Fossil Record of the Origin of Baupläne and Its Implications

  • J. W. Valentine
Conference paper
Part of the Dahlem Workshop Reports book series (DAHLEM, volume 36)

Abstract

Animal Baupläne and Unterbaupläne appear abruptly in the fossil record, mostly developing early in Phanerozoic time; metazoan radiations near the Precambrian/Cambrian boundary may have produced scores of phylum-level taxa, and during Cambrian and Ordovician time, hundreds of class-level taxa. Ancestors and intermediates are unknown or are conjectural as fossils. About one in ten invertebrate species is a known fossil, and sampling of the Cambrian and Ordovician faunas appears at least average for the Phanerozoic, so that many species representing ancestral and intermediate lineages should have been discovered if they could be fossilized as easily as the average species which is found. Transformations between Baupläne most likely occurred in small localized populations which evolved rapidly, perhaps the restructuring of a partitioned genome via regulatory changes, commonly creating heterochronies, can account for the large-scale but rapid morphological changes required. Virtual restriction of Bauplan origin to the early Phanerozoic may be owing to the open adaptive space and to simpler metazoan genomes at that time.

Keywords

Permian Recombination Superoxide Shale Lution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bannister JV, Parker MW (1985) The presence of a copper/zinc superoxide dismutase in the bacterium Photobactorium leiognathi: A likely case of gene transfer from eukaryotes to prokaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 82: 149–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benveniste RE (1985) The contribution of retroviruses to the study of mammalian evolution. In: Molecular evolutionary genetics, ed Maclntyre RJ. New York: PlenumGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cloud PE (1949) Some problems and patterns of evolution exemplified by fossil invertebrates. Evolution 2: 322–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Conway Morris S (1979) The Burgess Shale (Middle Cambrian) fauna. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 10: 327–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crimes TP (1974) Colonisation of the early ocean floor. Nature 248: 328–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eldredge N, Gould SJ (1972) Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. In: Models in Paleobiology, ed Schopf TJM, pp 82–115. San Francisco: Freeman, CooperGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Erwin DH, Valentine JW (1984) “Hopeful monsters,” transposons, and Metazoan radiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 81: 5482–5483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glaessner MF (1984) The dawn of animal life, a biohistorical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    House MR (ed) (1979) The origin of major invertebrate groups. London: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jablonski D, Sepkoski J J Jr, Bottjer DJ, Sheehan PM (1983) Onshore-offshore patterns in the evolution of Phanerozoic shelf communities. Science 222: 1123–1125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lande R (1980) Genetic variation and phenotypic evolution during allopatric speciation. Am Nat 116: 463–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lowenstam HA, Margulis L (1980) Evolutionary prerequisites for early Phanerozoic calcareous skeletons. Biosystems 12: 27–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matthews SC, Missarzhevsky VV (1975) Small shelly fossils of Late Precambrian and Early Cambrian age: A review of recent work. J Geol Soc Lond 131: 289–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Raup DM (1976) Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: A tabulation. Paleobiology 2: 279–288Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rozanov AY et al. (1969) Tommotski Yarus i problema nizheni Grantitsy Keembriya [Tommotion Stage and the Lower Cambrian boundary problem]. Trudy Geol Inst Akad Nauk SSSR 206: 1–380 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Runnegar B (1982) The Cambrian explosion: animals or fossils? J Geol Soc Austral 29: 395–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sadler DM (1981) Sediment accumulation rates and the completeness of stratigraphie sections. J Geol 89: 569–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seilacher A (1964) Biogenic sedimentary structures. In: Approaches to Paleocology, eds Imbrie J, Newell ND, pp 296–316. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stanley SM (1979) Macroevolution, pattern and process. San Francisco: Freeman and CoGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Valentine JW (1973) Evolutionary paleoecology of the marine biosphere. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Valentine JW (1980) Determinants of diversity in higher taxonomic categories. Paleobiology 6: 444–450Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Valentine JW (1981) The lophophorate condition. In: Lophophorates, eds Dutro JT Jr, Boardman RS, pp 190–204. University of Tennessee Department of Geological Sciences Studies in Geology 5Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Valentine JW, Erwin DH (1983) Patterns of diversification of higher taxa: A test of macroevolutionary paradigms. In: Modalités, rhythmes et mécanismes de l’évolution biologique: Gradualism phyletique on équilibrés ponctues?, ed Chaline J. Coll Int CNRS 330: 219–223Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Valentine JW, Foin TC, Peart D (1978) A provincial model of Phanerozoic marine diversity. Paleobiology 4: 55–66Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wright S (1982) Character change, speciation, and the higher taxa. Evolution 36: 427–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr. S. Bernhard, Dahlem Konferenzen 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. W. Valentine
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Geological SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations