Search

Leptocharias smithii has been poorly explored in anatomical terms. This species bears a mosaic of morphological characters and is considered to represent an intermediate condition between other carcharhiniform clades. In the present paper, the anatomy of the appendicular skeleton of the species is thoroughly investigated and compared with other representatives of the order Carcharhiniformes. Leptocharias bears exclusive characteristics, such as the visible separation of the pro- and mesopterygia but it also has an aplesodic pectoral fin, a condition shared with carcharhiniforms placed at the base of the phylogenetic tree and at the same time a chevron-shaped coracoid bar, a condition characteristic of charcharhiniforms placed at the apex of the phylogenetic tree. Additionally, in an attempt to understand the evolution of its appendicular skeleton and of other carcharhiniforms, 20 characters of the paired fins and girdles are explored and discussed in light of two recent phylogenetic hypotheses. Most of these characters were not previously explored and support not only the monophyly of Carcharhiniformes, such as the mesopterygium overlapping the metapterygium in ventral view, but also the monophyly of the less inclusive clade Hemigaleidae + (Galeocerdonidae + (Carcharhinidae+Sphyrnidae)), such as the morphology and arrangement of the distal radials, which are pointed and spaced., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The morphology of the articular region of the pectoral girdle and associated basals in Etmopteridae is revised in light of new evidence provided by taxa unavailable for previous studies. Such studies considered that etmopterids plesiomorphically had a single pectoral articular condyle, and only Etmopterus had two separate ones. Our reanalysis indicates that the possession of two separate condyles, one for the articulation of the propterygium and the second for the meso- and metapterygium, is the most widespread condition in this group. However, the presence of two separate articular condyles is not recovered as a synapomorphy for Etmopteridae. Previous studies also proposed that etmopterids lack a hook-like process on the anteroproximal margin of the anteriormost pectoral basal. We document that the hook-like process is plesiomorphically present in Etmopteridae, thus corroborating the hypothesis of closer relationships between this family and the other squaliforms that also share this process, namely Centrophoridae, Dalatiidae, Oxynotidae, and Somniosidae., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Relationships among families of the shark order Carcharhiniformes are still being debated, for example, in relation to the inclusion of hammerhead sharks (Sphyrnidae) and the tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier) in the Carcharhinidae. Previous morphological studies have not analyzed the phylogenetic significance of axial caudal muscles among carcharhiniforms. The authors therefore describe here the axial muscles of the tail region (m. epaxialis, m. obliquus superioris, m. obliquus inferioris, m. flexor caudalis) to better understand their anatomical patterns among carcharhiniform sharks. Our results indicate that the family Pentanchidae, recently separated from scyliorhinids (catsharks), present a similar pattern of caudal muscles to catsharks, indicating their close phylogenetic relationship. Triakids, hemigaleids, leptochariids, Galeocerdo cuvier and Prionace glauca have a unique pattern in which the medial axial bundle is bulkier than all other caudal axial muscles. Sphyrnids share with carcharhinids a similar pattern of the m. obliquus superioris (approximately the same size as the dorsal m. epaxialis) and have fibers of the m. flexor caudalis arranged in a V-shape. This chevron-shape is also present on the m. flexor caudalis of hemigaleids and leptochariids. Also, sphyrnids and carcharhinids have more slender septa between muscle bundles (more notably in carcharhinids; the only exception is Galeocerdo cuvier, which has the same pattern as sphyrnids). Although being used here as an outgroup, Squaliformes is unique in lacking one of the epaxial bundles. The authors conclude that the caudal axial musculature has greater phylogenetic potential than previously understood., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Over the past few decades, geometric morphometric methods have become increasingly popular and powerful tools to describe morphological data while over the same period artificial neural networks have had a similar rise in the classification of specimens to preconceived groups. However, there has been little research into how well these two systems operate together, particularly in comparison to preexisting techniques. In this study, geometric morphometric data and multilayer perceptrons, a style of artificial neural network, were used to classify shark teeth from the genus Carcharhinus to species. Three datasets of varying size and species differences were used. We compared the performance of this combination with geometric morphometric data in a linear discriminate function analysis, linear measurements in a linear discriminate function analysis, and a preexisting methodology from the literature that incorporates linear measurements and a two-layered discriminate function analysis. Across datasets, geometric morphometric data in a multilayer perceptron tended to yield modest accuracies but accuracies that varied less across species whereas other methods were able to achieve higher accuracies in some species at the expense of lower accuracies in others. Further, the performance of the two-layered discriminate function analysis illustrates that constraining what material is classified can increase the accuracy of a method. Based on this tradeoff, the best methodology will then depend on the scope of the study and the amount of material available. J. Morphol. 