Journal of Zoology

Volume 280, Issue 3 p. 297-308

Quantitative analysis of the influences of phylogeny and ecology on phocid and otariid pinniped (Mammalia; Carnivora) cranial morphology

K. E. Jones,

K. E. Jones

Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

^*Current address: Center for Functional Anatomy and Evolution, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

Search for more papers by this author

A. Goswami,

A. Goswami

Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment and Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, London, UK

Search for more papers by this author

K. E. Jones,

K. E. Jones

Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

^*Current address: Center for Functional Anatomy and Evolution, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

Search for more papers by this author

A. Goswami,

A. Goswami

Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment and Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, London, UK

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 09 February 2010

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00662.x

Citations: 46

Correspondence
Anjali Goswami, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment and Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, 4 Stephenson Way, London NW1 2HE, UK. Tel: +44 0 20 7679 7411
Email: [email protected]

Editor: Andrew Kitchener

Read the full text

About

PDF

Tools

Share a link

Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
Wechat

Abstract

Pinnipeds (seals, sea lions and walruses) are secondarily marine carnivorans that exhibit a wide range of feeding and reproductive specializations. Extant pinnipeds are split into three families: Phocidae (seals), Otariidae (sea lions) and Odobenidae (walruses). Morphometric analyses were used to examine cranial morphology in otariid and phocid pinnipeds. Phocids are more ecologically and taxonomically diverse than otariids, and this study quantitatively assessed the effects of life history, phylogeny and ecology on cranial morphology in these closely related clades of aquatic carnivorans. Fifty-three to 58 three-dimensional landmarks were gathered from 138 specimens, representing 31 of the 33 extant species of otariids and phocids. Principal components analysis was used to identify major axes of variation, and principal component scores were compared with phylogenetic distances and ecological variables to test for significant correlates of skull morphology. Results showed that phocids exhibit a much greater diversity of adult skull morphology than otariids. Shape differences within adult otariids were dominated by males of only one species, Otaria flavescens. In contrast, several species of phocids deviated markedly from the mean phocid morphology. These atypical morphologies were consistently associated with specializations of either feeding or mating strategies. Ontogenetic shape changes are greater, relative to interspecific differences, in otariids than in phocids, and shape dimorphism was observed in only one otariid and two phocid species. Unexpectedly, neither otariids nor phocids showed strong correlations between phylogenetic relationship and cranial morphology. Both clades show strong correlations between cranial shape and some life history and some environmental variables, but phocids show stronger correlations with life-history variables, perhaps reflecting the broad range of reproductive strategies observed in phocids.

Supporting Information

References

Adam, P.J. & Berta, A. (2002). Evolution of prey capture strategies and diet in the Pinnipedimorpha (Mammalia, Carnivora). Oryctos 4, 83–107.

Google Scholar
Arnason, U., Gullberg, A., Janke, A., Kullberg, M., Lehman, N., Petrov, E.A. & Vainola, R. (2006). Pinniped phylogeny and a new hypothesis for their origin and dispersal. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 41, 345–354.
10.1016/j.ympev.2006.05.022
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Berg, L.M. & Pyenson, N.D. (2008). Osteological correlates and phylogenetic analysis of deep diving in living and extinct pinnipeds: what good are big eyeballs? J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 28 (Suppl.), 51A.

Google Scholar
Brunner, S. (2003). Fur seals and sea lions (otariidae): identification of species and taxonomic review. Syst. Biodivers. 1, 339–439.

Google Scholar
Cassini, M.H. (1999). The evolution of reproductive systems in pinnipeds. Behav. Ecol. 10, 612–616.
10.1093/beheco/10.5.612
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Deméré, T.A., Berta, A. & Adam, P.J. (2003). Pinnipedimorph evolutionary biogeography. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 279, 32–76.
10.1206/0003-0090(2003)279<0032:C>2.0.CO;2
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Felsenstein, J. (1985). Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 125, 1–15.
10.1086/284325
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Ferguson, S.H. & Higdon, J.W. (2006). How seals divide up the world: environment, life history, and conservation. Oecologia 150, 318–329.

PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Flynn, J.J., Finarelli, J.A., Zehr, S., Hsu, J. & Nedbal, M.A. (2005). Molecular phylogeny of the Carnivora (Mammalia): assessing the impact of increased sampling on resolving enigmatic relationships. Syst. Biol. 54, 317–337.

PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hammer, O., Harper, D.A.T. & Ryan, P.D. (2001). PAST: palaeontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electron. 4, 9pp.

CASGoogle Scholar
Jones, K.E. & Goswami, A. (2009). Morphometric analysis of cranial shape in pinnipeds (Mammalia, Carnivora): convergence, ecology, ontogeny, and dimorphism. In Carnivoran evolution: new views on phylogeny, form, and function. A. Goswami & A. Friscia (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Google Scholar
King, J.E. (1983). Seals of the world. London: British Museum (Natural History).

Google Scholar
Kovacs, K.M. & Lavigne, D.M. (1992). Maternal investment in otariid seals and walruses. Can. J. Zool. – Rev. Can. Zool. 70, 1953–1964.
10.1139/z92-265
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Marshall, C., Kovacs, K. & Lydersen, C. (2008). Feeding kinematics, suction and hydraulic jetting capabilities in bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus). J. Exp. Biol. 211, 699–708.
10.1242/jeb.009852
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Martins, E.P. (2004). COMPARE, version 4.6b: computer programmes for the statistical analysis of comparative data. Bloomington: Department of Biology, Indiana University.

Google Scholar
Muizon, C.de (1982). Phocid phylogeny and dispersal. Ann. S. Afr. Mus. 89, 175–213.

Google Scholar
O'Higgins, P. & Jones, N. (2006). Morphologika: tools for statistical shape analysis. Hull York Medical School. Available at http://hyms.fme.googlepages.com/resources

Google Scholar
Reeves, R., Stewart, B.S., Clapham, P.J. & Powell, J.A. (2002). Sea mammals of the world. London: A & C Black Publishers.

Google Scholar
Repenning, C.A. (1976). Adaptive evolution of sea lions and walruses. Syst. Zool. 25, 375–390.
10.2307/2412512
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Sanfelice, D. & de Freitas, T.R.O. (2008). A comparative description of dimorphism in skull ontogeny of Arctocephalus australis, Callorhinus ursinus and Otaria byronia (Carnivora: Otariidae). J. Mammal. 89, 336–346.
10.1644/07-MAMM-A-344.1
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Schulz, T.M. & Bowen, W.D. (2004). Pinniped lactation strategies: evaluation of data on maternal and offspring life history traits. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 20, 86–114.

Web of Science®Google Scholar
Schulz, T.M. & Bowen, W.D. (2005). The evolution of lactation strategies in pinnipeds: a phylogenetic analysis. Ecol. Monogr. 75, 159–177.

Web of Science®Google Scholar
Sinclair, E.H. & Zeppelin, T.K. (2002). Seasonal and spatial differences in diet in the western stock of Stellar sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus). J. Mammal. 83, 973–990.
10.1644/1545-1542(2002)083<0973:SASDID>2.0.CO;2
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Williams, T.M., Rutishauser, M., Long, B., Fink, T., Gafney, J., Mostman-Liwanag, H. & Casper, D. (2007). Seasonal variability in otariid energetics: implications for the effects of predators on localized prey resources. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 80, 433–443.

CASWeb of Science®Google Scholar
D.E. Wilson & D.M. Reeder (Eds). (2005). Mammal species of the world. A taxonomic and geographic reference, 3rd edn. Vol. 2. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Google Scholar
Wynen, L.P., Goldsworthy, S.D., Insley, S.J., Adams, M., Bickham, J.W., Francis, J., Pablo Gallo, J., Rus Hoelzel, A., Majluf, P., White, R.W.G. & Slade, R. (2001). Phylogenetic relationships within the eared seals (Otariidae: Carnivora): implications for the historical biogeography of the family. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 21, 270–284.

CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wyss, A.R. (1988). Evidence from flipper structure for a single origin of pinnipeds. Nature 334, 427–428.
10.1038/334427a0
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Zelditch, M., Swiderski, D., Sheets, H. & Fink, W. (2004). Geometric morphometrics for biologists: a primer. Boston: Elsevier Academic Press.

Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume280, Issue3

March 2010

Pages 297-308

Quantitative analysis of the influences of phylogeny and ecology on phocid and otariid pinniped (Mammalia; Carnivora) cranial morphology

Abstract

Supporting Information

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Quantitative analysis of the influences of phylogeny and ecology on phocid and otariid pinniped (Mammalia; Carnivora) cranial morphology

Abstract

Supporting Information

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information