Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
dARK ID: | ark:/26339/0013000006x33 |
Texto Completo: | http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/22303 |
Resumo: | The clade Theria has slept around 170 Mya into the two most diverse taxonomic groups of mammals: Metatheria e Eutheria. Since them, and especially during the Cenozoic, metatherians and eutherians followed towards very different evolutionary paths. Metatherians had a large portion of their evolutionary history restricted in South America and Oceania, while eutherians have dispersed and diversified throughout the whole globe. Nowadays, in South America, these two groups coexist at broad scale, frequently using the same natural habitat, like the didelphid marsupials and sigmodontine rodents. In the first two chapters of this document I present a comparison between didelphids and sigmodontines in relation to their trophic niche, using stable isotopes, and their scapular morphology. Both clades frequently occupy the same ecological and evolutionary space, culminating in overlapping patterns of trophic and morphological niche. On the one side, didelphids isotopic niche is smaller than that of sigmodontines. This is specially related to the higher amplitude of carbon enrichment of rodents, an indicative on the consumption of C4 and CAM plants within the trophic chain. On the other side, didelphids have more morphological disparity than sigmodontines in scapula shape, which is a consequence of the higher size variation among didelphids species and their intimate and strong relationship between shape and size. The large size variation of didelphids is also a good predictor of δ15N enrichment. In summary, larger didelphid species have higher levels of δ15N, indication increased consumption of proteins. In my third chapter, and at global scale, I investigate patterns of mandibular morphological disparity between mid and large sized Metatheria e Eutheria (> 7kg). Overall, patterns of morphological disparity in both clades are strongly correlated with paleoclimatic fluctuations through the evolutionary time. Moreover, the evolutionary restrictions that have been reported for methaterians does not seem to have kept them to achieve high levels of morphological disparity in mandibular shape, in which their disparity variables are comparable in magnitude to those observed in eutherians. Both clades have evolved highly adapted hypercarnivorous morphologies, showing convergent morphospace. Thus, in spite of their different evolutionary paths, I could identify several similarities between Eutheria and Metatheria, evolutionary convergences to similar habits that are not necessarily related to the same time period or geographical space. |
id |
UFSM_56ecfe25a39691863c75e6bd5a07672b |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ufsm.br:1/22303 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSM |
network_name_str |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológicaMetatheria versus eutheria: a trophic and morphological comparisonDidelphidaeEvoluçãoIsótopos estáveisMarsupiaisMorfologiaMorfometria geométricaPlacentáriosSigmodotinaeSparassodontaCreodontesUnguladosEvolutionGeometric morphometricsMarsupialsMorphologyPlacentalsSigmodotinaeStable isotopesCNPQ::CIENCIAS BIOLOGICASThe clade Theria has slept around 170 Mya into the two most diverse taxonomic groups of mammals: Metatheria e Eutheria. Since them, and especially during the Cenozoic, metatherians and eutherians followed towards very different evolutionary paths. Metatherians had a large portion of their evolutionary history restricted in South America and Oceania, while eutherians have dispersed and diversified throughout the whole globe. Nowadays, in South America, these two groups coexist at broad scale, frequently using the same natural habitat, like the didelphid marsupials and sigmodontine rodents. In the first two chapters of this document I present a comparison between didelphids and sigmodontines in relation to their trophic niche, using stable isotopes, and their scapular morphology. Both clades frequently occupy the same ecological and evolutionary space, culminating in overlapping patterns of trophic and morphological niche. On the one side, didelphids isotopic niche is smaller than that of sigmodontines. This is specially related to the higher amplitude of carbon enrichment of rodents, an indicative on the consumption of C4 and CAM plants within the trophic chain. On the other side, didelphids have more morphological disparity than sigmodontines in scapula shape, which is a consequence of the higher size variation among didelphids species and their intimate and strong relationship between shape and size. The large size variation of didelphids is also a good predictor of δ15N enrichment. In summary, larger didelphid species have higher levels of δ15N, indication increased consumption of proteins. In my third chapter, and at global scale, I investigate patterns of mandibular morphological disparity