Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PeerJ logoLink to PeerJ
. 2019 Oct 17;7:e7430. doi: 10.7717/peerj.7430

The phylogeny of desmostylians revisited: proposal of new clades based on robust phylogenetic hypotheses

Kumiko Matsui 1,2,✉, Takanobu Tsuihiji 3,4
Editor: John Hutchinson
PMCID: PMC6800978  PMID: 31637114

Abstract

Background

Desmostylia is a clade of extinct aquatic mammals with no living members. Today, this clade is considered belonging to either Afrotheria or Perissodactyla. In the currently-accepted taxonomic scheme, Desmostylia includes two families, 10 to 12 genera, and 13–14 species. There have been relatively few phylogenetic analyses published on desmostylian interrelationship compared to other vertebrate taxa, and two main, alternative phylogenetic hypotheses have been proposed in previous studies. One major problem with those previous studies is that the numbers of characters and OTUs were small.

Methods

In this study, we analyzed the phylogenetic interrelationship of Desmostylia based on a new data matrix that includes larger numbers of characters and taxa than in any previous studies. The new data matrix was compiled mainly based on data matrices of previous studies and included three outgroups and 13 desmostylian ingroup taxa. Analyses were carried out using five kinds of parsimonious methods.

Results

Strict consensus trees of the most parsimonious topologies obtained in all analyses supported the monophyly of Desmostylidae and paraphyly of traditional Paleoparadoxiidae. Based on these results, we propose phylogenetic definitions of the clades Desmostylidae and Paleoparadoxiidae based on common ancestry.

Keywords: Desmostylia, Phylogeny, Desmostylidae, Paleoparadoxiidae

Introduction

Desmostylia is a clade of extinct aquatic mammals with no living members (Repenning, 1965; Inuzuka, 1984; Inuzuka, 2000b; Inuzuka, 2000c; Domning, 2002; Gingerich, 2005). The phylogenetic affinities of the clade among mammals are still debated, having been hypothesized as belonging to Afrotheria (Domning, Ray & McKenna, 1986), Perissodactyla (Cooper et al., 2014; Rose et al., 2014) or Paenungulatomorpha (Gheerbrant, Filippo & Schmitt, 2016), due to their specialized morphology (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Summary of hypotheses on phylogenetic affinities of Desmostylia within Mammalia.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

(A) Perissodactyla hypothesis, (B) Afrotheria hypothesis, (C) Paenungulatamorpha hypothesis.

In the currently-accepted taxonomic scheme, Desmostylia includes two families, 10 to 12 genera, and 13–14 species (Shikama, 1966; Kohno, 2000; Inuzuka, 2005; Domning & Barnes, 2007; Barnes, 2013; Beatty & Cockburn, 2015; Chiba et al., 2016). The two families are Desmostylidae Osborn, 1905, and Paleoparadoxiidae Reinhart, 1959. Presently, Desmostylidae includes Ashoroa laticosta, Cornwallius sookensis, Ounalashkastylus tomidai, Kronokotherium brevimaxillare, Desmostylus japonicus, D. hesperus and D. (Vanderhoofius) coalingensis (Domning & Barnes, 2007; Inuzuka, 2005; Chiba et al., 2016). Paleoparadoxiidae has been considered to include two subfamilies, Behemotopsinae including Seuku emlongi, Behemotops proteus and Behemotops katsuiei (Domning, Ray & McKenna, 1986; Inuzuka, 2000b; Beatty & Cockburn, 2015) and Paleoparadoxiinae that includes Archaeoparadoxia weltoni, Paleoparadoxia tabatai, Neoparadoxia repenningi and Neoparadoxia cecilialina (Barnes, 2013). It is noteworthy, however, that results of some phylogenetic analyses do not support this taxonomic scheme (e.g., Beatty & Cockburn, 2015).

Previous studies on desmostylian phylogenetic interrelationships

There have been relatively few phylogenetic analyses published on desmostylian interrelationships compared to other vertebrate taxa. The results of previous studies are summarized here (Fig. 2). Domning, Ray & McKenna (1986) performed the first phylogenetic analysis that included Desmostylia. Before their study, Osborn (1905) and Reinhart (1953) suggested that Desmostylia is closely related to Sirenia and Proboscidea, and this hypothesis had been widely accepted. However, it had not been demonstrated to which of these two clades Desmostylia is more closely related. Domning, Ray & McKenna (1986) analyzed phylogenetic relationships among Prorastomus, Protosiren, crown Sirenia, the primitive tethytherian Minchenella, Anthracobune, Moeritherium, Barytherium, Prodeinotherium, Deinotherium, Paleomastodon, crown Proboscidea and Desmostylia including Behemotops proteus, B. emlongi, Paleoparadoxia, Cornwallius and Desmostylus. As a result, Desmostylia was found to be most closely related to Proboscidea. In addition, Domning, Ray & McKenna (1986) proposed the hypothesis that Minchenella was a suitable candidate for the ancestor (or the sister taxon) of the clade consisting of Desmostylia and Proboscidea, suggesting the origin of the latter two clades in Asia.

Figure 2. Previously-proposed hypotheses on the phylogenetic interrelationship of Desmostylia.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

(A) the topology of Domning, Ray & McKenna (1986) (credit) Smithsonian Libraries, (B) the topology of Clark (1991), (C) the topology of Inuzuka (2005), (D) the topology of Beatty (2009), (E) the topology of Barnes (2013) (credit) Natural History Museum Los Angeles, Pink: Behemotopsinae, Orange: Paleoparadoxiidae, Green: Paleoparadoxiinae, Yellow: Desmostylidae.

Clark (1991) performed the first phylogenetic analysis of desmostylian interrelationships including the new species of Paleoparadoxia that he described. His analysis included Behemotops emlongi, B. proteus, Cornwallius, Desmostylus, Paleoparadoxia tabatai, P. weltoni and two undescribed desmostylian specimens as OTUs. The result corroborated the monophyly of Paleoparadoxia and strongly supported a clade consisting of Desmostylus, Cornwallius and Paleoparadoxia. However, the relationship between Paleoparadoxia and the clade including Desmostylus and Cornwallius was unresolved.

