BACKGROUND: Ichthyosaurs were an important group of Mesozoic marine reptiles and existed from the Early Triassic to the early Late Cretaceous. Despite a great diversity in body shapes and feeding adaptations, all share greatly enlarged eyes, an elongated rostrum with numerous conical teeth, and a streamlined body. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Based on new material from China and the restudy of Shastasaurus pacificus, we here reinterpret the classical large-bodied Late Triassic ichthyosaur genus Shastasaurus to differ greatly from the standard ichthyosaurian body plan, indicating much greater morphological diversity and range of feeding adaptations in ichthyosaurs than previously recognized. Phylogenetic analysis indicates a monophyletic clade consisting of the giant Shonisaurus sikanniensis, Guanlingsaurus liangae, and Shastasaurus pacificus to which the genus name Shastasaurus is applied. Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. is from the Late Triassic (Carnian) Xiaowa Formation of Guizhou Province, southwestern China. The species combines a diminutive head with an entirely toothless and greatly reduced snout. The species also has by far the highest vertebral count among ichthyosaurs (86 presacral vertebrae and >110 caudal vertebrae), a count that is also very high for tetrapods in general. A reduced toothless snout and a diminutive head is also apparently present in the giant S. sikanniensis and presumably in S. pacificus. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In analogy to many modern odontocetes, Shastasaurus is interpreted as a specialized suction feeder on unshelled cephalopods and fish, suggesting a unique but widespread Late Triassic diversification of toothless, suction-feeding ichthyosaurs. Suction feeding has not been hypothesized for any of the other diverse marine reptiles of the Mesozoic before, but in Shastasaurus may be linked to the Late Triassic minimum in atmospheric oxygen.
BACKGROUND: Ichthyosaurs were an important group of Mesozoic marine reptiles and existed from the Early Triassic to the early Late Cretaceous. Despite a great diversity in body shapes and feeding adaptations, all share greatly enlarged eyes, an elongated rostrum with numerous conical teeth, and a streamlined body. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Based on new material from China and the restudy of Shastasaurus pacificus, we here reinterpret the classical large-bodied Late Triassic ichthyosaur genus Shastasaurus to differ greatly from the standard ichthyosaurian body plan, indicating much greater morphological diversity and range of feeding adaptations in ichthyosaurs than previously recognized. Phylogenetic analysis indicates a monophyletic clade consisting of the giant Shonisaurus sikanniensis, Guanlingsaurus liangae, and Shastasaurus pacificus to which the genus name Shastasaurus is applied. Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. is from the Late Triassic (Carnian) Xiaowa Formation of Guizhou Province, southwestern China. The species combines a diminutive head with an entirely toothless and greatly reduced snout. The species also has by far the highest vertebral count among ichthyosaurs (86 presacral vertebrae and >110 caudal vertebrae), a count that is also very high for tetrapods in general. A reduced toothless snout and a diminutive head is also apparently present in the giant S. sikanniensis and presumably in S. pacificus. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In analogy to many modern odontocetes, Shastasaurus is interpreted as a specialized suction feeder on unshelled cephalopods and fish, suggesting a unique but widespread Late Triassic diversification of toothless, suction-feeding ichthyosaurs. Suction feeding has not been hypothesized for any of the other diverse marine reptiles of the Mesozoic before, but in Shastasaurus may be linked to the Late Triassic minimum in atmospheric oxygen.
The Triassic witnessed an unprecedented radiation of marine reptiles, possibly
triggered by the Permian/Triassic extinction event which left the marine environment
largely devoid of metazoans [1], [2] or by the dramatic decline of atmospheric oxygen level
[3], [4] during this
period. The most successful group in this radiation were the ichthyosaurs [5]–[9] which appear in
the fossil record in the latest Early Triassic and reached their greatest diversity
during the Middle and Late Triassic [5]–[8]. Ichthyosaurs were very well
adapted to the marine environment as evidenced by their worldwide record in open
marine sediments. This invasion of the marine realm was faciliated by live birth
which is already seen in the earliest forms [5]–[9]. Ichthyosaurs are characterized
by their greatly enlarged eyes, elongated rostrum and numerous conical teeth.Ichthyosaurs show many evolutionary convergences with modern cetaceans [5], [6], [8], providing
important clues to functional versus phylogenetic constraints in whale evolution. As
attested to by fossil stomach contents, the elongated and toothed ichthyosaur
rostrum was used to capture fish and squid, the diet of most extant odontocetes.
Some of these odontocetes, such as the beaked whales (Ziphiidae), some delphinids,
pygmy and dwarf sperm whales (Kogia sima and K.
breviceps), and even the sperm whales (Physeter), use
suction feeding instead of an elongate tooth-bearing rostrum to capture their prey
[10], [11], [12]. In fact,
“suction feeding is the dominant method of prey capture in aquatic
vertebrates” [11, p.