278:131-141, 2017. ©© 2016 Wiley Periodicals,Inc., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Elasmobranchs exhibit two distinct arrangements of mineralized tissues in the teeth that are known as orthodont and osteodont histotypes. Traditionally, it has been said that orthodont teeth maintain a pulp cavity throughout tooth development whereas osteodont teeth are filled with osteodentine and lack a pulp cavity when fully developed. We used light microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and high-resolution micro-computed tomography to compare the structure and development of elasmobranch teeth representing the two histotypes. As an example of the orthodont histotype, we studied teeth of the blue shark, Prionace glauca (Carcharhiniformes: Carcharhinidae). For the osteodont histotype, we studied teeth of the great white shark, Carcharodon carcharias (Lamniformes: Lamnidae). We document similarities and differences in tooth development and the microstructure of tissues in these two species and review the history of definitions and interpretations of elasmobranch tooth histotypes. We discuss a possible correlation between tooth histotype and tooth replacement and review the history of histotype differentiation in sharks. We find that contrary to a long held misconception, there is no orthodentine in the osteodont teeth of C. carcharias., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Doliodus problematicus is the oldest known fossil shark-like fish with an almost intact dentition (Emsian, Lower Devonian, c. 397Ma). We provide a detailed description of the teeth and dentition in D. problematicus, based on tomographic analysis of NBMG 10127 (New Brunswick Museum, Canada). Comparisons with modern shark dentitions suggest that Doliodus was a ram-feeding predator with a dentition adapted to seizing and disabling prey. Doliodus provides several clues about the early evolution of the "shark-like" dentition in chondrichthyans and also raises new questions about the evolution of oral teeth in jawed vertebrates. As in modern sharks, teeth in Doliodus were replaced in a linguo-labial sequence within tooth families at fixed positions along the jaws (12-14 tooth families per jaw quadrant in NBMG 10127). Doliodus teeth were replaced much more slowly than in modern sharks. Nevertheless, its tooth formation was apparently as highly organized as in modern elasmobranchs, in which future tooth positions are indicated by synchronized expression of shh at fixed loci within the dental epithelium. Comparable dental arrays are absent in osteichthyans, placoderms, and many "acanthodians"; a "shark-like" dentition, therefore, may be a synapomorphy of chondrichthyans and gnathostomes such as Ptomacanthus. The upper anterior teeth in Doliodus were not attached to the palatoquadrates, but were instead supported by the ethmoid region of the prechordal basicranium, as in some other Paleozoic taxa (e.g., Triodus, Ptomacanthus). This suggests that the chondrichthyan dental lamina was originally associated with prechordal basicranial cartilage as well as jaw cartilage, and that the modern elasmobranch condition (in which the oral dentition is confined to the jaws) is phylogenetically advanced. Thus, oral tooth development in modern elasmobranchs does not provide a complete developmental model for chondrichthyans or gnathostomes., (Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The superorder Galeomorph comprises the orders Heterodontiformes, Orectolobiformes, Lamniformes, and Carcharhiniformes. Recent morphological and molecular support that it is a monophyletic taxon. The phyletic relationship within the Galeomorphi are also well resolved. However, only few morphological characters of the mandibular and hyoid muscles have been employed, and a detailed description of these muscles and their variations may contribute new interpretations of homology and to the discussion of different hypothesis of intrarelationships. This paper provides a detailed description of mandibular and hyoid arch muscles in galeomorph sharks, within a comparative elasmobranch framework, with the objective to discuss putative homologies that may elucidate our understanding of galeomorph evolution. Twenty-eight galeomorph species were dissected, described, illustrated and compared with other elasmobranchs and with data from the literature. The Galeomorphi are supported as monophyletic by presenting the m. levator labii superioris attached directly to the neurocranium, different from the attachment through a tendon in basal squalomorphs. Heterodontiformes and Orectolobiformes share particular variations in the position and insertion of the m. levator labii superioris and the presence of a well-defined m. levator hyomandibulae. Lamniformes and Carcharhiniformes show similar patterns in the position and attachment of the m. levator labii superioris, subdivision of the m. adductor mandibulae, and the presence of an almost indivisible m. levator hyomandibulae and m. constrictor hyoideus dorsalis, similar to the condition, albeit independently, in basal squalomorphs. No specific mandibular or hyoid arch muscle character was found to support the clade composed of Orectolobiformes, Lamniformes, and Carcharhiniformes, as advocated by recent phylogenetic analyses., (Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The order Hexanchiformes currently comprises two families, Chlamydoselachidae (frilled sharks) and Hexanchidae (six- and seven-gill sharks), but its monophyly and relationships with other elasmobranchs are still discussed. Previous studies of hexanchiforms addressing these issues were based mainly on external morphology, teeth, skeletal features, and molecular data, whereas the employment of characters derived from variations in muscles has not been significantly explored. Dissections of four species of Hexanchiformes (including Chlamydoselachus anguineus) are reported here describing the mandibular (musculus adductor mandibulae dorsalis, m. adductor mandibulae ventralis, m. levator labii superioris, m. intermandibularis, and m. constrictor dorsalis) and hyoidean (m. constrictor hyoideus dorsalis and ventralis) arch muscles. Our results provide new data concerning the relationships of hexanchiforms to other elasmobranchs. The m. adductor mandibulae superficialis is described and illustrated in C. anguineus, contradicting previous accounts in which is was considered absent. The anteroposterior orientation of the m. adductor mandibulae superficialis in Chlamydoselachus is similar to the pattern found in hexanchids, squaloids, and hypnosqualeans (including batoids), suggesting it was secondarily lost in Echinorhinus. This muscle therefore provides further support for the inclusion of the Chlamydoselachidae and Hexanchidae in the Squalomorphi, and not basal to all other elasmobranchs or nested within an all-shark collective, as has been previously proposed. However, the m. adductor mandibulae superficialis originating at the jaw joint and with an aponeurotic insertion in hexanchids, squaliforms, and hypnosqualeans, may be a separate derived feature uniting these taxa. The insertion of the m. constrictor dorsalis is restricted to the postorbital articulation in hexanchids, whereas it extends farther anteriorly in C. anguineus. The insertion of the m. constrictor hyoideus dorsalis solely on the palatoquadrate is found exclusively in the Hexanchidae. We conclude that no specific pattern of mandibular or hyoid arch muscles support the monophyly of hexanchiforms (i.e., including Chlamydoselachus)., (Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

This study investigated the relationship between olfactory morphology, habitat occupancy, and lifestyle in 21 elasmobranch species in a phylogenetic context. Four measures of olfactory capability, that is, the number of olfactory lamellae, the surface area of the olfactory epithelium, the mass of the olfactory bulb, and the mass of the olfactory rosette were compared between individual species and groups, comprised of species with similar habitat and/or lifestyle. Statistical analyses using generalized least squares phylogenetic regression revealed that bentho-pelagic sharks and rays possess significantly more olfactory lamellae and larger sensory epithelial surface areas than benthic species. There was no significant correlation between either olfactory bulb or rosette mass and habitat type. There was also no significant difference between the number of lamellae or the size of the sensory surface area in groups comprised of species with similar diets, that is, groups preying predominantly on crustaceans, cephalopods, echinoderms, polychaetes, molluscs, or teleosts. However, some groups had significantly larger olfactory bulb or rosette masses than others. There was little evidence to support a correlation between phylogeny and morphology, indicating that differences in olfactory capabilities are the result of functional rather than phylogenetic adaptations. All olfactory epithelia exhibited microvilli and cilia, with microvilli in both nonsensory and sensory areas, and cilia only in sensory areas. Cilia over the sensory epithelia originated from supporting cells. In contrast to teleosts, which possess ciliated and microvillous olfactory receptor types, no ciliated olfactory receptor cells were observed. This is the first comprehensive study comparing olfactory morphology to several aspects of elasmobranch ecology in a phylogenetic context.

Two basic types of spermatozoan aggregates, spermatophores and spermatozeugmata, found in 14 different species of sharks, one species of skate, and one species of chimaera (holocephalan), were investigated using light and scanning electron microscopy. Spermatophores, aggregates (usually 1,000-6,000 microns in diameter and larger) of randomly clumped sperm embedded in and surrounded by an eosinophilic matrix, were found in Alopias superciliosus, Odontaspis taurus, Carcharodon carcharias, Isurus oxyrinchus, and Lamna nasus. Three types of spermatozeugmata, sperm structures without a surrounding capsule or matrix, are described. The first, clumps of 60-200 sperm unbound in a supporting matrix, are found in Squalus acanthias and Hydrolagus colliei. In the second type, single-layered spheres are formed of sperm clumps with the sperm heads bound in a common supporting matrix. These are found in Carcharhinus limbatus and Carcharhinus plumbeus. The third type of spermatozeugmata are large multilayered, compound structures formed by the accretion of several single-layered aggregates. These multilayered structures characteristically are found in Carcharhinus falciformis, C. limbatus, Carcharhinus obscurus, C. plumbeus, Carcharhinus porosus, Prionace glauca, Rhizoprionodon terraenovae, and Sphyrna lewini. Sperm aggregates of all types are stored between the septa and in the lumen of the terminal ampulla of the epididymis. In their various forms they are the final product of the mature male elasmobranch reproductive tract. In a male with mature claspers, the presence of sperm aggregates is a more reliable indicator of maturity and sexual activity than is clasper condition alone.