Marquez Member (Eocene: lower Claibornian), in Texas. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 111:1–177.Google Scholar
Gauthier, J., Kluge, A., and Rowe, T.
1988. Amniote phylogeny and the importance of fossils. Cladistics, 4:105–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gili, C., and Martinell, J.
1994. Relationships between species longevity and larval ecology in nassariid gastropods. Lethaia. 27:291–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A.
1949. The molluscan stomach. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 61:737–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J. E.
1847. A list of the genera of Recent Mollusca, their synonyms and types. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 15:129–219.Google Scholar
Gray, J. E.
1852. (completion of) A synopsis of the Mollusca of Great Britain… by William Elford Leach. London, 376 p.Google Scholar
Griffith, E., and Pidgeon, E.
1834. The Mollusca and Radiata. Volume 12 of the Animal Kingdom by Cuvier, by E. Griffith. London, 601 p.Google Scholar
Hillis, D. M., and Bull, J. J.
1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Systematic Biology, 42:182–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iredale, T.
1916. On two editions of Duméril's Zoologie Analytique. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, 12:79–84.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. I.
1979. Paleoecology, Paleobiogeography, and Evolutionary Patterns of Late Cretaceous Gulf and Atlantic Coastal Plain Mollusks. unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 604 p.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. I., and Lutz, R. A.
1983. Larval ecology of marine benthic invertebrates: Paleobiological implications. Biological Reviews, 58:21–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, C. W.
1905. Annotated list of the types of invertebrate Cretaceous fossils in the collection of the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 57:4–28.Google Scholar
Kantor, Y. I.
1996. Phylogeny and relationships of neogastropoda, p. 221–230. In
Taylor, J. (ed.), Origin and evolutionary radiation of the Mollusca. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Keen, A. M.
1971. Sea Shells of Tropical West America. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 1064 p.Google Scholar
Kluge, A. G., and Farris, J. S.
1969. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Systematic Zoology, 18:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kool, S. P.
1993. Phylogenetic analysis of the Rapaninae (Neogastropoda: Muricidae). Malacologia, 35:155–259.Google Scholar
Ladd, H. F.
1977. Cenozoic fossil mollusks from western Pacific islands; Gastropods (Eratoidae through Harpidae): U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper, 533:1–84.Google Scholar
Locard, A.
1886. Prodome de malacologie francaise. Catalogue général des mollusques vivants de France (Mollusques marins). Paris, 778 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lozouet, P.
1999. Nouvelles espèces de gastèropodes (Mollusca: Gastropoda) de l'Oligocène et du Miocène inférieur d'Aquitaine (Sud-Ouest de la France). Partie 2. Cossmanniana, 6:1–68.Google Scholar
MacNeil, F. S., 1960. Tertiary and Quaternary Gastropoda from Okinawa. U. S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper, 339:1–148.Google Scholar
MacNeil, F. S., and Dockery, D. T. III. 1984. Lower Oligocene Gastropoda, Scaphopoda, and Cephalopoda of the Vicksburg Group in Mississippi. Mississippi Bureau of Geology Bulletin, 124, 415 p.Google Scholar
Maddison, W. P., Donoghue, M. J. and Maddison, D. R.
1984. Outgroup analysis and parsimony. Systematic Zoology, 33:83–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, W. C., 1937. Mollusks of the Tampa and Suwanee limestones of Florida. Florida Geological Survey Bulletin, 15:1–334.Google Scholar
Michaux, B.
1989. Cladograms can reconstruct phylogenies: An example from the fossil record. Alcheringa, 13:21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikkelsen, P. M.
1996. The evolutionary relationships of Cephalaspidea s.l. (Gastropoda: Opisthobranchia): A phylogenetic analysis. Malacologia, 37:375–442.Google Scholar
Monterosato, T. di.
1912. Historique du Nassa tinei
. Journal de Conchyliologie, 59:294–296.Google Scholar
Montfort, D. de, 1810. Conchyliologie systematique et classification méthodique des coquilles. Coquilles univalves, non cloisonnée. volume 2, F. Schoell, Paris, 676 p.Google Scholar
Mostafavi, N.
1978. Die Gattung Hinia (Nassariidae, Gastropoda) im Tertiär NW-Deutschlands. Meyniana, 30:29–53.Google Scholar
Nelson, C. M.
1978.
Neptunea (Gastropoda: Buccinacea) in the Neogene of the North Pacific and adjacent Bering Sea. Veliger, 21:203–215.Google Scholar
Nuttall, C. P., and Cooper, J.
1973. A review of some English Palaeogene Nassariidae, formerly referred to Cominella
. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Geology, 23:177–219.Google Scholar
Olsson, A. A.
1964. Neogene mollusks of northwestern Ecuador. Paleontological Research Institute, Ithaca, New York, 256 p.Google Scholar
d'Orbigny, A., 1841. Voyage dans l'Amerique Meridionale. Mollusques. Paris, 5:409–488.Google Scholar
Payne, C. M., and Crisp, M.
1989. Ultrastructure and histochemistry of the posterior oesophagus of Nassarius reticulatus (Linnaeus). Journal of Molluscan Studies, 55:313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peile, A. J.
1936. Radula notes. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, 22:139–144.Google Scholar
Peile, A. J.
1937. Radula notes—II. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, 22:181–186.Google Scholar
Ponder, W.
