Morphometric analysis of the Late Cretaceous Placenticeras of Alabama, USA: sexual dimorphism, allometry, and implications for taxonomy

Rachel C. Mohr,Thomas S. Tobin,Emily M. Tompkins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2024.3

2024-05-03

Paleobiology

Abstract:A traditional typological approach to taxonomy often does not adequately account for intraspecific variation and can result in taxonomic oversplitting. For many groups, including ammonoids of the Placenticeras genus, intraspecific variation documented in recent studies (e.g., ontogenetic changes, sexual dimorphism, polymorphism) challenges the historic proliferation of species names. Here, we used a population approach to taxonomy and quantitatively evaluated morphometric variation in a sample of Late Cretaceous (Santonian–Campanian) Placenticeras from Alabama and adjacent counties. We used linear mixed models (LMMs) to characterize how morphological variables scale with conch size across the sample, exploiting mixed longitudinal data to evaluate individual variation in growth and inform interpretations of multivariate analyses. Extended LMMs incorporating geological formation evaluated morphological changes through time. Principal component analysis and clustering analysis were then used to evaluate the number of distinct clusters that emerged in multivariate morphospace independent of previous taxon name assignments. Discontinuous scaling relationships and distinct clusters in multivariate space suggest sexual dimorphism characterized by differences in adult size and, secondarily, shape. Previous Stantonoceras and Placenticeras assignments broadly overlap in our morphospace, failing to justify this historic distinction (as sexual dimorphs or as genera or subgenera). Placenticeras conch morphology and ornament placement changed through time, suggesting a potential utility for coarse (stage-level) biostratigraphy. However, temporal changes were not associated with distinct clusters in morphospace, and our data fail to support the plethora of reported species names. As few as one or two (successive) species may be present in our sample (representing 130 years of collection effort). In addition to highlighting the need for a significant taxonomic revision of the Placenticeras genus, this study demonstrates the utility of LMMs for distinguishing between different sources of morphological variation, improving interpretations of morphospace under a population approach to taxonomy, and maximizing the amount of ontogenetic information that can be obtained nondestructively.

paleontology,ecology,evolutionary biology,biodiversity conservation

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The main aim of this paper is to address the following issues:

1. **Morphological Variation Analysis**: By quantitatively analyzing the morphological characteristics of Placenticeras (a type of ammonite) samples from the Late Cretaceous of Alabama, USA, the study explores sexual dimorphism, overall shape variation, and the implications of these variations for taxonomy.

2. **Challenges of Traditional Classification Methods**: It challenges the traditional classification methods based on typical individuals, which often fail to adequately consider intraspecific variation and may lead to over-splitting of species. The researchers use a population-based approach to reassess the taxonomic status of this genus.

3. **Grouping Phenomena in Morphological Space**: Using statistical methods (such as principal component analysis and cluster analysis), the study investigates whether different groups can be distinguished within the samples, which may represent different sexes or species.

4. **Relationship Between Morphology and Size**: Linear mixed models are used to describe how morphological variables change with shell size, thereby assessing changes in individual growth and understanding morphological changes at different time points.

5. **Temporal Trends in Morphological Changes**: The study examines changes in shell morphology and ornamentation position over time to determine whether these changes are suitable for rough stratigraphic dating.

6. **Distinction Between Placenticeras and Stantonoceras**: It evaluates whether the morphological differences historically attributed to these two names support their existence as separate genera or subgenera.

In summary, through the statistical analysis of a large amount of morphological data, this study aims to provide new insights into the taxonomy of the genus Placenticeras and explore the causes and significance of its morphological variation.