Inuzuka (2000b, Inuzuka, 2005) proposed a new phylogenetic tree of Desmostylia encompassing all valid desmostylian species including new primitive desmostylid materials described in Inuzuka (2000b). His data matrix includes more post-cranial characters than were used in previous phylogenetic analyses of desmostylians. However, the methods employed for these phylogenetic analyses were not described in either paper. According to Inuzuka’s results, Desmostylia consists of two clades, Desmostylidae (A. laticosta, C. sookensis, K. brevimaxillare, D. hesperus, D. japonicus and D. coalingensis) and Paleoparadoxiidae (B. proteus, B. katsuiei, P. weltoni, “P. media” and “P. tabatai”).

Beatty (2009) assembled a new matrix based on previous studies and included new data on Cornwallis sookensis. He used Moeritherium and Pezosiren portelli as outgroups of Desmostylia and included nearly all species of Desmostylia. The tree that Beatty (2009) obtained is different in topology from the one in Inuzuka (2000b, Inuzuka, 2005) in that Behemotops spp. were placed below the node containing other traditional paleoparadoxiids, making the traditionally-recognized family Paleoparadoxiidae paraphyletic.

Barnes (2013) made a new data matrix for analyzing the phylogenetic position of a new paleoparadoxiid as well as the interrelationships of Paleoparadoxiidae. His data matrix includes numerous post-cranial skeletal characters. In the cladogram that he obtained, three formerly-known species of Paleoparadoxia (separated into three genera by Barnes, 2013) formed the clade Paleoparadoxiinae. The problem with his analysis, however, is that it was based on the assumption of the traditional Paleoparadoxiidae including Behemotops being monophyletic. This assumption was not rigorously tested and had been challenged by Beatty (2009).

A more recent analysis by Chiba et al. (2016) was based on a data matrix modified from Beatty (2009). Chiba et al. (2016) added two molar characters to Beatty (2009)’s matrix and analyzed the phylogenetic position of Ounalashkastylus. Their topology is ((Moeritherium, Pezosiren, Anthracobnidae), ((Behemotops proteus, B. katsuiei), (Archaeoparadoxia weltoni, Paleoparadoxia tabatai, (Ashoroa laticosta, (Cornwallius sookensis, (Ounalashkastylus tomidai, (Desmostylus hesperus, Vanderhoofius coalingensis, cf. Vanderhoofius sp.))))))). This tree has a topology similar to the one obtained in Beatty (2009), with Ounalashkastylus placed between Cornwallius and the clade consisting of Desmostylus and Vanderhoofius spp.

Purpose of this study

The above review of past phylogenetic analyses points to problems with these studies. Firstly, not all valid desmostylian species were included in most previous analyses. Secondly, almost all analyses were based on the assumption that Desmostylia is a member of Afrotheria. Recently, however, this assumption was challenged based on phylogenetic analyses indicating that Desmostylia is a part of Perissodactyla (Cooper et al., 2014; Rose et al., 2014) or Paenungulatomorpha (Gheerbrant, Filippo & Schmitt, 2016). If this is the case, using afrotherians (e.g., proboscideans and/or sirenians) as outgroups for a phylogenetic analysis of desmostylian interrelationships is problematic. It is therefore necessary to run phylogenetic analyses using alternative outgroups representing different hypotheses of affinities of Desmostylia to examine effects of outgroup selections. Thirdly, for the numbers of taxa being analyzed, relatively few characters were used in past analyses. To summarize, global phylogeny of Desmostylia still needs to be analyzed by (1) incorporating all currently-accepted species, (2) using several outgroups reflecting various hypotheses of desmostyian affinities and (3) producing a data matrix with more characters.

In order to rectify these three problems, a new, largest data matrix for desmostylian interrelationships was assembled in this study and was analyzed using different outgroups reflecting currently-proposed hypotheses of desmostylian affinities. The resulting trees were then used to obtain a robust topology independent of outgroups in order to propose new phylogenetic definitions of the clades Desmostylidae and Paleoparadoxiidae.

Materials & Methods

Taxon sampling

Outgroups

In this study, three separate analyses were performed using different outgroups to account for uncertainty of desmostylian affinities with other mammals. Desmostylia has been hypothesized as belonging to Afrotheria, Perissodactyla or Paenungulatomorpha. In the case of the Afrotherian hypothesis, it is also not certain whether Desmostylia is closer to Sirenia or Proboscidea. Herein the following three analyses using different sets of outgroups were conducted. These analyses cover all appropriate outgroups suggested by the three phylogenetic hypotheses above.

  • (1)

    Analysis 1. Anthracobune spp. as the outgroup (coding based on Cooper et al. (2014)),

  • (2)

    Analysis 2. Pezosiren portelli, a primitive sirenian, and Moeritherium spp., a primitive proboscidean, as the outgroups (coding based on NMNS PV-20726, 20970–4, Andrews (1904 and 1906), Holroyd et al. (1996), and Delmer et al. (2006)),

  • (3)

    Analysis 3. Anthracobune spp., Pezosiren portelli and Moeritherium spp. as the outgroups.

In-group taxa

In this study, 13 species of desmostylians were included as OTUs. All presently-accepted desmostylian species were included. A possible exception is Kronokotherium brevimaxillare which has been considered a junior synonym of Desmostylus hesperus (Domning, 1996) and is known only from highly fragmentary specimens (Pronina, 1957; Beatty, 2009). The following is the list of OTUs with sources for coding.

Software and analysis

The data matrix was assembled in Mesquite v 3.6 (Maddison & Maddison, 2011). Analyses were conducted with equally weighted parsimony with PAUP* (Swofford, 2002) version 4.0a, build 165 for Macintosh using the heuristic search algorithm with Tree Bisection Reconnection (TBR) branch swapping (saving 10 trees per replication). Branch support was estimated with bootstrap resampling method (10,000 replicates). Phylogenetic trees were illustrated by using the geoscalePhylo function in the strap package (Gradstein, Ogg & Schmitz, 2012) for the statistical programming language R (R Core Team, 2017). The divergence time estimation was also calculated by geoscalePhylo function in trap package.

Characters and data matrices

Firstly, analyses were run based on previously-published character matrices (Inuzuka, 2000b; Barnes, 2013; Chiba et al., 2016; Clark, 1991; Beatty, 2009) to verify the published tree topologies. Secondly, those matrices were compiled, with coding revised and new characters added. Overall, 110 morphological characters were employed in the new matrix (Fig. 3). Character descriptions and data matrices are provided in File S1 and Table S1.

