Are lungfishes the sister group of tetrapods?

It is generally accepted that rhipaidistian crossopterygians are the closest relatives of tetrapods. Rosen, Forey, Gardiner & Patterson (1981) challenge this view and contend that lungfishes are the sister group of tetrapods. They present a detailed cladistic analysis and claim to identify a large number of synapomorphies shared by lungfishes and tetrapods but not by rhipidistians. Their analysis is faulty. Although Rosen et al. (1981) correctly emphasize that cladistic relationships must be based on shared derived characters, they often fail to take intragroup variation into account in postulating synapomorphies. They also use evidence inconsistently by attributing greater significance to similarities between lungfishes and tetrapods than to even more detailed similarities between rhipidistians and tetrapods. They misinterpret the skeletal pattern of the paired appendages. The many synapomorphies that they claim to have identified are either invalid, irrelevant, or are characters involving reduction or loss (which have a high probability of convergence). Consequently, they make an unconvincing case for a sister-group relationship between lungfishes and tetrapods. On the other hand, Rosen et al. (1981) do show that evidence for the orthodox view of rhipidistian-tetrapod relationships is not as strong as generally believed. The uncertain interrelationships among rhipidistians is a major problem. Tetrapod-fish relationships need to be re-examined by means of a properly conducted cladistic analysis.     

Molecules,fossils, and the origin of tetrapods

Summary Since the discovery of the coelacanth, Latimeria chalumnae, more than 50 years ago, paleontologists and comparative morphologists have debated whether coelacanths or lungfishes, two groups of lobe-finned fishes, are the closest living relatives of land vertebrates (Tetrapoda). Previously, Meyer and Wilson (1990) determined partial DNA sequences from two conservative mitochondrial genes and found support for a close relationship of lungfishes to tetrapods. We present additional DNA sequences from the 12S rRNA mitochondria gene for three species of the two lineages of lungfishes that were not represented in the first study: Protopterus annectens and Protopterus aethiopicus from Africa and Neoceratodus forsteri (kindly provided by B. Hedges and L. Maxson) from Australia. This extended data set tends to group the two lepidosirenid lungfish lineages (Lepidosiren and Protopterus) with Neoceratodus as their sister group. All lungfishes seem to be more closely related to tetrapods than the coelacanth is. This result appears to rule out the possibility that the coelacanth lineage gave rise to land vertebrates. The common ancestor of lungfishes and tetrapods might have possessed multiple morphological traits that are shared by lungfishes and tetrapods [Meyer and Wilson (1990) listed 14 such traits]. Those traits that seem to link Latimeria and tetrapods are arguably due to convergent evolution or reversals and not to common descent. In this way, the molecular tree facilitates an evolutionary interpretation of the morphological differences among the living forms. We recommended that the extinct groups of lobe-finned fishes be placed onto the molecular tree that has lungfishes and not the coelacanth more closely related to tetrapods. The placement of fossils would help to further interpret the sequence of morphological events and innovations associated with the origin of tetrapods but appears to be problematic because the quality of fossils is not always high enough, and differences among paleontologists in the interpretation of the fossils have stood in the way of a consensus opinion for the branching order among lobefinned fishes. Marshall and Schultze (1992) criticized the morphological analysis presented by Meyer and Wilson (1990) and suggest that 13 of the 14 morphological traits that support the sister group relationship of lungfishes and tetrapods are not shared derived characters. Here we present further alternative viewpoints to the ones of Marshall and Schultze (1992) from the paleontological literature. We argue that all available information (paleontological, neontological, and molecular data) and rigorous cladistic methodology should be used when relating fossils and extant taxa in a phylogenetic framework. Offprint requests to: Axel Meyer     

Oldest coelacanth, from the Early Devonian of Australia

Coelacanths are well-known sarcopterygian (lobe-finned) fishes, which together with lungfishes are the closest extant relatives of land vertebrates (tetrapods). Coelacanths have both living representatives and a rich fossil record, but lack fossils older than the late Middle Devonian (385-390 Myr ago), conflicting with current phylogenies implying coelacanths diverged from other sarcopterygians in the earliest Devonian (410-415 Myr ago). Here, we report the discovery of a new coelacanth from the Early Devonian of Australia (407-409 Myr ago), which fills in the approximately 20 Myr 'ghost range' between previous coelacanth records and the predicted origin of the group. This taxon is based on a single lower jaw bone, the dentary, which is deep and short in form and possesses a dentary sensory pore, otherwise seen in Carboniferous and younger taxa.     