1415] but has not been postulated for Mesozoic marine reptiles with
the exception of the giant Shonisaurus sikanniensis
[13].Based on new ichthyosaur finds from China, and the reexamination and reinterpretation
of material from the western USA, we suggest that in the Late Triassic there was a
previously unrecognized global diversification of large suction-feeding ichthyosaurs
that probably were the ecological equivalent to the extant suction-feeding
odontocetes.Large-bodied (adult length >7 m) Late Triassic Ichthyosauria include taxa with the
familiar elongated rostrum equipped with numerous teeth [5], [6] but also a few forms lacking
teeth combined with an abbreviated snout. These include Shastasaurus
liangae comb. nov. [14] from the early Carnian of China, Shastasaurus
sikanniensis comb. nov. [13] from the middle Norian of
British Columbia, and probably Shastasaurus pacificus
[15] from the
late Carnian of California.The youngest of the Chinese Triassic ichthyosaur-bearing formations is the early
Carnian Xiaowa Formation of the Guanling area, Guizhou Province [16]. The
faunistically unique Xiaowa Formation is also known as the Wayao Formation or the
Wayo Member of the Falang Formation in the literature [16]. The fossiliferous black shales
represent the upper part of the lower member of the Xiaowa Formation [16]. Ichthyosaurs
belonging to three different taxa are the most common vertebrate fossils in these
black shales, whereas fish fossils are extremely rare [16]. Most common among the
ichthyosaur taxa is the small (total length <2 m) Qianichthyosaurus
zhoui, followed by the moderately rare and larger (total length <6
m) Guizhouichthyosaurus tangae (probable junior synonyms of this
taxon are Cymbspondylus asiaticus and Pangjiangsaurus
epicharis
[16]), and the large
(total length <9 m) Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov., previously
only known from the poorly prepared holotype of Guanlingsaurus
liangae housed at the Geological Survey of Guizhou Province, Guiyang,
People's Republic of China [16]. Field work by staff of the Wuhan Institute of Geology
and Mineral Resources (the former Yichang Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources
[YIGMR]) resulted in the aquisition of three excellent new specimens of
this species. These and Shastasaurus pacificus
[5], [15] are the focus
of our study.
Materials and Methods
The specimes of S. liangae comb. nov. examined first-hand for this
study are the following three individuals: YIGMR SPCV03107, a large but incomplete
skeleton, YIGMR SPCV03108, a complete but diagenetically flattened skeleton of a
juvenile, and YIGMR SPCV03109, a large and complete but not yet fully prepared
skeleton preserverd in three dimensions. In the collections of the Museum of
Paleontology, University of California at Berkeley, USA (UCMP), the first author
also examined the proposed neotype of Shastasaurus pacificus (UCMP
9017) [5], a
partial skeleton from the Carnian Hosselkus Limestone of Shasta County, California,
USA. This find comprises the skull lacking the snout, the cervical and anterior
dorsal vertebral column and ribs, and parts of the shoulder girdle and forelimbs
[15].The phylogenetic framework for this study was obtained through two different
phylogenetic analyses. One is based on a modified and extended data matrix of Motani
[17] and the
other on a modified and extended data matrix of Sander [6]. The data matrices were edited
with MacClade 4 and analyzed with PAUP 4.0b10. The matrices were modified by adding
four new terminal taxa, Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov.,
Guizhouichthyosaurus tangae
[14], [18], [19],
Shastasaurus sikanniensis comb. nov. [13], and
Callawaya
[20]. In
addition, six new characters were added (Table S1, Table S2, Table S3, Table S4). Shastasaurus
pacificus was recoded in the matrices based on personal inspection by
P.M.S. in 2007 to only include the material from the late Carnian Hosselkuss
Limestone of California [5], [15] for reasons explained below. The modified matrix based on
Motani [17] has 36
taxa and 111 characters, and that based on Sander [6] has 15 taxa (the
Neoichthyosauria being treated as single terminal taxon) and 125 characters. The
search mode was heuristic and employed exactly the same settings as in the original
analyses. The resulting trees were optimized both under DELTRAN and ACCTRAN
character optimization, but only unambiguous character state transformations (Table S5) were
used for inferences about character evolution.
Revised diagnosis based on the phylogenetic analysis
Large to gigantic Shastasauridae diagnosed by the following unambiguous and
unequivocal synapomorphies (Table S5): abbreviated rostrum and
extremely slender lower jaw. Unambiguous but equivocal (i.e. consistency
index is <1) synapomorphies are the lack of a parietal ridge and the loss
of marginal teeth. Three ambiguous and equivocal synapomorphies are listed
in Table
S5. Shastasaurus differs from all other
ichthyosaurs in the reduced snout and lack of teeth. In addition,
Shastasaurus differs from other basal Merriamosauria
except for Shonisaurus popularis and
Besanosaurus in its larger size.
Remarks
The character state “loss of marginal teeth” is also unambiguous
and unequivocal if Hupehsuchus, which is not an ichthyosaur
[5]–[8], is deleted from the
analysis. While the holotype of the type species S.
pacificus is incompletely preserved, it shows at least one of
the synapomorphies of the genus Shastasaurus, the slender
lower jaw. Character optimization indicates that both the lack of teeth and
the reduced snout must have been present in S. pacificus
despite them not being preserved.
