Abstract
The turtle shell and the relationship of the shoulder girdle inside or ‘deep’ to the ribcage have puzzled neontologists and developmental biologists for more than a century. Recent developmental and fossil data indicate that the shoulder girdle indeed lies inside the shell, but anterior to the ribcage. Developmental biologists compare this orientation to that found in the model organisms mice and chickens, whose scapula lies laterally on top of the ribcage. We analyse the topological relationship of the shoulder girdle relative to the ribcage within a broader phylogenetic context and determine that the condition found in turtles is also found in amphibians, monotreme mammals and lepidosaurs. A vertical scapula anterior to the thoracic ribcage is therefore inferred to be the basal amniote condition and indicates that the condition found in therian mammals and archosaurs (which includes both developmental model organisms: chickens and mice) is derived and not appropriate for studying the developmental origin of the turtle shell. Instead, among amniotes, either monotreme mammals or lepidosaurs should be used.
Keywords: evolution and development, turtle shell, evolutionary novelty, Odontochelys semitestacea
1. Introduction
The turtle shell is often regarded as an evolutionary innovation (sensu [1]) and the two most commonly cited features unparalleled among other tetrapods are the turtle shell [2–4] and the relationship of the scapula relative to the dorsal ribs [3]. The turtle scapula is regularly referenced as being uniquely located ‘inside’ the dorsal ribcage [2,5,6], or at least ‘deep’ to the ribcage [7–9]. This topological relationship, however, is confounded by the fact that the scapula is located inside the turtle shell, of which only a portion is formed by the turtle's ribcage, whereas the rest is composed of intramembranously ossified dermis [4]. Indeed, the dorsal ribcage is often equated with the shell [3, p. 3] and the putatively unique relationship between the scapula and the ribcage is used as evidence for turtles appearing to have broken basic rules of the vertebrate body plan [3]. The turtle shell is therefore regarded as an evolutionary innovation: neither arising from conspicuous changes to the reptile body plan [7,8,10–12] nor from a hopeful monster [9,13].
Recent developmental and fossil evidence have shed considerable light on the scapula's relationship relative to the dorsal ribcage. As was initially noted by Ruckes [14] in 1929 and expanded upon by more recent developmental biologists [2,6–8,15], the turtle scapula does not move posteriorly during development to a position within or deep to the ribcage (contra [16]), but rather the dorsal ribs have a unique dorsolateral growth trajectory into a more superficial position within the dermis. The ribs later spread apart from one another distally to obtain a fan-like arrangement. The dermis finally encapsulates the ribs together with parts of the shoulder girdle [3]. Of note, the fan-like arrangement is exaggerated in the highly derived softshell turtle Pelodiscus sinensis, which is used as the primary model organism for understanding the development of the turtle shell [2,15–17]. As in other amniotes, the turtle shoulder girdle maintains its position relative to the muscle plate throughout development via a unique muscle folding mechanism, in some cases maintaining ancestral connectivities and in others creating novel ones [15]. However, the entire pectoral girdle remains anterior to the cartilaginous first dorsal rib throughout ontogeny, and only becomes encapsulated within the shell upon intramembranous ossification of the nuchal bone, the dorsal ribs and neural spines of the carapace [18]. Indeed, as has long been noted by skilled anatomists [19], the scapula remains anterior to the first dorsal rib even in adult turtles. The newly discovered stem turtle with a proto-shell, Odontochelys semitestacea from the early Late Triassic of China, also has a scapula that lies anterior to the ribcage, further supporting the idea that the turtle scapula does not lie within the ribcage [3,20].
While it is clear that the scapula of turtles does not lie within the ribcage, its vertical orientation anterior to the ribcage still appears unique. Kuratani et al. [3] argue that two factors contribute to the placement of the scapula ‘beneath’ the ribcage: (i) axial arrest of the ribs, and (ii) the inability of the scapula to form a ‘scapular blade’ (i.e. a blade-like process that lies on top of the ribcage). While the axial arrest of the dorsal ribs is undoubtedly a key transition in the origin of the turtle carapace [2,3,6–8,16], the putatively unique topological position of the turtle scapula has not been critically examined. The slender, rod-like morphology of the turtle scapula is clearly derived, relative to the massive, rectangular shape found in basal reptiles (e.g. Paleothyris acadiana, Petrolacosaurus kansensis, etc.), but it is unclear whether the topological position anterior to the dorsal ribcage is unique and whether it represents an important transition in the origin of the turtle bauplan [3,7,8]. We analyse the topological position of the scapula in a representative sample of extant and fossil amniotes to determine the basal condition for Amniota. Given the central role that the topological position of the scapula plays in the evolutionary model for the origin of the turtle carapace [3,15], it is important to critically analyse this feature within a broader phylogenetic context.