Distribution and variation in enamel structure in the oral teeth of sarcopterygians: Its significance for the evolution of a protoprismatic enamel

The property of tooth enamel to resist alteration during fossilization, is used to analyse the unique arrangements of biological crystallites amongst genera of Paleozoic sarcopterygians, with both polarized light and s.e.m. Previous concepts of crystallite organization in reptiles and mammal‐like reptiles are evaluated. Two of the Devonian sarcopterygians, are shown to exhibit a protoprismatic pattern, identical with that of a stem group therian. The patterns of crystallites, together with the arrangement of incremental lines establish that this tissue is solely an ectodermal product; monotypic enamel, in contrast to bitypic enamel with two cell products contributing to it as in enameloid or acrodin. Each genus examined has a different pattern, of significance in considering relationships amongst sarcopterygians. Recent information on ganoine and some new findings on enamel in extant lungfishes have led to the conclusion that types of monotypic enamel are present in both actinopterygians and sarcopterygians, and challenges the use of monotypic enamel as a synapomorphy of sarcopterygians in cladistic analyses.     

The oldest sarcopterygian fish

The study of basal sarcopterygians is crucial to an understanding of the relationships and interrelationships of sarcopterygians, including their relationship to tetrapods. The new material from Qujing, Yunnan, southwestern China, represents the oldest known sarcopterygian fish and extends the record of sarcopterygians to the Late Silurian, or about 410 Ma. The new form is close to Youngolepis and Powichthys at the base of the Crossopterygii. Similarities among the lower jaws of onychodonts, porolepiforms, Youngolepis, Powichthys and the new form support a position of onychodonts within the Crossopterygii. Four characters in the character matrix of Cloutier & Ahlberg (1996, in Stiassny et al: Interrelationships of Fishes , Academic Press) are reviewed, and sarcopterygian interrelationships are studied on the basis of their data with minor modifications. The new scheme of sarcopterygian interrelationships differs markedly from Cloutier & Ahlberg's scheme. Neither actinistians nor onychodonts are situated at the base of Sarcopterygii, but within the Crossopterygii. Youngolepis and Powichthys are at the base of the Crossopterygii, instead of being the sister group of dipnoans plus Diabolepis.     

Reconstructing pectoral appendicular muscle anatomy in fossil fish and tetrapods over the fins‐to‐limbs transition

The question of how tetrapod limbs evolved from fins is one of the great puzzles of evolutionary biology. While palaeontologists, developmental biologists, and geneticists have made great strides in explaining the origin and early evolution of limb skeletal structures, that of the muscles remains largely unknown. The main reason is the lack of consensus about appendicular muscle homology between the closest living relatives of early tetrapods: lobe‐finned fish and crown tetrapods. In the light of a recent study of these homologies, we re‐examined osteological correlates of muscle attachment in the pectoral girdle, humerus, radius, and ulna of early tetrapods and their close relatives. Twenty‐nine extinct and six extant sarcopterygians were included in a meta‐analysis using information from the literature and from original specimens, when possible. We analysed these osteological correlates using parsimony‐based character optimization in order to reconstruct muscle anatomy in ancestral lobe‐finned fish, tetrapodomorph fish, stem tetrapods, and crown tetrapods. Our synthesis revealed that many tetrapod shoulder muscles probably were already present in tetrapodomorph fish, while most of the more‐distal appendicular muscles either arose later from largely undifferentiated dorsal and ventral muscle masses or did not leave clear correlates of attachment in these taxa. Based on this review and meta‐analysis, we postulate a stepwise sequence of specific appendicular muscle acquisitions, splits, and fusions that led from the ancestral sarcopterygian pectoral fin to the ancestral tetrapod forelimb. This sequence largely agrees with previous hypotheses based on palaeontological and comparative work, but it is much more comprehensive in terms of both muscles and taxa. Combined with existing information about the skeletal system, our new synthesis helps to illuminate the genetic, developmental, morphological, functional, and ecological changes that were key components of the fins‐to‐limbs transition.     