Horizon and localities
Upper Triassic, lower Carnian to middle Norian of southwestern China and
western North America (California and British Columbia).
Geological Survey of Guizhou Province, Guiyang, People's Republic of
China specimen GMR 014, a complete skeleton. However, there are doubts about
the integrity of the material. The specimen was briefly described and
figured by Yin et al. [14] as Guanlingsaurus liangae and
access is limited [16], [18], [19]. However, autapomorphies of the species such as
the very high number of presacral and caudal vertebrae are clearly
discernable from the publication of Yin et al. [14].
Referred material
YIGMR SPCV03107, YIGMR SPCV03108, and YIGMR SPCV03109.
Horizon and locality
Upper Triassic, lower Carnian laminated beds of the lower Xiaowa Formation,
Guanling County, Guizhou Provice, southwestern China [14], [16].Large Shastasaurus with a very small skull, less than
10% of total length. S. liangae comb. nov. is
diagnosed by the following unambiguous but equivocal synapomorphies:
postorbital triradiate in shape and contiguous shaft of ulna absent. Other
characters are that the rostrum is greatly reduced in length, mainly
resulting from very short and slender premaxillae and dentaries. The nasals
and the angulars of the lower jaw reach the tip of the snout. The jaws are
completely toothless. There are 86 presacral and >110 caudal vertebrae,
the highest number of any ichthyosaur [5]–[7].
S. liangae comb. nov. differs from Shastasaurus
sikanniensis comb. nov. [13] in the lacrimal
having numerous small to medium-sized nutritive foramina, the supratemporal
extending well posterior of the parietal, and in a more strongly
foreshortened propodium and zeugopodium in both the forelimb and the
hindlimb. S. liangae comb. nov. differs from S.
sikanniensis comb. nov. [13] and S.
pacificus
[5],
[15]
in the lack of a preaxial notch in the radiale. Differs from S.
pacificus in the relative longer postorbital region and larger
upper temporal openings, the long axes of which are nearly parallel in
S. liangae but enclose an angle of about 60° in
S. pacificus because of its posteriorly diverging
parietals.
Description of Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov
The largest skeleton of S. liangae (YIGMR SPCV03109) is 8.3 m
long. This is somewhat longer than the holotype and slightly longer than the
three-dimensionally preserved specimen YGMIR SPCV03107 which must have been
about 7 m in total length. The juvenile (YIGMR SPCV03108, Fig. 1) is 3.74 m long. Skull length as
measured along skull midline is 8.3% of total length in the largest
specimen and 9.3% in the juvenile. Skull length is 17.7% of
presacral lenght in the juvenile compared to >40% in most other
ichthyosaurs [6]. The most striking feature about the skull of
S. liangae comb. nov. is its very short snout region (Figs. 2, 3). In addition, the snout is completely
toothless, as best shown by the juvenile skull because of the partial
disarticulation of its jaw bones. There is no evidence for a dental groove in
the dentary, premaxilla, and maxilla. All bones contributing to the snout taper
rapidly to a point. The premaxilla is dominated by an elongate foramen that
enters the bone obliquely in posterior direction. Likewise, the maxilla shows
several very large foramina that take up much of the lateral side of the bone
and are not seen in any other ichthyosaur. The maxilla is excluded from the
external nares by the premaxilla and lacrimal. There is a very large internasal
foramen between the external nares. The lacrimal is perforated by numerous small
to medium-sized foramina. Uniquely among ichthyosaurs [5], and extremely unusual
among sauropsids, the nasal extends anteriorly to the very tip of the snout
(Fig. 2C, D). The orbit
is evenly oval in outline, and the orbital and postorbital region of the skull
are as in other Merriamosauria [5].
Figure 1
Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov.
Juvenile individual YGMIR SPCV03108, total length 3.75 m. Scale bar, 50
cm.
Figure 2
Skull anatomy of Shastasaurus liangae comb.
nov.
Photograph and drawing of skull of YGMIR SPCV03107. (A) in left lateral
view. Note the greatly abbreviated rostrum, the complete lack of teeth,
the large foramina in the maxillary and lacrimal bones, and the dorsally
convex coronoid region of the dentary (arrow). (B) in dorsal view. Note
the nasals extending to the tip of the rostrum. Abbreviations: a,
angular; ar, articular; d, dentary; en, external nares; f, frontal; if,
internasal foramen; j, jugal; l, lacrimal; mx, maxilla; pa, parietal;
pf, postfrontal; pm, premaxilla; po, postorbital; prf, prefrontal; qj,
quadratojugal; sa, surangular; sq, squamosal; st, supratemporal; uto,
upper temporal opening.
Figure 3
Skull anatomy of Shastasaurus liangae comb.
nov.