2. Material and methods
A large sample of articulated skeletons of extant and extinct amniotes was studied and photographed. Sampling was undertaken to cover the greatest possible tree space in order to allow for reconstruction of ancestral conditions for each major amniote clade (Monotremata and Theria for Mammalia, Cryptodira and Pleurodira for Testudines; Sphenodon and Squamata for Lepidosauria; Aves and Crocodylia for Archosauria). Species are included only if the shoulder girdle is preserved in articulation, thereby reflecting as closely as possible the topological position of all elements in vivo. A complete list of species used is provided in the electronic supplementary material.
3. Results and discussion
The development of extant turtles, as well as the gross morphology of extant and fossil turtles, indicate that the scapula is universally oriented vertically and situated anterior to the ribcage. This position appears to be ancestral for amniotes, as among extant taxa it is found in amphibians, monotreme mammals and lepidosaurs (figure 1), and among fossil taxa is found in early tetrapods (e.g. Ariekanerpeton sigalovi), stem amniotes (e.g. Limnoscelis paludis) and early reptiles (e.g. Aerosaurus wellesi) [27,28]. Scapular blades that cover the dorsal ribs, by contrast, occur convergently in therian mammals and archosaurs and the scapular blades are convergently derived from axial somites [29,30]. Ancestrally, the scapulae of tetrapods are braced by dermal bones: the clavicles, interclavicle and cleithra. This plesiomorphically remains the case in turtles, where the scapula is surrounded by the nuchal, the entoplastron (interclavicle) and the epiplastra (clavicles). In monotreme mammals, the scapulae are strongly braced ventrally by the pre- and post-coracoids, the clavicles and the interclavicle. In therian mammals, by contrast, which typically lack all dermal components of the shoulder girdle, the scapular blade extends onto the ribcage and is stabilized by skeletal muscles (m. serratus anterior (AS), m. rhomboidei and m. levator scapulae [30]). A similar condition is found in archosaurs, where the scapula extends onto the ribcage and is affixed to the ribcage via the AS and the m. levator scapulae-rhomboid complex (sensu [15]).
Figure 1.
(a) Illustrations and (b) photographs of the shoulder girdle of taxa representing each of the major amniote clades (Mammalia, Monotremata, Theria, Testudines, Lepidosauria, Squamata, Archosauria, Aves and Crocodylia). The scapula is situated dorsal to the ribcage in therian mammals and archosaurs, including the two developmental model organisms: the house mouse and the domestic chicken. A vertically oriented scapula, anterior to the ribcage is found in turtles, the basal most stem turtle Eunotosaurus africanus [21], the stem turtle Proganochelys quenstedti, lepidosaurs, monotreme mammals and the amphibian Rana catesbeiana, indicating this is the basal amniote condition. The numbers represent the three hypotheses for turtle origins: 1, turtles as sister to diapsids (lepidosaurs + archosaurs) is supported by most morphological [21,22] and developmental data [23]; 2, turtles as sister to lepidosaurs is supported by some morphological [24] and molecular data [25]; 3, turtles as sister to archosaurs is supported by nuclear and mitochondrial genetic data [26].
Other ‘shelled’ amniotes exhibit both topological relationships of the scapula relative to the ribcage, indicating that this character is not correlated with the presence of a shell. Shelled sauropterygian reptiles from the Triassic, such as Henodus chelyops or Sinosaurosphargis yunguiensis, resemble turtles by having a vertically oriented scapula situated inside the shell, but placed anterior to the ribcage [31,32]. By contrast, therian armadillos or archosaurian ankylosaurs exhibit a scapular blade that is situated on top of the ribcage but underneath the shell.
The realization that a vertically oriented scapula which is situated anterior to the ribcage and that does not overlap the trunk ribs is plesiomorphic for amniotes has important implications for the evolutionary model regarding the origin of the turtle shell. Current hypotheses for the developmental evolution of the turtle shell are largely based on a single model organism, the trionychid Pelodiscus sinensis, and comparisons are made only to the development of two other model amniotes: the domestic chicken (an archosaur) and the house mouse (a therian mammal). Both species have long, posterodorsally directed scapular blades that are located on top of the ribcage. Thus, the position of the turtle scapula is seen as a uniquely derived feature, when in fact this topological relationship represents the basal amniote condition from which the conditions in the mouse and chicken later evolved. Although issues of sampling must be taken into consideration, it is apparent that the derived condition found in therian mammals and archosaurs (which includes both developmental model organisms: chickens and mice) is not an appropriate outgroup for studying the developmental origin of the turtle shell. Instead, among amniotes either monotreme mammals or lepidosaurs should be used.
