Advertisement

Journal of Mammalian Evolution

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 1–23 | Cite as

The Calcaneum—On the Heels of Marsupial Locomotion

  • Mina Bassarova
  • Christine M. Janis
  • Michael Archer
Original Paper

Abstract

The potential for making functional interpretations from a single postcranial element for marsupials was investigated through morphometric analysis of the calcanea of 61 extant species from Australia and New Guinea. Extant species were grouped into locomotor categories and a canonical variates analysis was carried out on measurements of their calcanea. A relationship between measurements of the calcanea and the locomotor behavior of species was found, allowing for prediction of locomotor behavior from calcaneum morphometrics. This was applied to fossil marsupial taxa, from early–late Miocene/?Pliocene deposits at Riversleigh, in an attempt to determine their locomotor behavior. Hopping (saltatorial) taxa are distinguished from quadruped terrestrial taxa and taxa capable of climbing (arboreal and scansorial) by their relatively longer tuber calcis and wider calcaneal head, by their dorso-ventrally thicker calcaneal head, and by their calcaneocuboid facet being less steeply angled antero-posteriorly. Taxa capable of climbing are distinguished from quadruped terrestrial taxa by their shorter tuber calcis relative to the calcaneal head and by their smaller calcaneo-astragalar facet. The locomotor categories distinguished in this study (arboreal/scansorial, quadruped terrestrial, and saltatorial) highlight differences between species in their use of available substrates and thus are informative with regards to the structural components of their habitat. The results of this analysis can be used, in combination with other data, to make inferences about the habitats of paleocommunities at Riversleigh through the Miocene. The calcaneum is a dense and very robust element and, therefore, has a good chance of being preserved. This method provides a quick and easy way of inferring locomotion and has a wide potential for application to many fossil deposits because it requires only a single element.

Keywords

Morphometric–functional analysis Fossils Riversleigh Canonical variates analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Vital support for the Riversleigh Fossil Project has been provided by the Australian Research Council, Department of Environment and Heritage, Environment Australia, the University of New South Wales, the Queensland Museum, the Australian Museum, Mount Isa City Council, Outback at Isa, Xstrata, CREATE, and many private supporters and volunteers as well as staff and postgraduate students of the University of New South Wales. We thank D. Arena R. Beck, K. Black, P. Brewer, A. Gillespie, H. Godthelp, S. Hand, B. Kear, J. Louys, K. Roberts, K. Travouillon, and V. Weisbecker for discussion, technical advice and assistance. T. Ennis and S. Ingleby kindly allowed access to comparative specimens at the Australian Museum.