Photograph (A) and drawing (B) of the skull of the juvenile specimen
YGMIR SPCV03108. Crushing lead to both the dorsal and the right lateral
view being exposed. Note the greatly abbreviated rostrum, the complete
lack of teeth, and the large foramina in the maxilla. Also note the
nasals extending to the tip of the rostrum and the angular almost
extending to the tip of the lower jaw. The extent of the left hyoid bone
is highlighted by the arrows. Abbreviations: a, angular; d, dentary; f,
frontal; hy, hyoid bone: j, jugal; l, lacrimal; mx, maxilla; pa,
parietal; pf, postfrontal; pm, premaxilla; po, postorbital; prf,
prefrontal; q, quadrate; sa, surangular; sq, squamosal; st,
supratemporal.
Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov.
Juvenile individual YGMIR SPCV03108, total length 3.75 m. Scale bar, 50
cm.
Skull anatomy of Shastasaurus liangae comb.
nov.
Photograph and drawing of skull of YGMIR SPCV03107. (A) in left lateral
view. Note the greatly abbreviated rostrum, the complete lack of teeth,
the large foramina in the maxillary and lacrimal bones, and the dorsally
convex coronoid region of the dentary (arrow). (B) in dorsal view. Note
the nasals extending to the tip of the rostrum. Abbreviations: a,
angular; ar, articular; d, dentary; en, external nares; f, frontal; if,
internasal foramen; j, jugal; l, lacrimal; mx, maxilla; pa, parietal;
pf, postfrontal; pm, premaxilla; po, postorbital; prf, prefrontal; qj,
quadratojugal; sa, surangular; sq, squamosal; st, supratemporal; uto,
upper temporal opening.The dentaries of the lower jaw are very short and completely edentulous with a
smooth dorsal surface. In lateral view, there is a marked dorsal convexity in
the coronoid region of the dentary opposite the maxilla, which is ventrally
concave. Just as unusual as the nasal extending to tip of the upper jaw is the
configuration of the angular that ventrally, together with the splenial, extends
to the very tip of the lower jaw, as can be seen in the skull YIGMR SPCV03109 in
ventral view and in the juvenile YIGMR SPCV03108 (Fig. 3). The postdentary region of the lower
jaw is as in other Merriamosauria [5] and ends in a large
retroarticular process. The hyoid bones are only observable in the juvenile and
are remarkably long, reaching 31% of the length of the lower jaw.Photograph (A) and drawing (B) of the skull of the juvenile specimen
YGMIR SPCV03108. Crushing lead to both the dorsal and the right lateral
view being exposed. Note the greatly abbreviated rostrum, the complete
lack of teeth, and the large foramina in the maxilla. Also note the
nasals extending to the tip of the rostrum and the angular almost
extending to the tip of the lower jaw. The extent of the left hyoid bone
is highlighted by the arrows. Abbreviations: a, angular; d, dentary; f,
frontal; hy, hyoid bone: j, jugal; l, lacrimal; mx, maxilla; pa,
parietal; pf, postfrontal; pm, premaxilla; po, postorbital; prf,
prefrontal; q, quadrate; sa, surangular; sq, squamosal; st,
supratemporal.Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. has by far the highest number of
vertebrae of any ichthyosaur [5], [6] with approximately 86 presacrals and over 100 caudal
vertebrae (Fig. 1). This is
also among the highest numbers in amniotes in general [21]. From the first cervical to
the middle dorsal, the vertebrae nearly double in height and width. Compared to
other Merriamosauria, the loss of contact of the diapophysis with the neural
arch occurs very far back, on the 69th presacral. Despite the very high number
of vertebrae, the body shape index [13] of 3.9 is similar to
other long-bodied Triassic Merriamosauria [13]. The caudal vertebral
column is very straight without a tailbend (Fig. 1).The appendicular skeleton is generally similar to that of other basal
Merriamosauria, with the proximal bones of the anterior limbs all being
disc-shaped, suggesting that they were surrounded by extensive cartilage (Fig. 4A). Distally, the
forefins appear to have been incompletely ossified as well, considering that all
three new specimens preserve very few fin bones except for humerus, radius, ulna
and radiale. This suggests that the distal carpals, metacarpals, and phalanges
possibly were not ossified at all. The alternative explanation, that they were
lost taphonomically, is inconsistent with the high degree of articulation
generally observed in marine reptiles from the Xiaowa Formation [16]. If these
elements were ossified, it appears likely that at least one out of three
specimens should have preserved some of these bones. The incomplete ossification
of the distal forelimbs is also suggested by the illustration of the holotype
with only three digits preserved and an apparent phalangeal formula of 1-1-0
[14, plate
9]. The humerus of S. liangae is wider than long,
and its length is only 1% of the body length. Together with the small
zeugopodium of the forelimb and the poor ossification of the distal limb, this
suggests that the forefins were disproportionally small in life. The hind fins
appear to have been even smaller than the forefins, and the humerus to femur
ratio is 1.16. However, the proximal bones of the hindfins retain a shaft and
are remarkably stout (Fig.
4B). The hindfins also appear poorly ossified distally.
Figure 4
Appendicular skeleton of Shastasaurus liangae comb.
nov.
(A) Pectoral girdle and forelimb elements of YGMIR SPCV03107. (B) Pelvic
girdle and hindlimb elements of YGMIR SPCV03107. Abbreviations: f,
femur; fi, fibula; h, humerus; i, ischium; r, radius; s, scapula; t,
tibia; u, ulna. Scale bars, 10 cm.