Acknowledgments
We thank Greg Watkins-Caldwell for facilitating access to the Yale Peabody Museum of Vertebrate Zoology's collection.
References
- 1.Gauthier J. A., Nesbitt S. J., Schachner E. R., Bever G. S., Joyce W. G. 2011. A new bipedal stem crocodilian, early archosaur phylogeny, and innovation in archosaur locomotion. Bull. Peabody Mus. Nat. Hist. 52, 107–126 10.3374/014.052.0102 (doi:10.3374/014.052.0102) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Gilbert S. F., Loredo G. A., Brukman A., Burke A. C. 2001. Morphogenesis of the turtle shell: the development of a novel structure in tetrapod evolution. Evol. Dev. 3, 47–58 10.1046/j.1525-142x.2001.003002047.x (doi:10.1046/j.1525-142x.2001.003002047.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Kuratani S., Kuraku S., Nagashima H. 2011. Evolutionary developmental perspective for the origin of turtles: the folding theory for the shell based on the developmental nature of the carapacial ridge. Evol. Dev. 13, 1–14 10.1111/j.1525-142X.2010.00451.x (doi:10.1111/j.1525-142X.2010.00451.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Scheyer T. M., Brullmann B., Sánchez-Villagra M. R. 2008. The ontogeny of the shell in sidenecked turtles, with emphasis on the homologies of costal and neural bones. J. Morphol. 269, 1008–1021 10.1002/jmor.10637 (doi:10.1002/jmor.10637) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Gilbert S. F., Bender G., Betters E., Yin M., Cebra-Thomas J. A. 2007. The contribution of neural crest cells to the nuchal bone and plastron of the turtle shell. Integr. Comp. Biol. 47, 401–408 10.1093/icb/icm020 (doi:10.1093/icb/icm020) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Cebra-Thomas J., Tan F., Sistla S., Estes E., Bender G., Kim C., Gilbert S. F. 2005. How the turtle forms its shell: a paracrine hypothesis of carapace formation. J. Exp. Zool. 304B, 558–569 10.1002/jez.b.21059 (doi:10.1002/jez.b.21059) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Burke A. C. 1989. Development of the turtle carapace: implications for the evolution of a novel bauplan. J. Morphol. 199, 363–378 10.1002/jmor.1051990310 (doi:10.1002/jmor.1051990310) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Burke A. C. 1991. The development and evolution of the turtle body plan. Inferring intrinsic aspects of the evolutionary process from experimental embryology. Am. Zool. 31, 616–627 10.1093/icb/31.4.616 (doi:10.1093/icb/31.4.616) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Rieppel O. 2001. Turtles as hopeful monsters. BioEssays 23, 987–991 10.1002/bies.1143 (doi:10.1002/bies.1143) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Burke A. C. 2009. Turtles … again. Evol. Dev. 11, 622–624 10.1111/j.1525-142X.2009.00369.x (doi:10.1111/j.1525-142X.2009.00369.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Hall B. K. 1998. Evolutionary developmental biology, 2nd edn London, UK: Chapman & Hall [Google Scholar]
- 12.Rieppel O. 2009. How did the turtle get its shell? Science 325, 154–155 10.1126/science.1177446 (doi:10.1126/science.1177446) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Theißen G. 2006. The proper place of hopeful monsters in evolutionary biology. Theory Biosci. 124, 349–369 10.1016/j.thbio.2005.11.002 (doi:10.1016/j.thbio.2005.11.002) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Ruckes H. 1929. The morphological relationships between the girdles, ribs, and carapace. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 13, 81–120 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1929.tb55192.x (doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1929.tb55192.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Nagashima H., Sugahara F., Takechi M., Ericsson R., Kawashima-Ohya Y., Narita Y., Kuratani S. 2009. Evolution of the turtle body plan by the folding and creation of new muscle connections. Science 325, 193–196 10.1126/science.1173826 (doi:10.1126/science.1173826) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kuraku S., Usuda R., Kuratani S. 2005. Comprehensive survey of carapacial ridge-specific genes in turtle implies co-option of some regulatory genes in carapace evolution. Evol. Dev. 7, 3–17 10.1111/j.1525-142X.2005.05002.x (doi:10.1111/j.1525-142X.2005.05002.