Figure 3. Distribution of morphological characters by the region used in the new matrix assembled in the present study.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

The skeleton is Neoparadoxia repenningi modified from Panofsky (1998) and its figure by Pete Nuding, courtesy of the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. Purple: teeth, Orange: skull, Yellow: mandible, Blue: forelimb, Pink: trunk, Green: hindlimb.

Results

Reproducibility of previous data matrices

Among previously-published data matrices, only the data matrix of Inuzuka (2005) did not produce the original topology presented in the paper (Fig. S1).

Analyses based on a new data matrix

All results are shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. S2–S3, S5–S6, and S8-S9. Bootstrap consensus trees obtained in all the analyses showed the identical topology (Fig. 4; Figs. S3, S6, S9) whereas strict consensus trees (Figs. S2, S5, S8) of these analyses had partly different topologies. However, all these topologies (Fig. 4, and S2–S3, S5–S6, S8–S9) agree on both traditional Paleoparadoxiinae including Archaeoparadoxia, Paleoparadoxia and Neoparadoxia and traditional Desmostylidae including Ashoroa, Cornwallius, Ounalashkastylus and Desmostylus being monophyletic as well as on Desmostylidae + Paleoparadoxiinae forming a clade. On the other hand, Paleoparadoxiidae sensu Inuzuka (2000b, 2005) and Barnes (2013) that includes Paleoparadoxia, Archaeoparadoxia, Neoparadoxia, Seuku and Behemotops spp. was not recovered as a clade. The positions of Behemotops spp. and Seuku differs among the strict consensus trees obtained in Analyses 1–3. In all the bootstrap consensus trees of these analyses, Behemotops and Seuku formed an unresolved polytomy with the clade containing the remaining desmostylians. These genera thus diverged before the split between Paleoparadoxiinae and Desmostylidae.

Figure 4. Time-calibrated strict consensus tree resulting from the present analyses.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

The number written in red below each node represents the bootstrap value (in %). The numbers written in blue indicate characters and character states representing synapomorphies for each node. Black bar: geological range, Green: Desmostylia, Blue: Desmostyloidea, Orange: Paleoparadoxiidae, Yellow: Desmostylidae. L = 205, CI = 0.668, RI = 0.682, RC = 0.456, HI = 0.332, G-fit = − 78.950.

Discussion

Reproducibility of data matrices

The analysis based on Inuzuka’s (2005) original data matrix produced a completely unresolved polytomy with no resolution. This matrix includes a relatively few characters for the number of OTUs, likely contributing to non-resolution of the tree topology.

Characters supporting each clade in the present analyses

Although not all character distribution patterns were shared among the strict consensus trees of Analyses 1 through 3 (Figs. S4, S7, S10), many common synapomorphies were found for major clades. Such synapomorphies identified in all the strict consensus trees are described below.

The monophyly of traditional Desmostylidae consisting of Ashoroa, Cornwallius, Ounalashkastylus and Desmostylus was supported by the presence of 7 or more cusps on M3 (c. 29(1)), conical and tusk-like lower incisors (c. 32( 2)), no passage anterior to the external auditory meatus connecting to the skull roof (c. 37(1)), presence of an anterior orbital groove (c. 46(1)), having cancellous bones of vertebrae (centrum) (c. 75(3)) and shallow and wide shape of intertubercular groove in humeus(c. 93(2)). The monophyly of traditional Paleoparadoxiinae consisting of Archaeoparadoxia, Paleoparadoxia and Neoparadoxia was supported by the mandibular symphysis rotated anteroventrally (c. 68(1)), 14 or 15 theoretic vertebrae (c. 78(1)), and a flat femoral shaft (c. 103 (2)). The clade consisting of Paleoparadoxiinae + Desmostylidae was supported by the absence of the p3 paraconid (c. 12(1)), fused double roots of p3 and p4 (c. 14(2)), swollen and appressed molar cusps (c. 17(1)), enlarged P4-M3 hypoconulid and entoconid (c. 18(1)) and having osteosclerosis bones of vertebrae (centrum) (c. 75(1)). Synapomorphies of Desmostylia are a tusk root enlarged in diameter (c. 5(1)), an enlarged lower canine (c. 6(1)), the hypoconid and entoconid reduced in height in p4 talonid (c. 15(1)) a transversely broad hypoconulid shelf of m3 (c. 16(1)), transversely aligned lower incisors (c. 30(1)), a flattened or conical and tusk-like lower incisor (c. 32(1 & 2)), absent of foramen within squamosal passing anterior from external auditory meatus (c. 36(1)), elongating to much behind alveolus of incisors and canine in posterior part of premaxilla (c. 38(1)), high and closed ventrally external auditory meatus (c. 39(1)), elongated paraoccipital process (c. 40(1)), the presence of the foramen post-zygomaticus (c. 41(1)), basioccipital bone’s length less than half of the width of the foramen magnum (c. 49(1)), paired sternebrae (c. 73(1)), exist of the ring like shape epiphyseal line in centrum (c. 83(1)), shallow and narrow intertubercular groove in humerus (c. 93(1)), distal surface inclined medially in capitate bone (c. 103(1)), and tibia is medially twisted with its distal articular surface facing laterally (c. 106(1)). The monophyly of Desmostylus (D. japonicus + D. hesperus + “Vanderhoofius” coalingensis) was supported by the sigmoid upper margin of mandibular body (c. 64(1)). The monophyly of D. hesperus + “Vanderhoofius” coalingensis was supported by the loss of the upper canine (c. 3(1)), the presence of one pair of upper incisors (c. 33(1)), premaxilla contacting the frontal (c. 42(1)) and the laterally convex interalveolar margin in the diastema of the mandible (c. 70(1)). The monophyly of Neoparadoxia was supported by a small angle between the anterior and posterior margins of the coronoid process (c. 65(1)), the tibia–fibula articulation enlarged and extended proximally (c. 104(1)) and the astragalar facet on the tibia tilted at least 60 degrees from horizontal (c. 105(1)).