Appendicular skeleton of Shastasaurus liangae comb.
nov.
(A) Pectoral girdle and forelimb elements of YGMIR SPCV03107. (B) Pelvic
girdle and hindlimb elements of YGMIR SPCV03107. Abbreviations: f,
femur; fi, fibula; h, humerus; i, ischium; r, radius; s, scapula; t,
tibia; u, ulna. Scale bars, 10 cm.
Reevaluation of Shastasaurus pacificus
Shastasaurus pacificus was the first large ichthyosaur from the
Triassic for which articulated material became known. It was first described
over a century ago based on a specimen from the late Carnian of northern
California [15], [22]. Although the rostrum remains unknown, being broken
off in the only reasonably complete skull, UCMP 9017 (Fig. 5), the preserved parts of maxilla and
dentary in this skull are toothless [23]. Notwithstanding,
Shastasaurus pacificus was reconstructed several times in
the past to conform to the general ichthyosaurian skull shape with a long
rostrum and numerous teeth [e.g.], [ 7], [17], [23,24]. These reconstructions were apparently inspired by
the putative assignment of a normal ichthyosaurian snout fragment from the Upper
Triassic of Mexico to Shastasaurus altispinus
[5], [20], [24] and on
the assignment of a long-snouted ichthyosaur from the Norian of British Columbia
to Shastasaurus as S. neoscapularis
[25]. However
this material has since been placed in its own genus,
Callawayia
[5], [7], [20]. We
follow the view of Nicholls & Manabe [13], [20] that the genus
Shastasaurus should be restriced to Merriam's [15], [26] original
type series from the Hosselkus Limestone of California. The notion of
Shastasaurus being a typical, long-snouted ichthyosaur is
also reflected in the recent reassignment by Shang & Li [19] of
Guizhouichthyosaurus tangae to the genus
Shastasaurus.
Figure 5
Partial skull of Shastasaurus pacificus (UCMP 9017)
from the Late Triassic of California, USA, in (A) lateral, (B) dorsal,
and (C) anterolateral view.
Based on this skull, Shastasaurus has repeatedly been
reconstructed with a long, tooth-bearing rostrum. However, note the
slenderness of the lower jaw (B, C) and the strong anterior taper of the
snout (B), both of which are more consistent with the abbreviated and
toothless snout of Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. than
with the traditional long-snouted reconstruction of this skull (as,
e.g., in references [22] and [23]).
Partial skull of Shastasaurus pacificus (UCMP 9017)
from the Late Triassic of California, USA, in (A) lateral, (B) dorsal,
and (C) anterolateral view.
Based on this skull, Shastasaurus has repeatedly been
reconstructed with a long, tooth-bearing rostrum. However, note the
slenderness of the lower jaw (B, C) and the strong anterior taper of the
snout (B), both of which are more consistent with the abbreviated and
toothless snout of Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. than
with the traditional long-snouted reconstruction of this skull (as,
e.g., in references [22] and [23]).Re-examination of UCMP 9017 in light of the new Chinese material and character
optimization based on phylogenetic analysis and suggests that S.
pacificus (Fig.
5) had the same reduced snout as Shastasaurus
liangae comb. nov. In addition, among the material from California,
distal limb elements are rare and not preserved in articulation, and isolated
teeth were never found with any of the Californian Shastasaurus
material [15], [22], [26]. These observations are consistent with the
edentulous condition and reduced distal fins of Shastasaurus
liangae comb. nov. However, some anatomical differences, such as
the relatively longer postorbital region, the larger upper temporal openings,
and the posteriorly diverging parietals indicate that Shastasaurus
liangae is not a junior synonym of Shastasaurus
pacificus (see diagnosis).
Phylogenetic relationships and taxonomic consequences
A very similar tree topology resulted from both phylogenetic analyses, one based
on a modified and extended data matrix of Motani [17] and one based on a modified
and extended data matrix of Sander [6]. In this article, we will
discuss the analysis of the modified matrix of Motani [17] in detail because it
represents the most widely used data set in ichthyosaur phylogenetic research.
Our analysis based on the modified and extended data matrix of Motani [17] recovered
72 most parsimonious trees (MPTs). The strict consensus of these (Fig. 6) had a length of 254
steps, a consistency index of 0.569, a rescaled consistency index of 0.462, and
a retention index of 0.81. The disagreement between the MPTs is largely confined
to the outgroup taxa and the basal Merriamosauria. Exept for these poorly
resolved areas and the new taxa, the topology of the tree does not differ from
that found in the earlier analysis by Motani [17]. The quality metrics of our
analysis do not differ much from that of Motani [17] either, which had a
consistency index of 0.654 and was one step shorter. The sligthly poorer
measures for the tree statistics in our analysis are not surprising because of
the addition of four terminal taxa and of new characters. However, we note that
the scope of the current study is not a reanalysis of ichthyosaurian
interrelationships but the determination of the phylogenetic position of
S. liangae.
Figure 6
Phylogenetic relationships of Shastasaurus.