between mid and large sized Metatheria e Eutheria (> 7kg). Overall, patterns of morphological disparity in both clades are strongly correlated with paleoclimatic fluctuations through the evolutionary time. Moreover, the evolutionary restrictions that have been reported for methaterians does not seem to have kept them to achieve high levels of morphological disparity in mandibular shape, in which their disparity variables are comparable in magnitude to those observed in eutherians. Both clades have evolved highly adapted hypercarnivorous morphologies, showing convergent morphospace. Thus, in spite of their different evolutionary paths, I could identify several similarities between Eutheria and Metatheria, evolutionary convergences to similar habits that are not necessarily related to the same time period or geographical space.Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPESPor volta de 170 maa, o clado Theria se dividiu para formar os dois mais diversos grupos taxonômicos de mamíferos: Metatheria e Eutheria. A partir desta divisão, e especialmente durante o Cenozóico, metatérios e eutérios tiveram caminhos evolutivos muito distintos. Metatérios tiveram grande parte de sua evolução restrita a América do Sul e Oceania, enquanto eutérios se dispersaram e diversificaram por todo globo. Na América do Sul estes grupos atualmente coexistem em larga escala e frequentemente utilizam os mesmos hábitats naturais, a exemplo dos marsupiais didelfídeos e os roedores sigmodontíneos. Nos dois primeiros capítulos desta tese comparo didelfídeos e sigmodontíneos com relação ao seu nicho trófico, utilizando isótopos estáveis e morfologia escapular. Os dois clados frequentemente ocupam o mesmo espaço de nicho ecológico e evolutivo, culminando com padrões de sobreposição de nicho trófico e morfológico. Por um lado, o nicho isotópico de didelfídeos é menor que o de sigmodontíneos, principalmente relacionado com a maior amplitude de enriquecimento de carbono em roedores, indicativo da presença de plantas C4 e CAM consumida dentro da cadeia trófica. Por outro lado, a forma da escápula de didelfídeos tem maior disparidade morfológica, se comparada àquela de sigmodontíneos, o que é consequência da maior variação de tamanho entre as espécies deste clado e de sua íntima relação entre tamanho e forma. A maior variação de tamanho corporal dos didelfídeos também está relacionada com o enriquecimento de δ15N nestes animais, uma vez que espécies maiores têm maiores níveis de δ15N, indicando uma dieta enriquecida proteicamente. Em escala global, no terceiro capítulo investigo comparativamente os padrões de disparidade morfológica da mandíbula de médios e grandes Metatheria e Eutheria (> 7kg). Sobretudo, os padrões de disparidade morfológica em Metatheria e Eutheria estão fortemente associados com as flutuações climáticas ao longo do tempo evolutivo, sendo que as restrições evolutivas comumente associadas aos metatérios não parecem ter impedido que estes atingissem valores de disparidade morfológica na forma da mandíbula equiparáveis aos valores observados em carnívoros placentários. Ambos os clados evoluíram morfologias altamente adaptadas para hipercarnivoria, mostrando convergências quanto ao morfoespaço. Portanto, e apesar de seus distintos caminhos evolutivos, existem muitas semelhanças entre Eutheria e Metatheria, uma consequência de convergências evolutivas para hábitos similares, mas não necessariamente no mesmo tempo e espaço.Universidade Federal de Santa MariaBrasilCiências BiológicasUFSMPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Biodiversidade AnimalCentro de Ciências Naturais e ExatasCáceres, Nilton Carloshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/1920880712756721Melo, Geruza LealPerini, Fernando AraújoMonteiro, Leandro RabelloWeber, Marcelo de MoraesBubadué, Jamile de Moura2021-09-29T19:00:06Z2021-09-29T19:00:06Z2020-02-18info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisapplication/pdfhttp://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/22303ark:/26339/0013000006x33porAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSMinstname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)instacron:UFSM2022-01-03T11:57:56Zoai:repositorio.ufsm.br:1/22303Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttps://repositorio.ufsm.br/ONGhttps://repositorio.ufsm.br/oai/requestatendimento.sib@ufsm.br||tedebc@gmail.comopendoar:2022-01-03T11:57:56Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica Metatheria versus eutheria: a trophic and morphological comparison |
title |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica |
spellingShingle |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica Bubadué, Jamile de Moura Didelphidae Evolução Isótopos estáveis Marsupiais Morfologia Morfometria geométrica Placentários Sigmodotinae Sparassodonta Creodontes Ungulados Evolution Geometric morphometrics Marsupials Morphology Placentals Sigmodotinae Stable isotopes CNPQ::CIENCIAS BIOLOGICAS |