Comparisons with MPTs and synapomorphies for clades obtained in previous studies

In this study, a new data matrix was constructed including more characters and taxa than those used in previous studies. The present MPT topologies are clearly different from the one presented in Inuzuka (2000b, 2005) but are mostly consistent with the one in Beatty (2009). An assumption by Barnes (2013) that both Paleoparadoxiinae and Paleoparadoxiidae were monophyletic was rejected herein. In addition, the relationship among Archaeoparadoxia, Paleoparadoxia and Desmostylidae was unresolved in Chiba et al. (2016) likely because their matrix did not include enough characters. In this study, the data matrix consisting of more characters successfully resolved the relationship among these three taxa.

The synapomorphies identified in the present study are somewhat different from those proposed by previous studies. Clark (1991) identified two synapomorphies for traditional Paleoparadoxiinae and three synapomorphies for Desmostylidae + Paleoparadoxiinae. However, the present analyses did not find any of these characters diagnosing these clades except for Clark’s (1991) Character 29 (Character 68 in the present data matrix). As an OTU, Clark’s (1991) matrix included an undescribed specimen (USNM 23895) not included in the present analyses, possibly causing differences in synapomorphies of these clades.

Inuzuka (2005), on the other hand, identified four synapomorphies for Desmostylia, six for Desmostylidae, three for traditional Paleoparadoxiinae and two for Desmostylus. None of those synapomorphies identified in Inuzuka (2005; his Characters 1, 3, 8, 12, 14, 15, 31, 32, 34 and 35) supported these clades in the present analyses. The strict consensus topologies obtained in the present analyses are different from the one presented in Inuzuka (2005). Therefore, such differences may be expected.

Taxonomy of Desmostylia

The present results suggest that the previously-proposed taxa Desmostylidae and Paleoparadoxiinae are monophyletic and valid. On the other hand, Paleoparadoxiidae including Behemotops (Inuzuka, 2000c; Barnes, 2013; Inuzuka, 2009) turned out to be paraphyletic. Therefore, the currently-used taxon Paleoparadoxiidae needs to be re-defined as a clade excluding Behemotops, leaving it with the same taxonomic content as the currently-used Paleoparadoxiinae (Beatty, 2009). Behemotops and Seuku are not included in either monophyletic Desmostylidae or Paleoparadoxiidae. Additionally, Vanderhoofius (= “Desmostylus”) coalingensis, D. hesperus and D. japonicus formed a clade in the strict consensus trees of all present analyses. Therefore, these results support the hypothesis of Kohno (2000) and Santos & Parham (2016) that Vanderhoofius is a junior synonym of Desmostylus.

New definition of desmostylian clades

In this study, the monophyly of traditional Paleoparadoxiidae was rejected. Desmostylian families have been defined based on a traditional convention of simply enumerating included taxa. Such an approach was regarded as non-evolutionary by de Queiroz and Gauthier (1990, 1992, and 1994). These authors instead proposed phylogenetic definitions of taxon names, i.e., defining taxon names in terms of common ancestry, which has resulted in the proposal of the formal International Code of Phylogenetic Nomenclature (PhyloCode) governing the naming of clades (Cantino & De Queiroz, 2010). Their rationale is followed here and traditional desmostylian family names are converted to clade names with new definitions following the PhyloCode rules.

DESMOSTYLIDAE OSBORN 1905 (CONVERTED CLADE NAME)

Definition: Desmostylidae refers to the clade consisting of Desmostylus hesperus Marsh 1888 and all organisms or species that share a more recent common ancestor with D. hesperus than with Paleoparadoxia tabatai Tokunaga 1939.

Comments: Because the Order Desmostylia is currently divided into two families, Desmostylidae and Paleoparadoxiidae, it is appropriate to convert these taxa to branch- or stem-based clades so that all desmostylian species except for a few, early-diverging forms (e.g., those regarded as Family indeterminate by Beatty & Cockburn (2015) are included in one of these clades. All taxa traditionally regarded as constituting Desmostylidae formed a clade in the present analyses (Fig. 4). Therefore, the converted clade of Desmostylidae include the same set of currently valid taxa as the traditional Family Desmostylidae.

Based on the current analyses, Desmostylidae is diagnosed by the following characteristics: the presence of seven or more cusps on M3 (c. 29(1)), conical and tusk-like lower incisors (c. 32( 2)), no passage anterior to the external auditory meatus connecting to the skull roof (c. 37(1)), presence of an anterior orbital groove (c. 46(1)), having cancellous bones of vertebrae (centrum) (c. 75(3)) and shallow and wide shape of intertubercular groove in humweus(c. 93(2)).

PALEOPARADOXIIDAE Reinhart, 1959 (CONVERTED CLADE NAME)

Definition: Paleoparadoxiidae refers to the clade consisting of Paleoparadoxia tabatai Tokunaga 1939 and all organisms or species that share a more recent common ancestor with P. tabatai than with Desmostylus hesperus Marsh 1888.

Comments: Traditionally-recognized paleoparadoxiids formed a paraphyletic group and thus did not form a clade in all present analyses (Fig. 4), necessitating a revision of the content of the taxon. Based on the present analyses, the clade Paleoparadoxiidae is diagnosed by the following synapomorphies: the mandibular symphysis rotated anteroventrally (c. 68(1)), 14 or 15 theoretic vertebrae (c. 78(1)), and a flat femoral shaft (c. 103 (2)).

DESMOSTYLOIDEA Osborn, 1905 (CONVERTED CLADE NAME)

Definition: Desmostyloidea refers to the clade originating with the most recent common ancestor of Desmostylus hesperus Marsh 1888 and Paleoparadoxia tabatai Tokunaga 1939.

Comments: The new clade Desmostyloidea includes Desmostylidae and Paleoparadoxiidae as its subclades. Because these two clades are defined above as branch-based clades, any member of Desmostyloidea belongs to either Desmostylidae or Paleoparadoxiidae.

The following synapomorphies of Desmostyloidea were identified in the present analyses: The clade consisting of Paleoparadoxiinae + Desmostylidae was supported by the absence of the p3 paraconid (c. 12(1)), fused double roots of p3 and p4 (c. 14(2)), swollen and appressed molar cusps (c. 17(1)), enlarged P4-M3 hypoconulid and entoconid (c. 18(1)) and having osteosclerosis bones of vertebrae (centrum) (c. 75(1)).