Ribosomal RNA genes and deuterostome phylogeny revisited: more cyclostomes, elasmobranchs, reptiles, and a brittle star

This is an expanded study of the relationships among the deuterostome animals based on combined, nearly complete 28S and 18S rRNA genes (>3925 nt.). It adds sequences from 20 more taxa to the approximately 45 sequences used in past studies. Seven of the new taxa were sequenced here (brittle star Ophiomyxa, lizard Anolis, turtle Chrysemys, sixgill shark Hexanchus, electric ray Narcine, Southern Hemisphere lamprey Geotria, and Atlantic hagfish Myxine for 28S), and the other 13 were from GenBank and the literature (from a chicken, dog, rat, human, three lungfishes, and several ray-finned fishes, or Actinopterygii). As before, our alignments were based on secondary structure but did not account for base pairing in the stems of rRNA. The new findings, derived from likelihood-based tree-reconstruction methods and by testing hypotheses with parametric bootstrapping, include: (1) brittle star joins with sea star in the echinoderm clade, Asterozoa; (2) with two hagfishes and two lampreys now available, the cyclostome (jawless) fishes remain monophyletic; (3) Hexanchiform sharks are monophyletic, as Hexanchus groups with the frilled shark, Chlamydoselachus; (4) turtle is the sister taxon of all other amniotes; (5) bird is closer to the lizard than to the mammals; (6) the bichir Polypterus is in a monophyletic Actinopterygii; (7) Zebrafish Danio is the sister taxon of the other two teleosts we examined (trout and perch); (8) the South American and African lungfishes group together to the exclusion of the Australian lungfish. Other findings either upheld those of the previous rRNA-based studies (e.g., echinoderms and hemichordates group as Ambulacraria; orbitostylic sharks; batoids are not derived from any living lineage of sharks) or were obvious (monophyly of mammals, gnathostomes, vertebrates, echinoderms, etc.). Despite all these findings, the rRNA data still fail to resolve the relations among the major groups of deuterostomes (tunicates, Ambulacraria, cephalochordates and vertebrates) and of gnathostomes (chondrichthyans, lungfishes, coelacanth, actinopterygians, amphibians, and amniotes), partly because tunicates and lungfishes are rogue taxa that disrupt the tree. Nonetheless, parametric bootstrapping showed our RNA-gene data are only consistent with these dominant hypotheses: (1) deuterostomes consist of Ambulacraria plus Chordata, with Chordata consisting of tunicates and 'vertebrates plus cephalochordates'; and (2) lungfishes are the closest living relatives of tetrapods.     

Comparative retinal morphology of the platypus

The purpose of this study is to identify evolutionary origin and fate of anatomic features of the duck‐billed platypus eye. Eyes from the duck‐billed platypus and four key evolutionary basal vertebrates (Pacific hagfish, north hemisphere sea lamprey, and Australian and South American lungfishes) were prepared for light microscopy. In addition to a standard panel of stains, tissues were immunostained against a variety of rod and cone opsins. Finally, published opsin sequences of platypus and several other vertebrate species were aligned and compared with immunohistochemical results. A complete scleral cartilage similar to that seen in birds, reptiles and amphibians encloses the platypus eye. This feature is present in sharks and rays, and in extant relatives of tetrapods, the lungfishes. The choroid lacks a tapetum. The retina is largely avascular and is rod‐dominated, with a minority of red‐ and blue‐ cone immunoreactive photoreceptors. Like marsupials and many nonmammalian vertebrates, cones contain clear inner segment droplets. Double cones were present, a feature not found in eutherian mammals or marsupials. Evaluation of opsins indicates that red and blue immunoreactive cone opsins, but not rhodopsin, are present in the most basal of the extant species examined, the Pacific hagfish. Rhodopsin appears in the Australian and South American lungfishes, establishing emergence of this pigment in an extant relative of tetrapods. Unlike eyes of eutherian mammals, the platypus eye has retained morphologic features present in early tetrapods such as amphibians and their evolutionarily basal sister group, the lungfishes. These include scleral cartilage, double cones and cone droplets. In the platypus, as in other mammals, rod rhodopsin is the predominant photoreceptor pigment, at expense of the cone system. J. Morphol. 2011. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

