ALBERT

Notes: [Auszug] ANIMAL behaviour, both within and between species, tends to exhibit much greater variability than does morphology or physiology, This makes it difficult to reconstruct phylogenies from behaviour patterns. The problems are particularly acute for mammals, where social be-haviour can be very variable ...

Notes: [Auszug] The first fossil evidence for 'primates of modern aspect' — the euprimates — appears abruptly in the northern continents at the beginning of the Eocene, about 55 million years ago. Eocene primates are well documented from sites in North America and Europe, but specimens from Asia have ...

Notes: [Auszug] Primate evolution attracts special interest because of its direct relevance to human origins. The fossil record remains extremely sparse, however, and that is particularly true of a group called the strepsirrhines, which comprises the bushbabies and lorises — together, the lorisiforms — ...

Notes: [Auszug] SIR - Fossil specimens can be restored, measured and replicated without physical contact using a combination of computerized tomography (CT), computer-assisted reconstruction and rapid prototyping. We have used this procedure to reconstruct and reinterpret fragments of a ...

Notes: [Auszug] Divergence times estimated from molecular data often considerably predate the earliest known fossil representatives of the groups studied. For the order Primates, molecular data calibrated with various external fossil dates uniformly suggest a mid-Cretaceous divergence from other placental ...

Notes: Abstract. The New World monkeys are divided into two main groups, Callitrichidae and Cebidae. Callimico goeldii shares traits with both the Cebidae and the Callitrichidae. Recent morphological phyletic studies generally place Callimico as the most basal member of the Callitrichidae. In contrast, genetic studies (immunological, restriction fragment, and sequence data) have consistently placed Callimico somewhere within the Callitrichidae, not basal to this clade. A DNA sequence data set from the terminal 236 codons of the mitochondrial ND4 gene and the tRNAHis, tRNASer, and tRNALeu genes was generated to clarify the position of Callimico. The sequences of 887 base pairs were analyzed by maximum-parsimony, neighbor-joining, and maximum-likelihood methods. The results of these various methods are generally congruent and place Callimico within the Callitrichidae between the marmosets (Callithrix and Cebuella) and the tamarins (Saguinus and Leontopithecus). Combined analyses of all suitable nuclear and mitochondrial gene sequences confirm the position of Callimico between the marmosets and the tamarins. As available molecular evidence indicates that Callimico is more closely related to the marmosets than to the tamarins, a reconsideration of the morphological evidence in light of the consensus tree from DNA sequence analyses is warranted. The marmosets and tamarins share four morphological characters (loss of the third molar, loss of the hypocone, reduced body size, reproductive twinning). Dwarfism may have evolved repeatedly among the Callitrichidae. It is well-known that the loss of a character can occur many times independently. The reproduction of marmosets and tamarins is extremely specialized and it is difficult to imagine that this complex and unique twinning system evolved separately in marmosets and tamarins. However, it is possible that a secondary reversal to single offspring took place in Callimico.

Notes: [Auszug] Recent discoveries of fossil primate specimens have produced several surprises and challenged prevailing views of early primate evolution. Plesiadapiforms, long regarded as 'archaic primates', may perhaps be linked to the peculiar colugos instead. Inferred relationships of the earliest known ...

Notes: [Auszug] A comparative study has now been carried out by one of us (F.D'S.) on the reproduction of three tree-shrew species representative of the adaptive range within the subfamily Tupaiinae (possibly excluding Dendrogale). The study included one of the largest, predominantly terrestrial species Lyonogale ...

Notes: [Auszug] Field studies in Madagascar and Gaboon have shown that there are many ecological and behavioural similarities between Cheirogaleinae (mouse and dwarf lemurs) and Galaginae (bush babies), which may reflect the retention of ancestral primate features. If this is so, the relationships of lemurs and ...

Notes: Abstract I review new evidence on origins and adaptive radiation of Malagasy lemurs, a remarkably diverse group containing 13% of living primate species. The number of recognized lemur species has increased significantly, partly due to research revealing specific subdivisions within known populations but mainly because of discovery of new populations through fieldwork. Some species feared to be extinct have also been rediscovered. Specific numbers have increased particularly in small-bodied, cryptic genera for which continued research will surely reveal even more species. Adaptative radiation of lemurs has been essentially confined to Madagascar. The high density of lemur species on that island, associated with very small geographical ranges, has major implications both for their evolutionary divergence and for conservation. Reconstructions of phylogenetic relationships among primates have been considerably enhanced by DNA sequence data. Sufficient data are now available from both nuclear and mitochondrial sequences to examine relationships among and within the major groups of living primates. Most studies have confirmed that lemurs constitute a monophyletic sister-group of the lorisiform clade and all exclude a specific relationship between cheirogaleids and lorisiforms repeatedly inferred from morphological evidence. However, some analyses indicate that the aye-aye may have branched away before the divergence between other lemurs and lorisiforms. DNA sequence analyses have also yielded a broad consensus for relationships between Eulemur, Hapalemur, Lemur and Varecia: Varecia branched away first, while Lemur is more closely related to Hapalemur than to Eulemur. As debate about phylogenetic relationships among lemurs and other primates seems to have been settled in favor of lemur monophyly (possibly excluding the aye-aye), only a single invasion of Madagascar is required; but it must still be explained how ancestral lemurs could have migrated there at an appropriate time. Separation between Madagascar and Africa was apparently complete by about 120 Ma, too far in the past for direct overland migration. A recent hypothesis suggested that uplifted land in the Mozambique Channel assisted colonization of Madagascar 26-45 Ma, seemingly agreeing with an estimated date of about 40 Ma for divergence of lemurs from other primates. However, mounting evidence suggests that divergence occurred significantly earlier. Because the earliest known fossil representatives of several modern orders of placental mammals (including primates) are dated no earlier than the early Tertiary, it is widely accepted that their divergence took place after the Cretaceous/Tertiary mass extinction. Yet the known fossil record can only yield minimum divergence times; if sampling is poor and/or biased there may be a considerable discrepancy between minimum and actual dates. There is, for example, virtually no known fossil record for lemurs in Madagascar and the earliest known representatives are subfossil lemurs, so in this case a direct reading of the fossil record would indicate that the lemurs first originated just a few thousand years ago! Examination of underestimation of times of origin because of poor sampling in the fossil record has confirmed previous suggestions that primates originated considerably earlier than generally believed. Several recent phylogenetic reconstructions based on DNA sequence data and using calibration dates derived from groups other than primates provide independent support for this inference. Overall, it now seems that primates originated at around 90 Ma rather than the 55 Ma indicated by direct reading of the known fossil record. Hence, colonization of Madagascar by lemurs would have taken place at about 80 Ma, double the date usually accepted, and should be interpreted in terms of contemporary continental relationships.