Origination and diversification of life -- the grand scale.

As a special case later in this lecture, we will consider the origination and diversification of arthropods.

In two weeks, we will take up this problem when we talk about development and evolution.

A Brief History of Time:

Before Metazoa (time is measured in billions of years ago = bya).

1. First fossil life -- prokaryote

The earth is 4.5 bya.

Oldest sedimentary rocks are 3.7 bya. Oldest "fossil-like objects" are 3.4 bya.

The fossils are largely single cells or mats of connected single-cells.

Evidence for oxygen increase in atmosphere 2 bya.

Diversification of aerobes and presumably extinction of some anaerobes.

2. When did the eukaryotes evolve (unicellular algae)?

What of the trends for increase in size? Compare cell size of extant prokaryotes (and eukaryotes) and compare this with the size distribution in the fossil record. From this it is clear that eukaryotes first appeared ~1.45 bya.

What about the molecular phylogeny of prokaryotes and eukaryotes?

The molecular phylogeny has a split in prokaryotes into two groups archaebacteria and eubacteria that occurred prior to the eukaryotes orgination.

Subsequent to or coincident with the evolution of eukaryotes, was the sybiotic origin of the cell organelles: mitochondria and chloroplasts (derived from members of the eubacteria).

3. When did the metazoa (multicellular eukaryotes) evolve?

First large algae and invertebrates found 0.7 bya = 700 mya.

First hard parts in algae and metazoa 0.6 bya = 600 mya.

prior to this there was a preservation bias -- hard parts are much more likely to preserve.


Origin of the metazoa (with emphasis on Arthropods)

Change time scale. For Metazoa we deal in millions of years ago = mya.

Question: Can we use cladistic analysis to refine the resolution of the phylogenetic relationships among members of a fossil assemblage?

Ediacarian Assemblage -- soft bodied, Precambrian fauna

Best known Precambrian Fossil assemblage is Ediacarian Period 670-550 mya

What was present (overhead). genera species

Cnidaria (Jelly fish, polyps, etc.)(67 percent) 14 19

Annelida (marine worms) (25 percent) 3 7

Arthropods (segmented) (5 percent) 2 2

Phylum uncertain (3 percent) 1 1

+ Trace fossils 6 7

Burgess Shale -- hard parts, Middle Cambrian fauna

Burgess shale 44 genera of arthropods - 14 genera of trilobites = 30

What our basic aim with this group of fossils is to construct a phylogeny based on a couple of different character sets

1) based on the Bauplane (Not all Bauplane are seen in real life).

a) presence of carapace or cephalic shield

b) the trunk tergites (components of the biramous limb)

Failure of assumptions: Presence or absence of carapace is adaptively plastic (not slow evolutionry change we would like in parsimony reconstruction). Evidence in later forms -- can be gained or lost.

2) based on cephalic appendages per se -- CEPHALIZATION

preoral appendages + post oral appendages = appendage formula

Evolutionary assumptions used in constructing this tree:

1) primitive form is 1+1 or ~0+1 -> Spriggina from the ediacarian

2) concept of cephalization (specialization of limb function) a sequential process, commencing anteriorly, incorporating appendages posteriorly

For example here is an evolutionary progression (nested set of clades).

Trilobites -> Chelicerates -> Crustaceans

1+3 -> 1+5 -> 2+3


What about subsequent diversification of Arthropods?

Within an adaptive zone (marine arthropods):

1) Do we see a similar pattern of diversification from specialization?

2) Is specialization within a lineage related to diversification of a lineage? Is there a tendency to make finer and finer partitioning of the available ecological space into finer scale "niches"?

3) Are there limits to specialization and diversification (competition)?

Expand on the concept of CEPHALIZATION Briggs 1984

TAGMATIZATION Cisne 1974 Evo. 28.

Fundamental assumptions:

1) Tagmatization -- The degree of arthropod specialization is proportional to morphological specialization of limb pairs

2) Calculate a diversity index for specialization down the length of an arthropod. This captures the specialization of function. Tagmosis index - a measure of diversity along the length of a species.

3) Specialization along the length of the arthropod is in some way related to niche specialization of the arthropod in an ecological sense.

An example of a Key Innovation: Malacostracan evolution (crabs, lobsters)

1) primitively 8 sets of filtering appendages in brine shrimp

2) Malacostracans evolved a filtering maxilla - 1 limb specialized for filtering

3) This frees up the remaining 8 limbs to specialize for other tasks.

Questions (see Price for these points, Chapter 16):

1) How does tagmosis change over time from ancestor to descendant groups? Increases.

2) How does tagmosis change within a lineage?

Increases and then plateaus.

3) What is the correlation between between tagmosis (specialization) and diversification of a lineage? Very strongly positive.


I also discussed the Development of Arthropods,

These notes are on file in the Development and Evolution lectures where they were cross-referenced.


Final point: Are analyses of patterns in the fossil record confounded by preservational biases?

think about it a little...