LATE DEVONIAN (FAMENNIAN) LUNGFISHES FROM THE CATSKILL FORMATION OF PENNSYLVANIA, USA

Abstract:  Occurrences of fossil lungfishes (Dipnoi: Sarcopterygii) in the Famennian Catskill Formation of Pennsylvania are reviewed. A nearly complete dermal skull roof is assigned to a new genus and species, Apatorhynchus opistheretmus . Other recently discovered lungfish specimens include an incomplete postcranium similar to that of the Frasnian genus Fleurantia , a small parasphenoid of uncertain affinities, and isolated toothplates. Previously described dipnoan remains from the Catskill Formation include a partial skull roof of Soederberghia groenlandica , toothplates assigned to several species of Dipterus , a putative rostral or symphysial region placed in the problematic form taxon Ganorhynchus , and sedimentary structures interpreted as burrows. The toothplates attributed to Dipterus are indeterminate and are placed in open nomenclature, while the specimen identified as Ganorhynchus is not convincingly dipnoan. The status of the burrows remains uncertain pending the discovery of lungfish remains within these or similar structures in Catskill deposits. The distinct ichthyofaunas within the Catskill Formation and their lungfish components are briefly reviewed. Lungfishes are found in the Holoptychius - and Bothriolepis -dominated faunas common in the Catskill succession, as well as in the compositionally distinctive Red Hill assemblage. Many of the Devonian continental faunas that contain tetrapods also include long-snouted, denticle-bearing lungfishes ('rhynchodipterids', fleurantiids, or both). The composition of Late Devonian ichthyofaunas may have predictive qualities that will allow researchers to identify localities likely to produce the remains of early tetrapods.     

Relative importance of molecular,neontological, and paleontological data in understanding the biology of the vertebrate invasion of land

Summary Meyer and Wilson's (1990) 12S rRNA phylogeny unites lungfish and tetrapods to the exclusion of the coelacanth. These workers also provide a list of morphological features shared in common between modern lungfish and tetrapods, and they conclude that these traits were probably present in their last common ancestor. However, the exquisite fossil records of the abundant extinct lungfishes and rhipidistians show that at least 13 out of Meyer and Wilson's 14 supposed ancestral traits were not present in the last common ancestor of lungfishes and tetrapods. Using extant taxa to infer ancestral morphologies is fraught with difficulties; just like molecular sequences, ancestral character states of morphological traits may be severely overprinted by subsequent modifications. Modern lungfish are air-breathing nonmarine forms, yet their Devonian forebears were marine fish that did not breathe air. Fossils dating from the time of origin of tetrapods in the Devonian offer the only hope of understanding the morphological innovations that led to tetrapods; morphological analysis of the living fossils, the coelacanth and lungfish, only lends confusion.     

