Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Phylogenetics of characters and groups, and the classification of taxa
- 3 Problems in understanding metatherian evolution
- 4 Form–function, and ecological and behavioral morphology in Metatheria
- 5 Background to the analysis of metatherian cruropedal evidence
- 6 Mesozoic and Cenozoic: Fossil tarsals of ameridelphians unassociated with teeth
- 7 Cruropedal attributes of living and fossil families of metatherians
- 8 Taxa and phylogeny of Metatheria
- 9 Paleobiogeography and metatherian evolution
- References
- Index
7 - Cruropedal attributes of living and fossil families of metatherians
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 October 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Phylogenetics of characters and groups, and the classification of taxa
- 3 Problems in understanding metatherian evolution
- 4 Form–function, and ecological and behavioral morphology in Metatheria
- 5 Background to the analysis of metatherian cruropedal evidence
- 6 Mesozoic and Cenozoic: Fossil tarsals of ameridelphians unassociated with teeth
- 7 Cruropedal attributes of living and fossil families of metatherians
- 8 Taxa and phylogeny of Metatheria
- 9 Paleobiogeography and metatherian evolution
- References
- Index
Summary
It is that osteology must after all constitute the core of the true theory of mammalian history. It is only by means of the skeleton that we are able to correlate the knowledge of living with that of fossil mammals and thus to synthesize the results of palaeontology, systematic mammalogy and comparative anatomy.
Gregory (1910, p. 112)It will, perhaps, be helpful for an understanding of marsupial conditions if it be explained that Huxley, Dollo, Bensley, and other authorities on this group have been convinced that the Metatheria were derived from an ancestor sufficiently specialized for an arboreal existence for the latter adaptation to have left a lasting impression upon the foot structure. This is in contrast to the protoplacental ancestor, which, although presumably to some extent arboreal in habit, was hardly modified in this direction to a very definite degree.
A. B. Howell (1944, p. 28)Didelphidae (Figures 3.1, 3.2, 4.1– 4.5, 6.23, 7.1–71–7.12, & 8.11–8.18)
Ecomorphology
Bock's (1991) and Goldschmid and Kotrschal's (1989) recent reviews (see additional references therein) explore and discuss in detail the role of functional and ecological morphology in systematic biology.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1995