title_short |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica |
title_full |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica |
title_fullStr |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica |
title_full_unstemmed |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica |
title_sort |
Metatheria versus eutheria: uma comparação trófica e morfológica |
author |
Bubadué, Jamile de Moura |
author_facet |
Bubadué, Jamile de Moura |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Cáceres, Nilton Carlos http://lattes.cnpq.br/1920880712756721 Melo, Geruza Leal Perini, Fernando Araújo Monteiro, Leandro Rabello Weber, Marcelo de Moraes |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Bubadué, Jamile de Moura |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Didelphidae Evolução Isótopos estáveis Marsupiais Morfologia Morfometria geométrica Placentários Sigmodotinae Sparassodonta Creodontes Ungulados Evolution Geometric morphometrics Marsupials Morphology Placentals Sigmodotinae Stable isotopes CNPQ::CIENCIAS BIOLOGICAS |
topic |
Didelphidae Evolução Isótopos estáveis Marsupiais Morfologia Morfometria geométrica Placentários Sigmodotinae Sparassodonta Creodontes Ungulados Evolution Geometric morphometrics Marsupials Morphology Placentals Sigmodotinae Stable isotopes CNPQ::CIENCIAS BIOLOGICAS |
description |
The clade Theria has slept around 170 Mya into the two most diverse taxonomic groups of mammals: Metatheria e Eutheria. Since them, and especially during the Cenozoic, metatherians and eutherians followed towards very different evolutionary paths. Metatherians had a large portion of their evolutionary history restricted in South America and Oceania, while eutherians have dispersed and diversified throughout the whole globe. Nowadays, in South America, these two groups coexist at broad scale, frequently using the same natural habitat, like the didelphid marsupials and sigmodontine rodents. In the first two chapters of this document I present a comparison between didelphids and sigmodontines in relation to their trophic niche, using stable isotopes, and their scapular morphology. Both clades frequently occupy the same ecological and evolutionary space, culminating in overlapping patterns of trophic and morphological niche. On the one side, didelphids isotopic niche is smaller than that of sigmodontines. This is specially related to the higher amplitude of carbon enrichment of rodents, an indicative on the consumption of C4 and CAM plants within the trophic chain. On the other side, didelphids have more morphological disparity than sigmodontines in scapula shape, which is a consequence of the higher size variation among didelphids species and their intimate and strong relationship between shape and size. The large size variation of didelphids is also a good predictor of δ15N enrichment. In summary, larger didelphid species have higher levels of δ15N, indication increased consumption of proteins. In my third chapter, and at global scale, I investigate patterns of mandibular morphological disparity between mid and large sized Metatheria e Eutheria (> 7kg). Overall, patterns of morphological disparity in both clades are strongly correlated with paleoclimatic fluctuations through the evolutionary time. Moreover, the evolutionary restrictions that have been reported for methaterians does not seem to have kept them to achieve high levels of morphological disparity in mandibular shape, in which their disparity variables are comparable in magnitude to those observed in eutherians. Both clades have evolved highly adapted hypercarnivorous morphologies, showing convergent morphospace. Thus, in spite of their different evolutionary paths, I could identify several similarities between Eutheria and Metatheria, evolutionary convergences to similar habits that are not necessarily related to the same time period or geographical space. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-02-18 2021-09-29T19:00:06Z 2021-09-29T19:00:06Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/22303 |
dc.identifier.dark.fl_str_mv |
ark:/26339/0013000006x33 |
url |
http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/22303 |
identifier_str_mv |
ark:/26339/0013000006x33 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria Brasil Ciências Biológicas UFSM Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biodiversidade Animal Centro de Ciências Naturais e Exatas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria Brasil Ciências Biológicas UFSM Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biodiversidade Animal Centro de Ciências Naturais e Exatas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) instacron:UFSM |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) |
instacron_str |
UFSM |
institution |
UFSM |
reponame_str |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
collection |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
atendimento.sib@ufsm.br||tedebc@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1815172295647297536 |