DESMOSTYLIA Reinhart, 1953 (CONVERTED CLADE NAME)

Definition: Desmostylia refers to the clade originating with the first organism or species to possess as an apomorphy the transversely broad hypoconulid shelf of the third molar, as inherited by Desmostylus hesperus Marsh 1888.

Comments: The order Desmostylia was established by Reinhart, 1953 for the genera Desmostylus and Cornwallius. Since then, several new genera have been referred to this order by Reinhart (1959), Domning, Ray & McKenna (1986), Inuzuka (2000a), Barnes (2013), Beatty & Cockburn (2015) and Chiba et al. (2016). In the present analyses, such genera were all found to be included in one clade and share numerous synapomorphies.

Several alternative phylogenetic definitions of Desmostylia are possible, but the newly defined clade should approximate traditional use of the name. The node-based definition would be “the clade originating with the most recent common ancestor of Desmostylus hesperus Marsh 1888, Paleoparadoxia tabatai Tokunaga 1939, Seuku emlongi (Domning, Ray & McKenna, 1986), Behemotops proteus (Domning, Ray & McKenna, 1986) and Behemotops katsuiei Inuzuka, 2000a.” This definition, however, would exclude from the clade earlier-diverging or “stem” species on this lineage. The branch-based definition, on the other hand, would be “the clade consisting of Desmostylus hesperus Marsh 1888 and all organisms or species that share a more recent common ancestor with D. hesperus than with Anthracobune pinfoldi Pilgrim, 1940, Trichechus manatus Linnaeus, 1758, or Elephas maximus Linnaeus, 1758”, considering currently hypothesized sister clades of Desmostylia. However, the exact relationships of Desmostylia with other mammalian clades are still debated and it is possible that other clades will turn out to be more closely related to Desmostylia than those that have been hypothesized. Considering that such a case would result in a wildly different taxonomic content of Desmostylia than that currently recognized, this branch-based definition also appears inappropriate.

Desmostylia was originally proposed by Reinhart (1953) for Osborn’s (1905) Desmostylidae and Hay’s (1924) Desmostyliformes. It included currently-recognized Paleparadoxia, Cornwallius, and Desmostylus. Although various recent studies identified diagnostic features of Desmostylia (e.g., Inuzuka, 2005; Matsui, 2017; Matsui et al., 2018), they did not attempt define the name of the clade Desmostylia. In this study we newly established the apomorphy-based definition for this clade. The clade defined in this way includes not only the derived clades Paleoparadoxiidae and Desmostylidae that share the “bundled, pillar-like” teeth, but also earlier-diverging members Seuku and Behemotops possessing a transversely broad hypoconulid shelf that would have been a precursor of the highly specialized dental morphology of those clades. Considering that members of Desmostylia have been recognized based on such unique dental morphology present in derived species, it is most reasonable to adopt the apomorphy-based definition based on a dental characteristic as proposed here.

Conclusions

In this study, a new data matrix was assembled for analyzing phylogenetic interrelationships of Desmostylia. The results of the analyses support a monophyletic Paleoparadoxiinae consisting of Archaeoparadoxia, Paleoparadoxia and Neoparadoxia as well as a Desmostylidae consisting of Ashoroa, Cornwallius, Ounalashkastylus, and Desmostylus. In addition, Behemotops and Seuku turned out to form an unresolved polytomy with the clade of Paleoparadoxiinae + Desmostylidae. Based on these results, the phylogenetic definitions of Desmostylia, Desmostylidae and Paleoparadoxiidae, as well as a new clade Desmostyloidea, are proposed.

Supplemental Information

File S1. Character lists.
Click here for additional data file. (33.7KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-1
Table S1. Data matrices.
Click here for additional data file. (41.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-2
Figure S1. Strict consensus tree of the cladistic analysis based on Inuzuka (2005)’s matrix.
Click here for additional data file. (69.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-3
Figure S2. The strict consensus tree of Analysis 1.
Click here for additional data file. (75.8KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-4
Figure S3. The bootstrap consensus tree of Analysis 1.

L = 163, CI = 0.699, RI = 0.688, RC = 0.481, HI = 0.301, G-fit = − 63.350

Click here for additional data file. (103.7KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-5
Figure S4. The synapomorphies map of Analysis 1.
Click here for additional data file. (99.3KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-6
Figure S5. The strict consensus tree of Analysis 2.
Click here for additional data file. (13.5KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-7
Figure S6. The bootstrap consensus tree of Analysis 2.

L = 190, CI = 0.663, RI = 0.663, RC = 0.440, HI = 0.337, G-fit = − 71.600

Click here for additional data file. (103KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-8
Figure S7. The synapomorphies map of Analysis 2.
Click here for additional data file. (90.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-9
Figure S8. The strict consensus tree of Analysis 3.
Click here for additional data file. (75.4KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-10
Figure S9. The bootstrap consensus tree of Analysis 3.

L = 194, CI = 0.655, RI = 0.679, RC = 0.445, HI = 0.345, G-fit = − 77.100

Click here for additional data file. (107.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-11
Figure S10. The synapomorphies map of Analysis 3.
Click here for additional data file. (99.8KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-12
Supplemental Information 1. The log data of Analysis 1.
Click here for additional data file. (365.3KB, log)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-13
Supplemental Information 2. The log data of Analysis 2.
Click here for additional data file. (390.4KB, log)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-14
Supplemental Information 3. The log data of Analysis 3.
Click here for additional data file. (403.2KB, log)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-15

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to Nicholas Pyenson, David Bohaska (USNM), Mark Goodwin, and Patricia Holroyd (UCMP), Jorge Velez-Juarbe, Samuel A. McLeod, and Vanessa R. Rhue (LACM), Naoki Kohno (NMNS), and CH Tsai (NMNS, currently National Taiwan University), Hiroshi Sawamura, Tatsuro Ando, and Tatsuya Shinmura (AMP), Yoshitsugu Kobayashi, Tomonori Tanaka, Tsogtbaatar Chinzorig, Kota Kubo (UHM) for allowing us to study desmostylian specimens under their care. KM also thanks Kazuyoshi Endo, Takenori Sasaki, Makoto Manabe, and Naoki Kohno for helpful discussions on her Ph.D. dissertation including a chapter on which this paper is based. We are grateful for the constructive reviews by the editor, John Hutchinson, and reviewers, Brian L. Beatty and Daryl P. Domning.

Institutional abbreviations

AMP

Ashoro Museum of Paleontology, Hokkaido, Japan

GSJ

Geological Survey of Japan, Ibaraki, Japan

LACM

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California, USA

NMNS

National Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo, Japan

UCMP

University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley, California, USA

UHR

Hokkaido University Museum, Sapporo, Japan

USNM

Department of Paleobiology, US National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., USA.

Funding Statement

Kumiko Matsui received support from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Research grant for Young Scientists (JSPS 16J00546) and the Sasakawa Scientific Research Grant 2018-6028 from the Japan Science Society. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Additional Information and Declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare there are no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Kumiko Matsui conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Takanobu Tsuihiji conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

All raw data are available in the Supplemental Files.

Specimens are at the Ahoro Museum of Paleontology, Ashoro, Hokkaido, Japan (Behemotops katsuiei AMP 22, Ashoroa laticosta: AMP 21), the Geological Survey of Japan, Ibaraki, Japan (Desmostylus hesperus: GSJ-F7743, Desmostylus japonicus: GSJ-F02071), Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles,California, USA (Neoparadoxia cecilialina: 150150), National Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo, Japan (Desmostylus japonicus: NMNS PV-5600, Paleoparadoxia tabatai: NMNS PV-5601, Pezosiren portelli: NMNS PV-20726, 20970–4), the University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley, California, USA (Archaeoparadoxia weltoni: UCMP 114285, Neoparadoxia repeninngi: UCMP 81302, Desmostylus hesperus: UCMP 32742, Desmostylus (Vanderhoofius) coalingensis: UCMP 39990), the Hokkaido University Museum, Sapporo, Japan (Desmostylus hesperus: UHR-18466), and the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, USA (Behemotops proteus USNM 244035; Cornwallius sookensis USNM 11073, 11075, 181738, 181740, 181741, and 214740; Desmostylus (Vanderhoofius) coalingensis USNM 244489)