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Nagashima H., Kuraku S., Uchida K., Ohya Y. K., Narita Y., Kuratani K. 2007. On the carapacial ridge in turtle embryos: its developmental origin, function, and the chelonian body plan. Development 134, 2219–2226 10.1242/dev.002618 (doi:10.1242/dev.002618) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Sánchez-Villagra M. R., Müller H., Sheil C. A., Scheyer T. M., Nagashima H., Kuratani S. 2009. Skeletal development in the Chinese soft-shelled turtle Pelodiscus sinensis (Reptilia: Testudines: Trionychidae). J. Morphol. 270, 1381–1399 10.1002/jmor.10766 (doi:10.1002/jmor.10766) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Ogushi K. 1911. Anatomische Studien an der japanischen dreikralligen Lippenschildkröte (Trionyx japonicus). Morpholog. Jahrbuch 43, 1–106 [Google Scholar]
- 20.Li C., Wu X.-C., Rieppel O., Wang L.-T., Zhao J. 2009. Ancestral turtle from the Late Triassic of southwestern China. Nature 456, 497–501 10.1038/nature07533 (doi:10.1038/nature07533) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Lyson T. R., Bever G. S., Bhullar B.-A. S., Joyce W. G., Gauthier J. A. 2010. Transitional fossils and the origin of turtles. Biol. Lett. 6, 830–833 10.1098/rsbl.2010.0371 (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0371) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Gauthier J., Kluge A. G., Rowe T. 1988. Amniote phylogeny and the importance of fossils. Cladistics 4, 105–209 10.1111/j.1096-0031.1988.tb00514.x (doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.1988.tb00514.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Werneburg I., Sánchez-Villagra M. R. 2009. Time of organogenesis support basal position of turtles in the amniote tree of life. BMC Evol. Biol. 9, 82. 10.1186/1471-2148-9-82 (doi:10.1186/1471-2148-9-82) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Rieppel O., deBragga M. 1996. Turtles as diapsid reptiles. Nature 384, 453–455 10.1038/384453a0 (doi:10.1038/384453a0) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Lyson T. R., Sperling E. A., Heimburg A. M., Gauthier J. A., King B. L., Peterson K. J. 2012. microRNAs support a turtle + lizard clade. Biol. Lett. 8, 104–107 10.1098/rsbl.2011.0477 (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2011.0477) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Hugall A. F., Foster R., Lee M. S. Y. 2007. Calibration choice, rate smoothing, and the pattern of tetrapod diversification according to the long nuclear gene RAG-1. Syst. Biol. 56, 543–563 10.1080/10635150701477825 (doi:10.1080/10635150701477825) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Laurin M. 1996. A reevaluation of Ariekanerpeton, a Lower Permian seymouriamorph (Tetrapoda: Seymouriamorpha) from Tadzhikistan. J. Vert. Paleontol. 16, 653–665 10.1080/02724634.1996.10011355 (doi:10.1080/02724634.1996.10011355) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Langston W., Reisz R. R. 1981. Aerosaurus wellesi, new species, a varanopseid mammal-like reptile (Synapsida: Pelycosauria) from the Lower Permian of New Mexico. J. Vert. Paleontol. 1, 73–96 10.1080/02724634.1981.10011881 (doi:10.1080/02724634.1981.10011881) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Huang R., Zhi Q., Patel K., Wilting J., Christ B. 2000. Dual origin and segmental organisation of the avian scapula. Development 127, 3789–3794 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Valasek P., Theis S., Krejci E., Grim M., Maina F., Shwartz Y., Otto A., Huang R., Patel K. 2010. Somitic origin of the medial border of the mammalian scapula and its homology to the avian scapula blade. J. Anat. 216, 482–488 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2009.01200.x (doi:10.1111/j.1469-7580.2009.01200.x) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Rieppel O. 2002. The dermal armor of the cyamodontoid placodonts (Reptilia, Sauropterygia): morphology and systematic value. Fieldiana Geol. 46, 1–41 [Google Scholar]
- 32.Li C., Rieppel O., Wu X.-C., Zhao L.-J., Wang L.-T. 2011. A new Triassic marine reptile from southwestern China. J. Vert. Paleontol. 31, 303–312 10.1080/02724634.2011.550368 (doi:10.1080/02724634.2011.550368) [DOI] [Google Scholar]