The Complete DNA Sequence of the Mitochondrial Genome of a ``living Fossil,'''' the Coelacanth (Latimeria Chalumnae)

The complete nucleotide sequence of the 16,407-bp mitochondrial genome of the coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae) was determined. The coelacanth mitochondrial genome order is identical to the consensus vertebrate gene order which is also found in all ray-finned fishes, the lungfish, and most tetrapods. Base composition and codon usage also conform to typical vertebrate patterns. The entire mitochondrial genome was PCR-amplified with 24 sets of primers that are expected to amplify homologous regions in other related vertebrate species. Analyses of the control region of the coelacanth mitochondrial genome revealed the existence of four 22-bp tandem repeats close to its 3' end. The phylogenetic analyses of a large data set combining genes coding for rRNAs, tRNAs, and proteins (16,140 characters) confirmed the phylogenetic position of the coelacanth as a lobe-finned fish; it is more closely related to tetrapods than to ray-finned fishes. However, different phylogenetic methods applied to this largest available molecular data set were unable to resolve unambiguously the relationship of the coelacanth to the two other groups of extant lobe-finned fishes, the lungfishes and the tetrapods. Maximum parsimony favored a lungfish/coelacanth or a lungfish/tetrapod sistergroup relationship depending on which transversion:transition weighting is assumed. Neighbor-joining and maximum likelihood supported a lungfish/tetrapod sistergroup relationship.     

A fibrous membrane suspends the multifocal lens in the eyes of lampreys and African lungfishes

The sharpness and thus information content of the retinal image in the eye depends on the optical quality of the lens and its accurate positioning in the eye. Multifocal lenses create well‐focused color images and are present in the eyes of all vertebrate groups studied to date (mammals, reptiles including birds, amphibians, and ray‐finned fishes) and occur even in lampreys, i.e., the most basal vertebrates with well‐developed eyes. Results from photoretinoscopy obtained in this study indicate that the Dipnoi (lungfishes), i.e., the closest piscine relatives to tetrapods, also possess multifocal lenses. Suspension of the lens is complex and sophisticated in teleosts (bony fishes) and tetrapods. We studied lens suspension using light and electron microscopy in one species of lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis) and two species of African lungfish (Protopterus aethiopicus aethiopicus and Protopterus annectens annectens). A fibrous and highly transparent membrane suspends the lens in both of these phylogenetically widely separated vertebrate groups. The membrane attaches to the lens approximately along the lens equator, from where it extends to the ora retinalis. The material forming the membrane is similar in ultrastructure to microfibrils in the zonule fibers of tetrapods. The membrane, possibly in conjunction with the cornea, iris, and vitreous body, seems suitable for keeping the lens in the correct position for well‐focused imaging. Suspension of the lens by a multitude of zonule fibers in tetrapods may have evolved from a suspensory membrane similar to that in extant African lungfishes, a structure that seems to have appeared first in the lamprey‐like ancestors of allextant vertebrates. J. Morphol. 271:980–989, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Origin of tetrapods inferred from their mitochondrial DNA affiliation to lungfish

Summary This paper shows that questions of an unexpected phylogenetic depth can be addressed by the study of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences. For decades, it has been unclear whether coelacanth fishes or lungfishes are the closest living relatives of land vertebrates (Tetrapoda). Segments of mtDNA from a lungfish, the coelacanth, and a ray-finned fish were sequenced and compared to the published sequence of a frog mtDNA. A tree based on inferred amino acid replacements, silent transversions, and ribosomal RNA (rRNA) substitutions showed with statistical confidence that the lungfish mtDNA is more closely related to that of the frog than is the mtDNA of the coelacanth. This result appears to rule out the possibility that the coelacanth lineage gave rise to land vertebrates; hence, morphological characters that link the latter two groups are possibly due to convergent evolution or reversals and not to common descent. Besides supporting the theory that land vertebrates arose from an offshoot of the lineage leading to lungfishes, the molecular tree facilitates an evolutionary interpretation of the morphological differences among the living forms. It would appear that the common ancestor of lungfishes and tetrapods already possessed multiple morphological traits preadapting their locomotion, circulation, and respiration for life on land.     