References

  1. Archer M, Godthelp H, Hand SJ, Megirian D (1989) Fossil mammals of Riversleigh, northwestern Queensland: preliminary overview of biostratigraphy, correlation and environmental change. Aust Zool 25:29–65Google Scholar
  2. Archer M, Hand SJ, Godthelp H, Creaser P (1997) Correlation of the Cainozoic sediments of the Riversleigh World Heritage Fossil Property, Queensland, Australia. In: Aguilar JP, Legendre S, Michaux J (eds) Actes du Congress BiochroM’97. Mem Trav EPHE, Inst Monpellier, pp 131–152Google Scholar
  3. Argot C (2001) Functional–adaptive anatomy of the forelimb in the Didelphidae, and the paleobiology of the Paleocene marsupials Mayulestes ferox and Pucadelphys andinus. J Morphol 247:51–79. doi:10.1002/1097-4687(200101)247:1<51::AID-JMOR1003>3.0.CO;2-# PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argot C (2002) Functional–adaptive analysis of the hindlimb anatomy of extant marsupials and the paleobiology of the Paleocene marsupials Mayulestes ferox and Pucadelphys andinus. J Morphol 253:76–108 doi: 10.1002/jmor.1114 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertram JEA, Biewener AA (1990) Differential scaling in the long bones in the terrestrial Carnivora and other mammals. J Morphol 220:157–169 doi: 10.1002/jmor.1052040205 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bishop N (1997) Functional anatomy of the macropodid pes. Proc Linn Soc N S W 117:17–50Google Scholar
  7. Cartmill M (1985) Climbing. In: Hildelbrand M, Bramble DM, Liem KF, Wake DB (eds) Functional Vertebrate Morphology. Belknap, Cambridge MA, pp 73–88Google Scholar
  8. Creaser P (1997) Oligocene–Miocene sediments of Riversleigh: the potential significance of topography. Mem Queensl Mus 41:303–314Google Scholar
  9. Damuth JD (1992) Taxon-free characterization of animal communities. In: Behrensmeyer AK, Damuth JD, Di Michele WA, Potts R, Sues H-D, Wing SL (eds) Terrestrial Ecosystems Through Time. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 183–203Google Scholar
  10. Fa-Hong Y, Yan-Zhang P, Ru-Liang P, Zhi-Zhang Y, Hong W (1993) Comparative studies on ankle joints in quadriceps. Acta Zool Sin 39:424–430Google Scholar
  11. Flannery TF (1995) Mammals of New Guinea. Reed Books, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  12. Flannery TF, Martin R, Szalay A (1996) Tree Kangaroos—A Curious Natural History. Reed Books, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  13. Gordon G (1998) Northern brown bandicoot, Isoodon macrourus (Gould, 1842). In: Strahan R (ed) The Mammals of Australia. New Holland, Sydney, pp 174–175Google Scholar
  14. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis. Prentice-Hall, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. Hall RL, Shereff MJ (1993) Anatomy of the calcaneus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 290:27–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2004) PAST—PAlaeontological STatistics, Version 1.27. Computer program available online at http://folk.uio.no/ohammer/past
  17. Hickman CS (1988) Analysis of form and function in fossils. Am Zool 28:775–793Google Scholar
  18. Janis CM, Theodor JM, Boisvert B (2002) Locomotor evolution in camels revisited: a quantitative analysis of pedal anatomy and the acquisition of the pacing gait. J Vertebr Paleontol 22:110–121 doi: 10.1671/0272-4634(2002)022[0110:LEICRA]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jenkins FA Jr (1974) Tree shrew Locomotion and the origins of primate arborealism. In: Jenkins FA Jr (ed) Primate Locomotion. Academic, New York, pp 85–115Google Scholar
  20. Jenkins FA Jr, McLearn D (1984) Mechanisms of hind foot reversal in climbing mammals. J Morphol 182:197–219 doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051820207 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lemelin P (1999) Morphological correlates of substrate use in didelphid marsupials: implications for primate origins. J Zool (Lond) 247:165–175 doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1999.tb00980.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Oxnard CE (1968) The architecture of the shoulder in some mammals. J Morphol 126:249–290 doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051260302 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Paddle R (2000) The Last Tasmanian Tiger—The History and Extinction of the Thylacine. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. Reyment RA, Blackith RE, Campbell NA (1984) Multivariate Morphometrics. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Sarrafian SK (1993) Biomechanics of the subtalar joint complex. Clin Orthop Relat Res 290:17–26PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Strahan R (ed) (1998) The Mammals of Australia. New Holland, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  27. SYSTAT—Version 7.0 for Windows (1997) SPSS, Chicago (computer program)Google Scholar
  28. Szalay FS (1982) A new appraisal of marsupial phylogeny and classification. In: Archer M (ed) Carnivorous Marsupials. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Australia, pp 621–640Google Scholar
  29. Szalay FS (1994) Evolutionary History of the Marsupials and an Analysis of Osteological Characters. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Szalay FS, Decker RL (1974) Origins, evolution and function of the tarsus in late Cretaceous eutherians and Paleocene primates. In: Jenkins FA Jr (ed) Primate Locomotion. Academic, New York, pp 233–259Google Scholar
  31. Szalay FS, Sargis EJ (2001) Model-based analysis of postcranial osteology of marsupials from the Palaeocene of Itaborai (Brazil) and the phylogenetics and biogeography of Metatheria. Geodiversitas 23:139–302Google Scholar
  32. Turbón D, Pérez-Pérez A, Springer CB (1997) A multivariate analysis of Pleistocene hominids: testing hypotheses of European origins. J Hum Evol 32:449–468 doi: 10.1006/jhev.1996.0119 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Valkenburgh B (1987) Skeletal indicators of locomotor behavior in living and extinct carnivores. J Vertebr Paleontol 7:162–182Google Scholar
  34. Walker A (1974) Locomotor adaptations in past and present prosimian primates. In: Jenkins FA Jr (ed) Primate Locomotion. Academic, New York, pp 349–381Google Scholar
  35. Wells RG (1989) Vombatidae. In: Walton DW, Richardson BJ (eds) Fauna of Australia, vol 1B Mammalia. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, pp 755–768Google Scholar
  36. Youlatos D (2003) Calcaneal features of the Greek Miocene primate Mesopithecus pentelicus (Cercopithecoidea: Colobinae). Geobios 36:229–239 doi: 10.1016/S0016-6995(03)00008-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mina Bassarova
    • 1
  • Christine M. Janis
    • 2
  • Michael Archer
    • 1
  1. 1.Vertebrate Palaeontology Laboratory, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental ScienceUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations