Abstract
AbstractThe metapodials of extinct horses have long been regarded as one of the most useful skeletal elements to determine taxonomic identity. However, recent research on both extant and extinct horses has revealed the possibility for plasticity in metapodial morphology, leading to notable variability within taxa. This calls into question the reliability of metapodials in species identification, particularly for species identified from fragmentary remains. Here, we use ten measurements of metapodials from 203 specimens of four Pleistocene horse species from eastern Beringia to test whether there are significant differences in metapodial morphology that support the presence of multiple species. We then reconstruct the body masses for every specimen to assess the range in body size within each species and determine whether species differ significantly from one another in mean body mass. We find that that taxonomic groups are based largely on the overall size of the metapodial, and that all metapodial measurements are highly autocorrelated. We also find that mean body mass differs significantly among most, but not all, species. We suggest that metapodial measurements are unreliable taxonomic indicators for Beringian horses given evidence for plasticity in metapodial morphology and their clear reflection of differences in body mass. We recommend future studies use more reliable indicators of taxonomy to identify Beringian horse species, particularly from localities from which fossils of several species have been recovered.
Funder
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Beaty Centre for Species Discovery
University of Ottawa
Dinosaur Research Institute
Canadian Museum of Nature
Carleton University
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference124 articles.
1. Alberdi MT, Arroyo-Cabrales J, Marín-Leyva AH, Polaco OJ (2014) Study of Cedral horses and their place in the Mexican Quaternary. Rev Mex Cienc Geol 31:221–237
2. Alberdi MT, Prado JL, Ortiz-Jaureguizar E (1995) Patterns of body size changes in fossil and living Equini (Perissodactyla). Biol J Linn Soc 54:349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-4066(95)90015-2
3. Alexander RM (1998) Symmorphosis and safety factors. In: Weibel ER, Taylor CR, Bolis L (eds) Principles of Animal Design: The Optimization and Symmorphosis Debate. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp 28–35
4. Alroy J (2003) Taxonomic influence and body mass distributions in North American fossil mammals. J Mammal 84(2):431–443. https://doi.org/10.1644/1545-1542(2003)084<0431:TIABMD>2.0.CO;2
5. Ashton KG, Tracy MC, de Queiroz A (2000) Is Bergmann’s rule valid for mammals? Am Nat 156(4):390–415. https://doi.org/10.1086/303400