1973. The origin and evolution of the Neogastropoda. Malacologia, 12:295–338.Google ScholarPubMed
Ponder, W., and Lindberg, D. R.
1997. Towards a phylogeny of gastropod molluscs: an analysis using morphological characters. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 119:83–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponder, W., and Warén, A.
1988. Classification of the Caenogastropoda and Heterostropha—a list of the family-group names and higher taxa. Malacological Review Supplement, 4:288–329.Google Scholar
Powell, A. W. B.
1929. The Recent and Tertiary species of the genus Buccinulum in New Zealand, with a review of related genera and families. Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, 60:57–65.Google Scholar
Risbec, J.
1952. Observations sur l'anatomie des Nassidae de Nouvelle-Calédonie. Société Zoologique de France Bulletin, 77:487–495.Google Scholar
Roeding, P. F.
1798. Museum Boltenianum sive Catalogus Cimeliorum e tribus regnis naturae… pars 2 continens Conchylia sive Testacea univalvia, bivalvia et multivalvia. Hamburg, 199 p.Google Scholar
Sanderson, M. J.
1989. Confidence limits on phylogenies: The bootstrap revisited. Cladistics, 5:113–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanderson, M. J.
1995. Objections to bootstrapping phylogenies: A critique. Systematic Biology, 44:299–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanderson, M. J., and Donoghue, M. J.
1989. Patterns of variation in levels of homoplasy. Evolution, 43:1781–1795.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanderson, M. J., and Donoghue, M. J.
1996. The relationship between homoplasy and confidence in a phylogenetic tree, p. 67–89. In
Sanderson, M. J. and Hufford, L. (eds.), Homoplasy: The Recurrence of Similarity in Evolution. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shuto, T.
1969. Neogene Gastropods from Panay Island, the Philippines, Contributions to the Geology and Palaeontology of Southeast Asia LXVIII. Memoirs of the Faculty of Science Kyushu University, Series D, 19:1–250.Google Scholar
Simone, L. R. L.
1996. Anatomy and systematics of Buccinanops gradatus (Deshayes, 1844) and Buccinanops moniliferus (Kiener, 1834) (Neogastropoda, Muricoidea) from the southeastern coast of Brazil. Malacologia, 38:87–102.Google Scholar
Sohl, N. F.
1964. Neogastropoda, Opisthobranchia and Basommatophora from the Ripley, Owl Creek, and Prairie Bluff Formations. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 331-B:153–344.Google Scholar
Stimpson, W.
1865. On certain genera and families of zoophagous gasteropods. American Journal of Conchology, 1:55–64.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. L.
1993. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (PAUP), version 3.1.1. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. L.
1998. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and other methods) (PAUP*), version 4.0. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. D., Morris, N. J.,and Taylor, C. N.
1980. Food specialization and the evolution of predatory prosobranch gastropods. Palaeontology, 23:375–409.Google Scholar
Thiele, J.
1929. Handbuch der systematischen Weichtierkunde. volume 1. Gustav Fischer, Jena, 376 p.Google Scholar
Titova, L. V.
1993. The early history of the North Pacific Ancistrolepidinae (Gastropoda: Buccinidae). Ruthenica, 3:1–16.Google Scholar
Titova, L. V.
1994. Cenozoic history of Turritelloidea and Buccinoidea (Mollusca: Gastropoda) in the North Pacific. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 108:319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troschel, F. H.
1867. Das Gebiss der Schnecken. Nicolaische Verlags-Buchhandlung, Berlin, 51–96.Google Scholar
Tryon, W. G. Jr
1882. Manual of conchology, volume 4. Published by the author, Philadelphia, 276 p.Google Scholar
Vermeij, G. J., and Signor, P. W.
1992. The geographic, taxonomic and temporal distribution of determinate growth in marine gastropods. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 47:233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vokes, E. H.
1970. The genus Trajana (Mollusca: Gastropoda) in the New World. Tulane Studies in Geology and Paleontology, 7:75–83.Google Scholar
Vredenburg, E.
1925. Descriptions of Mollusca from the post-Eocene Tertiary Formation of North-Western India: Cephalopoda, Opisthobranchiata, Siphonostomata. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, 50:1–350.Google Scholar
Wade, B.
1917. New and little known Gastropoda from the Upper Cretaceous of Tennessee. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 69:280–304.Google Scholar
Wagner, P. J.
1995. Stratigraphic tests of cladistic hypotheses. Paleobiology, 21:153–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenz, W.
1943. Gastropoda. Allgemeiner Teil und Prosobranchia, p. 949–1639. In
Schwindewolf, O. (ed.), Handbuch der Paläozoologie volume 6. Gebrüder Borntraeger, Berlin.Google Scholar
Wenzel, J. W.
1997. When is a phylogenetic test good enough?, p. 31–45. In
Grandcolas, P. (ed.), The origin of biodiversity in insects: phylogenetic tests of evolutionary scenarios. Mémoires du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 173.Google Scholar
Wise, J. B.
1996. Morphology and phylogenetic relationships of certain pyramidellid taxa (Heterobranchia). Malacologia, 37:443–511.Google Scholar
Woodring, W. P., 1928. Miocene Mollusks from Bowden, Jamaica; Part II, gastropods and discussion of results. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication
385:1–564.Google Scholar