This cladogram represents the strict consensus of 72 most parsimonious
trees. Differences in topology among MPTs are mainly found among the
outgroup taxa and the basal Merriamosauria. Derived Parvipelvia were
part of the analysis but were omitted for clarity. Relevant nodes are
numbered in accordance with Table S5. See Materials and Methods section and Supporting Information for details of
analysis.
Phylogenetic relationships of Shastasaurus.
This cladogram represents the strict consensus of 72 most parsimonious
trees. Differences in topology among MPTs are mainly found among the
outgroup taxa and the basal Merriamosauria. Derived Parvipelvia were
part of the analysis but were omitted for clarity. Relevant nodes are
numbered in accordance with Table S5. See Materials and Methods section and Supporting Information for details of
analysis.In the analysis of the modified matrix of Motani [17], Shastasaurus
liangae comb. nov. is most closely related to Shastasaurus
pacificus (Fig.
6). These two taxa in turn are most closely related to
Shonisaurus sikanniensis, forming a monophyletic group.
Shonisaurus popularis was found to be less derived than
this clade, making the genus Shonisaurus paraphyletic. This
leads us to propose including S. sikanniensis in the genus
Shastasaurus as Shastasaurus sikanniensis
comb. nov. We feel justified in doing so because the original authors [13] had
already noted the strong affinites of this species with
Shastasaurus, and their decision to assign S.
sikanniensis to Shonisauris was not based on a
phylogenetic analysis.We used the unambiguous and unequivocal synapomorphies at node 57 (abbreviated
rostrum and slender lower jaw, see Table S5) to diagnose
Shastasaurus because of the major morphological departure
from all other ichthyosaurs they represent. Retaining the original genus names
for S. sikanniensis and S. liangae was not an
option because of the resulting paraphyly of the genus
Shonisaurus. Since the genus name
Shonisaurus has to stay with the type species S.
popularis, the only taxonomic options for S.
sikanniensis were either to erect a new genus name or to include it
and G. liangae in the genus Shastasaurus. The
list of apomorphies for Shastasaurus and the three included
species are provided in Table S5.
Discussion
Toothlessness in ichthyosaurs
Previously, complete toothlessness had only been described for the adults of one
other Triassic ichthyosaur species, i.e., the giant Shastasaurus
sikanniensis comb. nov. However, the juveniles of the S.
sikanniensis appear to have had teeth [13]. Additionally, Nicholls
& Manabe [13] suggested that Shonisaurus popularis
also lacked teeth in the adult, but this is difficult to verify because of the
poor preservation of the material.S. sikanniensis comb. nov. resembles S. liangae
comb. nov. in its toothlessness, in that its snout is reduced, the hyoids are
enlarged, and at <3 m [13], the skull is small relative to the estimated body
length of 21 m. Our phylogenetic analysis (Fig. 6) indicates that the Shastasauridae
evolved towards tooth reduction and loss, possibly beginning with
Besanosaurus leptorhynchus which has few and very small
teeth [27].
The short snout of Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. thus may
have evolved from a long-snouted ichthyosaur with a slender rostrum like
Besanosaurus by strong heterochrony. We hypothesize that
early developmental stages of this ancestor that were retained by
Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. are the failure of teeth to
form, the participation of the nasal and angular in the tip of the snout, and
the very large internasal foramen. In embryos of extant Reptilia, the jaws
ossify well before the development of teeth [28]. Similarly, at least in
Lacerta and Sphenodon embryos, the
premaxillary bones are separated among the skull midline by the nasals which
reach the tip of the snout [28]. The fairly late-stage embryos of the sauropodomorph
dinosaur Massospondylus are toothless as well [29], but early
hatchlings have a full complement of teeth. The alternative hypothesis to
explain the evolution of toothlessness in Shastasaurus, early
senescence of the dental lamina, would require senescence to have occurred in
early juveniles, requiring a much greater shift in development than the first
hypothesis.Although toothlessness occurs in mature individuals of a few Jurassic ichthyosaur
species [5],
[13],
the toothless condition in some of these is a taphonomic artifact because of the
loose, aulacodont tooth implantation [5]. None of the Jurassic forms
has a smooth dorsal surface of the dentary without a trace of a dental groove or
tooth sockets [5], and none has the strikingly reduced snout of
Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov., which only accounts for
42% of lower jaw length (the snout ratio of McGowan [30]), as compared to
53% in the Jurasssic ichthyosaur with the shortest snout,
Ichthyosaurus breviceps
[30].