Cephalic muscle development in the Australian lungfish,Neoceratodus forsteri

Lungfishes are the extant sister group of tetrapods. As such, they are important for the study of evolutionary processes involved in the water to land transition of vertebrates. The evolution of a true neck, that is, the complete separation of the pectoral girdle from the cranium, is one of the most intriguing morphological transitions known among vertebrates. Other salient changes involve new adaptations for terrestrial feeding, which involves both the cranium and its associated musculature. Historically, the cranium has been extensively investigated, but the development of the cranial muscles much less so. Here, we present a detailed study of cephalic muscle development in the Australian lungfish, Neoceratodus forsteri, which is considered to be the sister taxon to all other extant lungfishes. Neoceratodus shows several developmental patterns previously described in other taxa; the tendency of muscles to develop from anterior to posterior, from their region of origin toward insertion, and from lateral to ventral/medial (outside‐in), at least in the branchial arches. The m.protractor pectoralis appears to develop as an extension of the most posterior m.levatores arcuum branchialium, supporting the hypothesis that the m.cucullaris and its derivatives (protractor pectoralis, levatores arcuum branchialium) are branchial muscles. We present a new hypothesis regarding the homology of the ventral branchial arch muscles (subarcualis recti and obliqui, transversi ventrales) in lungfishes and amphibians. Moreover, the morphology and development of the cephalic muscles confirms that extant lungfishes are neotenic and have been strongly influenced via paedomorphosis during their evolutionary history.     

Development of the Snout of the Australian Lungfish Neoceratodus forsteri (Krefft, 1870), with Special Reference to Cranial Nerves

Abstract The anatomy and embryology of the dipnoan snout and olfactory organ play a major role in the discussion about the phylogenetic position of Dipnoi and the question of ancestry of Tetrapoda. This is primarily due to the fact that an internal nostril is regarded as an important preadaptive organ of the ancestors of tetrapods. Two conflicting scenarios of phylogenetic change were proposed in favour of different hypotheses of relationship. One emphasizes the similarities between Dipnoi and Chondrichthyes concerning this complex of characters. The other supports the idea of a close relationship of Dipnoi and Tetrapoda and a common origin of a ‘choana’ from the posterior external nostril of fishes. Accordingly, there is need for a detailed embryological and anatomical study which could help to clarify homologies and the basis of character evaluation. This, in the first place, concentrates on Neoceratodus forsteri. A plate reconstruction of the larval head provides many new insights which are important for comparison with the lepidosirenid lungfishes Protopterus and Lepidosiren and with other vertebrate taxa. The value of the peripheral nervous system as a topographical reference is critically reviewed. The results support the hypothesis that lungfish form a ‘primitive’ teleostomate group, closely adjoining Chondrichthyes in many characteristics of the snout formation. The relations between cranial nerves in the snout and the developing nasal sac, however, do not support the conclusion that the recent selachian condition is the exceptional ancestral character state of the lungfish snout. Dipnoi lack a ‘choana’, but nevertheless a closer relationship to tetrapods is not excluded. A vestigial and transitory naso-buccal connection in larvae of Neoceratodus might indicate such common ancestry, but has a completely different functional significance among fishes. It is shared with several plagiostomes and is, therefore, probably not useful as a synapomorphy of Dipnoi and Tetrapoda.     

Fish and tetrapod communities across a marine to brackish salinity gradient in the Pennsylvanian (early Moscovian) Minto Formation of New Brunswick,Canada, and their palaeoecological and palaeogeographical implications