References

  • Andrews (1906).Andrews CW. A descriptive catalogue of the tertiary vertebrata of the Fayum, Egypt, based on the collection of the Egyptian Government in the Geological Museum, Cairo, and on the collection in the British Museum (Natural History) Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History); London: 1906. [Google Scholar]
  • Andrews III (1904).Andrews III CW. Further notes on the mammals of the Eocene of Egypt. Geological Magazine. 1904;1:109–115. doi: 10.1017/S001675680012343X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Barnes (2013).Barnes LG. A new genus and species of Late Miocene paleoparadoxiid (Mammalia, Desmostylia) from California. Contributions in Science. 2013;521:51–114. [Google Scholar]
  • Beatty (2006).Beatty BL. 2006. Rediscovered specimens of Cornwallius (Mammalia, Desmostylia) from Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada; pp. 1–6. (Vertebrate palaeontology series). [Google Scholar]
  • Beatty (2009).Beatty BL. New material of Cornwallius sookensis (Mammalia: desmostylia) from the Yaquina Formation of Oregon. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 2009;29:894–909. doi: 10.1671/039.029.0320. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Beatty & Cockburn (2015).Beatty BL, Cockburn TC. New insights on the most primitive desmostylian from a partial skeleton of Behemotops (Desmostylia, Mammalia) from Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 2015;35:e979939. doi: 10.1080/02724634.2015.979939. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Cantino & De Queiroz (2010).Cantino PD, De Queiroz K. 2010. International code of phylogenetic nomenclature. https://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/PhyloCode4c.pdf
  • Chiba et al. (2016).Chiba K, Fiorillo AR, Jacobs LL, Kimura Y, Kobayashi Y, Kohno N, Nishida Y, Michael PJ, Tanaka K. A new desmostylian mammal from Unalaska (USA) and the robust Sanjussen jaw from Hokkaido (Japan), with comments on feeding in derived desmostylids. Historical Biology. 2016;28:289–303. doi: 10.1080/08912963.2015.1046718. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Clark (1991).Clark JM. A new early Miocene species of Paleoparadoxia (Mammalia: Desmostylia) from California. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 1991;11:490–508. doi: 10.1080/02724634.1991.10011417. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Cooper et al. (2014).Cooper LN, Seiffert ER, Clementz M, Madar SI, Bajpai S, Hussain ST, Thewissen JGM. Anthracobunids from the middle Eocene of India and Pakistan are stem perissodactyls. PLOS ONE. 2014;9:e109232. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • De Queiroz & Gauthier (1990).De Queiroz K, Gauthier J. Phylogeny as a central principle in taxonomy: phylogenetic definitions of taxon names. Systematic Biology. 1990;39:307–322. [Google Scholar]
  • De Queiroz & Gauthier (1992).De Queiroz K, Gauthier J. Phylogenetic taxonomy. Annual review of Ecology and Systematics. 1992;23:449–480. doi: 10.1146/annurev.es.23.110192.002313. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • De Queiroz & Gauthier (1994).De Queiroz K, Gauthier J. Toward a phylogenetic system of biological nomenclature. Tree. 1994;9:27–31. doi: 10.1016/0169-5347(94)90231-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Delmer et al. (2006).Delmer C, Mahboubi M, Tabuce R, Tassy P. A new species of Moeritherium (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the Eocene of Algeria: new perspectives on the ancestral morphotype of the genus. Palaeontology. 2006;49:421–434. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4983.2006.00548.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Domning (1996).Domning DP. Bibliography and index of the Sirenia and Desmostylia. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology. 1996;80(1996):1–611. [Google Scholar]
  • Domning (2002).Domning DP. The terrestrial posture of desmostylians. In: Cenozoic Mammals of Land and Sea: tributes to the Career of Clayton E. Ray, R. J. Emry, ed. Smithson. Contr. Paleobiology. 2002;93:99–111. [Google Scholar]
  • Domning & Barnes (2007).Domning DP, Barnes LG. A new name for the ‘Stanford Skeleton’ of Paleoparadoxia (Mammalia, Desmostylia) Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 2007;27:748–751. doi: 10.1671/0272-4634(2007)27[748:ANNFTS]2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Domning, Ray & McKenna (1986).Domning DP, Ray CE, McKenna MC. Two new oligocene desmostylians and a discussion of tethytherian systematics. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology. 1986;59:1–56. doi: 10.5479/si.00810266.59.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Gheerbrant, Filippo & Schmitt (2016).Gheerbrant E, Filippo A, Schmitt A. Convergence of Afrotherian and Laurasiatherian Ungulate-like Mammals: first Morphological Evidence from the Paleocene of Morocco. PLOS ONE. 2016;11(2016):e0157556. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157556. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gingerich (2005).Gingerich PD. Aquatic adaptation and swimming mode inferred from skeletal proportions in the Miocene desmostylian Desmostylus. Journal of Mammalian Evolution. 2005;12:183–194. doi: 10.1007/s10914-005-5719-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Gradstein, Ogg & Schmitz (2012).Gradstein FM, Ogg JM, Schmitz M. A geologic time scale. Elsevier; Boston: 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • Hay (1924).Hay OP. Notes on the osteology and dentition of the genera Desmostylus and Cornwallius. Proceedings of the United States National Museum. 1924;65(2521):1–8. doi: 10.5479/si.00963801.65-2521.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Holroyd et al. (1996).Holroyd PA, Simons EL, Bown TM, Polly PA, Kraus MJ. New records of terrestrial mammals from the upper Eocene Qasr el Sagha Formation, Fayum Depression, Egypt. Palaeovertebrata. 1996;25:175–192. [Google Scholar]
  • Ijiri & Kamei (1961).Ijiri S, Kamei T. On the skulls of Desmostylus mirabilis Nagao from South Sakhalin and of Paleoparadoxia tabatai (Tokunaga) from Gifu Prefecture, Japan. Earth Science. 1961;53:1–27. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (1980a).Inuzuka N. The skeleton of Desmostylus mirabilis from South Sakhalin 1. Atlas and thoracic vertebrae. Earth Science. 1980a;34:205–214. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (1980b).Inuzuka N. The skeleton of Desmostylus mirabilis from South Sakhalin 2. Lumbar vertebrae, sacrum and coccygeal vertebrae. Earth Science. 1980b;34:247–257. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (1981a).Inuzuka N. The skeleton of Desmostylus mirabilis from South Sakhalin 4. Metacarpus. Earth Science. 1981a;35:240–244. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (1981b).Inuzuka N. The skeleton of Desmostylus mirabilis from South Sakhalin 3. Ribs, scapula and os coxae. Earth Science. 1981b;35:1–18. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (1982).Inuzuka N. The skeleton of Desmostylus mirabilis from South Sakhalin 5. Limb bones. Earth Science. 1982;36:117–127. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (1984).Inuzuka N. Skeletal restoration of the Desmostylians: herpetiform Mammals. Memoirs of the faculty of science, Kyoto University. Series of Biology. 1984;9:157–253. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (1988).Inuzuka N. The skeleton of Desmostylus from Utanobori, Hokkaido, 1. Cranium. Bulletin of the Geological Survey of Japan. 1988;39:139–190. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (2000a).Inuzuka N. The Stanford Skeleton of Paleoparadoxia (Mammalia: Desmostylia) Bulletin of Ashoro Museum of Paleontology. 2000a;3:3–110. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (2000b).Inuzuka N. Aquatic adaptations in desmostylians. Historical Biology. 2000b;14:97–113. doi: 10.1080/10292380009380558. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (2000c).Inuzuka N. Primitive Late Oligocene desmostylians from Japan and Phylogeny of the Desmostylia. Bulletin of the Ashoro Museum of Paleontology. 2000c;1:91–124. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (2005).Inuzuka N. The Stanford skeleton of Paleoparadoxia (Mammalia: Desmostylia) Bulletin of the Ashoro Museum of Paleontology. 2005;3:3–110. [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (2009).Inuzuka N. The skeleton of Desmostylus from Utanobori, Hokkaido, Japan, 2. Postcranial skeleton. Bulletin of the Geological Survey of Japan. 2009;60:257–379. doi: 10.9795/bullgsj.60.257. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Inuzuka (2011).Inuzuka N. The postcranial skeleton and adaptation of Ashoroa laticosta (Mammalia: Desmostylia) Bulletin of the Ashoro Museum of Paleontology. 2011;6:3–57. [Google Scholar]
  • Jacobs et al. (2007).Jacobs LL, Fiorillo A, Gangloff R, Pasch A. Desmostylian remains from Unalaska Island, Aleutian Chain, Alaska. In Beard, C. and Luo, Zhe-Xi ed. Mammalian paleontology on a global stage: papers in honor of Mary R. Dawson. Bulletin of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. 2007;39:189–202. doi: 10.2992/0145-9058(2007)39[189:DRFUIA]2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Jacobs et al. (2009).Jacobs LL, Fiorillo AR, Nishida Y, Fitzgerald EMG. Mid-Cenozoic marine mammals from Alaska. Papers on geology, vertebrate paleontology, and biostratigraphy in honor of Michael O. Woodburne. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin. 2009;64:171–184. [Google Scholar]
  • Kohno (2000).Kohno N. A centenary of studies on the holotype (NSM-PV 5600) of Desmostylus japonicus Tokunaga and Iwasaki, 1914. Bulletin of Ashoro Museum of Paleontology. 2000;1:137–151. [Google Scholar]
  • Linnaeus (1758).Linnaeus C. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Ed. 10, Tomus 1 L. Salvii; Stockholm: 1758. p. 823p. [Google Scholar]
  • Maddison & Maddison (2011).Maddison WP, Maddison DR. 2011. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. http://www.mesquiteproject.org
  • Matsui (2017).Matsui K. How can we reliably identify a taxon based on humeral morphology? Comparative morphology of desmostylian humeri. PeerJ. 2017;5:e4011. doi: 10.7717/peerj.4011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Matsui et al. (2018).Matsui K, Kimura Y, Nagata M, Inose H, Ikeda K, Beatty BL, Obayashi H, Hirata T, Otoh S, Shinmura T, Agematsu S, Sashida K. A long-forgotten ‘dinosaur’ bone from a museum cabinet, uncovered to be a Japan’s iconic extinct mammal, Paleoparadoxia (Desmostylia, Mammalia) Royal Society Open Science. 2018;5(7) doi: 10.1098/rsos.172441. Article 172441. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Osborn (1905).Osborn HF. Ten years’ progress in the mammalian palaeontology of North America. American Geologist. 1905;36:199–229. [Google Scholar]
  • Panofsky (1998).Panofsky AI. Stanford Paleoparadoxia fossil skeleton mounting. Stanford Linear Accelerator Center; Stanford: 1998. SLAC-PUB-7829:vi 143 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Pilgrim (1940).Pilgrim GE. Middle eocene mammals from North-west India. Proceedings of the zoological society of London (Vol. 110, No. 1-2, 127–152); 1940. [Google Scholar]
  • Pronina (1957).Pronina IG. A new desmostylid, Kronokotherium brevimaxillare gen. nov., sp. nov., from Miocene deposits of Kamchatka. Doklady Akademii nauk SSSR, NS. 1957;117:310–312. 1 pl. [Google Scholar]
  • R Core Team (2017).R Core Team . R Foundation for Statistical Computing; Vienna: 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • Ray, Domning & McKenna (1994).Ray CE, Domning DP, McKenna MC. A new specimen of Behemotops proteus (Order Desmostylia) from the marine Oligocene of Washington. In A. Berta, and T. A. Deméré ed. Proceedings of the San Diego Society of Natural History. 1994;29:205–222. [Google Scholar]
  • Reinhart (1953).Reinhart RH. Diagnosis of the new mammalian order, Desmostylia. The Journal of Geology. 1953;61:187. doi: 10.1086/626067. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Reinhart (1959).Reinhart RH. A review of the Sirenia and Desmostylia. University of California Publications in Geological Sciences. 1959;36:1–146. [Google Scholar]
  • Repenning (1965).Repenning CA. Drawing of Paleoparadoxia skeleton. Geotimes. 1965;9:1–3. [Google Scholar]
  • Rose et al. (2014).Rose KD, Holbrook LT, Rana RS, Kumar K, Jones KE, Ahrens HE, Missiaen P, Sahni A, Smith T. Early Eocene fossils suggest that the mammalian order Perissodactyla originated in India. Nature communications. 2014;5 doi: 10.1038/ncomms6570. Article 5570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Santos & Parham (2016).Santos G-P, Parham B. L. Beatty, JF. New data on the ontogeny and senescence of Desmostylus (Desmostylia, Mammalia) Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 2016;36(2):e1078344. doi: 10.1080/02724634.2016.1078344. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • Shikama (1966).Shikama T. Postcranial skeletons of Japanese Desmostylia. Palaeontological Society of Japan Special Paper. 1966;12:1–202. [Google Scholar]
  • Swofford (2002).Swofford DL. Sinauer Associates; Sunderland: 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • Yoshiwara & Iwasaki (1902).Yoshiwara Y, Iwasaki C. Notes on a new fossil mammal. Journal of the College of Science, Imperial University of Tokyo. 1902;16:1–13. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Citations