Modern analog
The closest modern analogs in skull shape, body proportions and body size to
Shastasaurus liangae and the lesser known other two species
of Shastasaurus are the unusual Ziphiidae (beaked whales,
Odontoceti [31], [32]) which range from 6 m to 11 m in length and have a
proportionally small skull and a snout that is toothless, save for one or two
pairs of peculiar teeth in the lower jaw, which do not erupt in the females of
some species. In addition, ziphiids share with Shastasaurus
liangae an elongate body and very small forefins [31]. As in
Shastasaurus species, their toothlessness evolved from
ancestral forms with numerous teeth [11], [33], [34]. Further similarities in
the skull of Shastasaurus liangae and ziphiid whales are the
dorsally convex coronoid region of the lower jaw and the enlarged hyoids. Other
modern odontocetes tending towards toothlessness are the modern sperm whales
(Physeter and the pygmy and dwarf sperm whales,
Kogia sima and K. breviceps), some
delphinids such as Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus, a few
lower teeth and no upper teeth), and the narwhal (Monodon
monoceros) which only retains its huge maxillary tusk [32]. Among
these, Kogia spp., Grampus, and
Monodon have an abbreviated rostrum as seen in
Shastasaurus.These odontocete taxa and the ziphiid whales are suction feeders in which the
tongue is pulled back rapidly by strong retractor muscles that are attached to
hypertrophied hyoid bones [10]. In this way, prey items are taken up by the negative
pressure generated in the oral cavity, obviating the need for teeth to hold them
before swallowing. Based on the morphological similarity of suction-feeding
odontocete whales and Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov.,
including the enlarged hyoids and the massive convex coronoid region of the
lower jaw, and by exclusion of other options, we suggest that S.
liangae comb. nov., and probably S. pacificus and
S. sikanniensis comb. nov., were specialized in a similar
manner (see also Nichols & Manabe [13] on S.
sikanniensis). An importantant component of the diet of most
suction-feeding odontocetes, particulary of ziphiids [31], [35], are coleoid cephalopods.
Cephalopods, which are commonly bioluminescent, would have been suitable prey
for visually hunting ichthyosaurs [36], [37], [38] as well, especially since
bioluminescent cephalopods would have been visually detectable below the photic
zone and at night. The eyes of Shastasaurus species appear to
be average-sized for ichthyosaurs, although this is difficult to quantify
because of lack of comparative size standards. They were clearly relatively
larger than in Cymbospondylus but smaller than in mixosaurs and
Qianichthyosaurus
[5], [6], [39].Werth [11]
established the relationship between an abbreviated snout and generation of
suction in modern cetaceans but, as the example of the ziphiids shows, an
abbreviated rostrum is not a requirement for suction feeding. The specific
mechanism of suction feeding in Shastasaurus probably was
different from that of ziphiid and other whales, because the latter have a
secondary soft palate that aids in generating negative pressure. The exact
mechanism of suction generation is difficult to infer in
Shastasaurus but may have involved specialized soft tissue
structures in the snout such as lips or cheeks that would have tightly closed
the mouth on the sides and increased the efficency of suction. The potential
presence of such structures is hinted at by the unique large foramina in the
maxillary and lacimal bones of S. liangae comb. nov. The
massive retroarticular process of the lower jaw, combined with the reduced
rostrum, may also have played a role in suction feeding because they would have
allowed very fast and forceful opening of the jaws. Preferred prey of
Shastasaurus may have been pelagic coleoid cephalopods and
fish. Both of these are fast swimmers, making suction feeding a more efficient
hunting mechanism than the elongated, tooth-bearing rostrum plesiomorphic for
ichthyosaurs in general and Merriamosauria in particular. Shelled cephalopods,
predominantly ammonites, are slower swimmers and occur abundantly together with
Shastasaurus but may have been less attractive prey for
Shastasaurus because of their protective shell and rounded
shape.As noted, further similarities of Shastasaurus and Ziphiidae are
the very small pectoral fins and the slender, elongate body. In ziphiids, the
reduced pectoral fins are believed to be an adaptation to deep diving, reducing
drag on the descent. The functional significance of body elongation and high
vertebral number in Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. is not
clear. High vertebral numbers are typical of marine reptiles [21], and
S. liangae comb. nov. appears to be the culmination of this
evolutionary trend among ichthyosaurs.Notably, just like the modern suction-feeding odontocetes [32], the species of
Shastasaurus show a size range from about 4 m to about 20 m
adult body length. This similar size bracket may have biomechanical reasons
rooted in the scaling of muscle power and maneuverability. Whales larger than 20
m (exclusively mysticetes) are filter feeders, whereas a body size <4 m, seen
in most dolphins and toothed ichthyosaurs, may favor catching prey with a long
slender rostrum studded with teeth.