Euryhaline adaptations in Pennsylvanian vertebrates allowed them to inhabit the marine to freshwater spectrum. This is illustrated by new assemblages of fish and tetrapods from the early Moscovian Minto Formation of New Brunswick, Canada. Fish include chondrichthyans (xenacanthids and the enigmatic Ageleodus), acanthodians (gyracanthids and acanthodiforms), sarcopterygians (rhizodontids, megalichthyids and dipnoans), and actinopterygians (eurynotiforms). Tetrapods include small‐ to medium‐sized, and largely aquatic, stem tetrapods (colosteids) and anthracosaurs (embolomeres). A key finding is that the parautochthonous fossil assemblages are preserved across a salinity gradient, with diversity (measured by the Simpson Index) declining from open marine environments, through brackish embayments, and reaching a nadir in tidal estuaries. Chondrichthyans dominate the entire salinity spectrum (65% of fossils), a distribution that demonstrates a euryhaline mode of life, and one large predatory chondrichthyan, Orthacanthus, may have practised filial cannibalism in coastal nurseries because its heteropolar coprolites contain juvenile xenacanthid teeth. In contrast, other fish communities were more common in open marine settings while tetrapods were more common in coastal brackish waters. While all these faunas were also likely to have been euryhaline, their osmoregulation was, perhaps, less versatile. The demonstration of widespread euryhalinity among fish and aquatic tetrapods explains why Pennsylvanian faunas generally show a cosmopolitan biogeography because taxa were able to disperse via seaways. It also resolves the paradox of enriched strontium isotopic signatures observed in these faunas because organisms would have been, at times, exposed to continental water bodies as well. Therefore, our new findings contribute to the long‐running debate about the ecology of Pennsylvanian fishes and tetrapods.     

Comparative anatomy, homologies and evolution of the pectoral muscles of bony fish and tetrapods: a new insight

The Osteichthyes, including bony fishes and tetrapods, is a highly speciose group of vertebrates, comprising more than 42,000 living species. The anatomy of osteichthyans has been the subject of numerous comparative studies, but most of these studies concern osteological structures; much less attention has been paid to muscles. The most detailed comparative analyses of osteichthyan pectoral muscles that were actually based on a direct observation of representatives of various major actinopterygian and sarcopterygian groups were provided several decades ago by authors such as Howell and Romer. Despite the quality of their work, these authors did not have access to much information that is now available. In the present work, an updated discussion on the homologies and evolution of the osteichthyan pectoral muscles is provided, based on the authors' own analyses and on a survey of the literature, both old and recent. It is stressed that much caution should be taken when the results obtained in molecular and developmental studies concerning the pectoral muscles of model actinopterygians such as the teleostean zebrafish are discussed and compared with the results obtained in studies concerning model sarcopterygians from clades such as the Amphibia and/or the Amniota. This is because, as shown here, as a result of the different evolutionary routes followed within the actinopterygian and the sarcopterygian clades none of the individual muscles found, for example, in derived actinopterygians such as teleosts is found in derived sarcopterygians such as tetrapods. It is hoped that the information provided in the present work may help in paving the way for future analyses of the pectoral muscles in taxa from different osteichthyan groups and for a proper comparison between these muscles in those taxa.     

The ear region of Latimeria chalumnae: functional and evolutionary implications

The anatomy of Latimeria chalumnae has figured prominently in discussions about tetrapod origins. While the gross anatomy of Latimeria is well documented, relatively little is known about its otic anatomy and ontogeny. To examine the inner ear and the otoccipital part of the cranium, a serial-sectioned juvenile coelacanth was studied in detail and a three-dimensional reconstruction was made. The ear of Latimeria shows a derived condition compared to other basal sarcopterygians in having a connection between left and right labyrinths. This canalis communicans is perilymphatic in nature and originates at the transition point of the saccule and the lagena deep in the inner ear, where a peculiar sense end organ can be found. In most gnathostomes the inner ears are clearly separated from each other. A connection occurs in some fishes, e.g. within the Ostariophysi. In the sarcopterygian lineage no connections between the inner ears are known except in the Actinistia. Some fossil actinistians show a posteriorly directed duct lying between the foramen magnum and the notochordal canal, similar to the condition in the ear of Latimeria, so this derived character complex probably developed early in actinistian history. Because some features of the inner ear of Latimeria have been described as having tetrapod affinities, the problem of hearing and the anatomy of the otical complex in the living coelacanth has been closely connected to the question of early tetrapod evolution. It was assumed in the past that the structure found in Latimeria could exemplify a transitional stage in otic evolution between the fishlike sarcopterygians and the first tetrapods in a functional or even phylogenetic way. Here the possibility is considered that the canalis communicans does not possess any auditory function but rather is involved in sensing pressure changes during movements involving the intracranial joint. Earlier hypotheses of a putative tympanic ear are refuted.