  1. Cantino PD, De Queiroz K. 2010. International code of phylogenetic nomenclature. https://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/PhyloCode4c.pdf
  2. Maddison WP, Maddison DR. 2011. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. http://www.mesquiteproject.org

Supplementary Materials

File S1. Character lists.
Click here for additional data file. (33.7KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-1
Table S1. Data matrices.
Click here for additional data file. (41.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-2
Figure S1. Strict consensus tree of the cladistic analysis based on Inuzuka (2005)’s matrix.
Click here for additional data file. (69.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-3
Figure S2. The strict consensus tree of Analysis 1.
Click here for additional data file. (75.8KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-4
Figure S3. The bootstrap consensus tree of Analysis 1.

L = 163, CI = 0.699, RI = 0.688, RC = 0.481, HI = 0.301, G-fit = − 63.350

Click here for additional data file. (103.7KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-5
Figure S4. The synapomorphies map of Analysis 1.
Click here for additional data file. (99.3KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-6
Figure S5. The strict consensus tree of Analysis 2.
Click here for additional data file. (13.5KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-7
Figure S6. The bootstrap consensus tree of Analysis 2.

L = 190, CI = 0.663, RI = 0.663, RC = 0.440, HI = 0.337, G-fit = − 71.600

Click here for additional data file. (103KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-8
Figure S7. The synapomorphies map of Analysis 2.
Click here for additional data file. (90.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-9
Figure S8. The strict consensus tree of Analysis 3.
Click here for additional data file. (75.4KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-10
Figure S9. The bootstrap consensus tree of Analysis 3.

L = 194, CI = 0.655, RI = 0.679, RC = 0.445, HI = 0.345, G-fit = − 77.100

Click here for additional data file. (107.9KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-11
Figure S10. The synapomorphies map of Analysis 3.
Click here for additional data file. (99.8KB, pdf)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-12
Supplemental Information 1. The log data of Analysis 1.
Click here for additional data file. (365.3KB, log)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-13
Supplemental Information 2. The log data of Analysis 2.
Click here for additional data file. (390.4KB, log)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-14
Supplemental Information 3. The log data of Analysis 3.
Click here for additional data file. (403.2KB, log)
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7430/supp-15

Data Availability Statement

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

All raw data are available in the Supplemental Files.

Specimens are at the Ahoro Museum of Paleontology, Ashoro, Hokkaido, Japan (Behemotops katsuiei AMP 22, Ashoroa laticosta: AMP 21), the Geological Survey of Japan, Ibaraki, Japan (Desmostylus hesperus: GSJ-F7743, Desmostylus japonicus: GSJ-F02071), Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles,California, USA (Neoparadoxia cecilialina: 150150), National Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo, Japan (Desmostylus japonicus: NMNS PV-5600, Paleoparadoxia tabatai: NMNS PV-5601, Pezosiren portelli: NMNS PV-20726, 20970–4), the University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley, California, USA (Archaeoparadoxia weltoni: UCMP 114285, Neoparadoxia repeninngi: UCMP 81302, Desmostylus hesperus: UCMP 32742, Desmostylus (Vanderhoofius) coalingensis: UCMP 39990), the Hokkaido University Museum, Sapporo, Japan (Desmostylus hesperus: UHR-18466), and the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, USA (Behemotops proteus USNM 244035; Cornwallius sookensis USNM 11073, 11075, 181738, 181740, 181741, and 214740; Desmostylus (Vanderhoofius) coalingensis USNM 244489)

Articles from PeerJ are provided here courtesy of PeerJ, Inc

RESOURCES