Diversification of suction feeding ichthyosaurs
Our detailed study of the osteology of the Shastasaurus liangae
comb. nov. and the phylogenetic analysis of related taxa reveals a Late Triassic
diversification of large, toothless, suction-feeding ichthyosaurs. The spatial
and temporal distribution of the species of Shastasaurus
indicates that this diversification was widespread, if not global, and
long-lasting, from at least the early Carnian to the middle Norian. Considering
the only recently recognized [40] very long duration of the Late Triassic, especially
the Norian, the diversification of suction feeding ichthyosaurs thus may have
lasted for up to 32 million years and may represent a hidden radiation in the
Triassic oceans, only incompletely captured by the fossil record.Support for this view comes from the small number, low diversity, and limited
geographic spread of Late Triassic ichthyosaur localities compared to those of
Middle Triassic age [5]–[8], especially considering the vastly longer duration of
the Late Triassic compared to the Middle Triassic [40]. Add to this the
apparently pelagic lifestyle of Shastasaurus and a similar
picture emerges as for the ziphiid whale fossil record. Because of their pelagic
life style and deep-diving habit, these whales are not only very rare in fossil
whale faunas [33], [34], [41] but are also the least known group of whales today. A
pelagic lifestyle for Shastasaurus is suggested by its rarity
in the Xiaowa Formation of China and the Hosselkus Limestone of California and
also by the observation that all of the beds that yielded
Shastasaurus have a pelagic depositional environment as
well as a distinctly pelagic fauna of ammonites, halobiid bivalves and
vertebrates [13], [16], [22]),
Suction feeding and low atmospheric oxygen
Restudy of Shastasaurus liangae comb. nov. from China and
Shastasaurus pacificus from the United States adds another,
unexpected type to the already very diverse feeding adaptations in Triassic
ichthyosaurs [36] and reveals a Late Triassic diversification of large
to giant toothless, presumably suction-feeding ichthyosaurs. By the Late
Triassic, ichthyosaurs had evolved the widest range of trophic adaptations known
in any marine tetrapod group [6], [8], [36], [42]. The diversification of ichthyosaurs in the Early and
Middle Triassic happened together with the recovery of marine invertebrate life
from the devastating end-Permian extinction [1], [2]. In particular, ammonites
apparently recovered much more quickly than the benthic invertebrates [40]. If this
is indicative of a fast recovery of cephalopods in general, it would explain the
rapid radiation of early ichthyosaurs, because shell-less cephalopods were the
main prey of ichthyosaurs. Apart from the diversity of standard ichthyosaurs
(cephalopod and fish eaters with an isodont dentition of small conical teeth)
and the putative suction feeders described here, the Triassic witnessed the
evolution of ichthyosaurs belonging to other feeding guilds [36]. These
include forms with crushing dentitions (Phalarodon
[43],
Tholodus
[44],
Xinminosaurus
[45]) and, in
the Norian, a large marine top predator (Himalayasaurus
[46]). The
appearance of S. liangae comb. nov. in the poorly oxygenated
environment of the Carnian Xiaowa Formation [16] and the diversification of
suction-feeding ichthyosaurs is consistent with the Phanerozoic minimum in
atmospheric oxygen in the Late Triassic, which may have given air-breathing
marine reptiles and low oxygen-tolerant cephalopods a competitive advantage over
gill-breathing fish [4], [16].Suction-feeding ichthyosaurs of the genus Shastasaurus did not
survive into the Jurassic. This may have been because they lost their
competitive advantage as atmospheric oxygen rose again, although there are no
other large suction feeders known among Early Jurassic marine vertebrate.
Alternatively, suction-feeding ichthyosaurs may have fallen victim to the
end-Triassic extinction event that greatly reduced ichthyosaur taxonomic and
ecological diversity [6], [42], with only the thunniform longirostrine
Neoichthyosauria surviving. These radiated throughout the Jurassic but never
reached the trophic diversity of Triassic forms again, including the
suction-feeding Shastasaurus.The additional characters in the modified and extended character matrix from
Motani [17].(DOC)Click here for additional data file.Characters states in the four new terminal taxa in the modified and extended
character matrix from Motani [17].(DOC)Click here for additional data file.Coding of the six new characters for all taxa of the modified and extended
character matrix from Motani [17].(DOC)Click here for additional data file.NEXUS file of the modified and extended character matrix from Motani [17] used in
the phylogenetic analysis.(TXT)Click here for additional data file.List of apomorphies found in the phylogenetic analysis based on the modified
matrix from Motani [17]. ACCTRAN = optimization
criterion accelerated transformation,
DELTRAN = optimization criterion delayed
transformation. Bold print indicates unambiguous and unequivocal
synapomorphies.(DOC)Click here for additional data file.
Authors: Arnaud Brayard; Gilles Escarguel; Hugo Bucher; Claude Monnet; Thomas Brühwiler; Nicolas Goudemand; Thomas Galfetti; Jean Guex Journal: Science Date: 2009-08-28 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Johannes Müller; Torsten M Scheyer; Jason J Head; Paul M Barrett; Ingmar Werneburg; Per G P Ericson; Diego Pol; Marcelo R Sánchez-Villagra Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-01-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Nadia B Fröbisch; Jörg Fröbisch; P Martin Sander; Lars Schmitz; Olivier Rieppel Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-01-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jun Liu; Shi-Xue Hu; Olivier Rieppel; Da-Yong Jiang; Michael J Benton; Neil P Kelley; Jonathan C Aitchison; Chang-Yong Zhou; Wen Wen; Jin-Yuan Huang; Tao Xie; Tao Lv Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2014-11-27 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Susana Gutarra; Benjamin C Moon; Imran A Rahman; Colin Palmer; Stephan Lautenschlager; Alison J Brimacombe; Michael J Benton Journal: Proc Biol Sci Date: 2019-03-13 Impact factor: 5.349