Letter | Published:

Definitive fossil evidence for the extant avian radiation in the Cretaceous

Nature volume 433, pages 305308 (20 January 2005) | Download Citation

Subjects

  • A Corrigendum to this article was published on 07 December 2006

Abstract

Long-standing controversy1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 surrounds the question of whether living bird lineages emerged after non-avian dinosaur extinction at the Cretaceous/Tertiary (K/T) boundary1,6 or whether these lineages coexisted with other dinosaurs and passed through this mass extinction event2,3,4,5,7,8,9. Inferences from biogeography4,8 and molecular sequence data2,3,5,9 (but see ref. 10) project major avian lineages deep into the Cretaceous period, implying their ‘mass survival’3 at the K/T boundary. By contrast, it has been argued that the fossil record refutes this hypothesis, placing a ‘big bang’ of avian radiation only after the end of the Cretaceous1,6. However, other fossil data—fragmentary bones referred to extant bird lineages11,12,13—have been considered inconclusive1,6,14. These data have never been subjected to phylogenetic analysis. Here we identify a rare, partial skeleton from the Maastrichtian of Antarctica15 as the first Cretaceous fossil definitively placed within the extant bird radiation. Several phylogenetic analyses supported by independent histological data indicate that a new species, Vegavis iaai, is a part of Anseriformes (waterfowl) and is most closely related to Anatidae, which includes true ducks. A minimum of five divergences within Aves before the K/T boundary are inferred from the placement of Vegavis; at least duck, chicken and ratite bird relatives were coextant with non-avian dinosaurs.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Explosive evolution in Tertiary birds and mammals. Science 267, 637–638 (1995)

  2. 2.

    , , & Continental breakup and the ordinal diversification of birds and mammals. Nature 381, 226–229 (1996)

  3. 3.

    & Mass survival of birds across the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary: molecular evidence. Science 275, 1109–1113 (1997)

  4. 4.

    Avian evolution, Gondwana biogeography and the Cretaceous-Tertiary mass extinction event. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 459–469 (2001)

  5. 5.

    & Calibration of avian molecular clocks. Mol. Biol. Evol. 18, 206–213 (2001)

  6. 6.

    ‘Big bang’ for Tertiary birds? Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 172–176 (2003)

  7. 7.

    , , & ‘Big bang’ for Tertiary birds? A replay. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 442–443 (2003)

  8. 8.

    et al. A Gondwanan origin of passerine birds supported by DNA sequences of the endemic New Zealand wrens. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 235–241 (2002)

  9. 9.

    et al. Four new avian mitochondrial genomes help get to basic evolutionary questions in the late Cretaceous. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 974–983 (2004)

  10. 10.

    & Basal divergences in birds and the phylogenetic utility of the nuclear RAG-1 gene. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 12, 115–123 (1999)

  11. 11.

    A lower jaw from a Cretaceous parrot. Nature 396, 29–30 (1998)

  12. 12.

    , & A new presbyornithid bird (Aves: Anseriformes) from the Late Cretaceous of southern Mongolia. Am. Mus. Novit. 3386, 1–11 (2002)

  13. 13.

    in Mesozoic Birds: Above the Heads of Dinosaurs (eds Chiappe, L. M. & Witmer, L. M.) 339–388 (Univ. California Press, Berkeley, 2002)

  14. 14.

    & The evolutionary radiation of modern birds (Neornithes): reconciling molecules, morphology and the fossil record. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 141, 153–177 (2004)

  15. 15.

    & A Late Cretaceous Presbyornithidae (Aves: Anseriformes) from Vega Island, Antarctic Peninsula: paleobogeographic implications. Ameghiniana 32, 57–61 (1995)

  16. 16.

    The fossil Presbyornis and the interordinal relationships of waterfowl. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 121, 361–428 (1997)

  17. 17.

    Systematic revision, skeletal anatomy, and paleoecology of the New World early Tertiary Presbyornithidae (Aves: Anseriformes). PaleoBios 20, 1–23 (2000)

  18. 18.

    & Acquisition, optimization and interpretation of X-ray computed tomographic imagery: Applications to the geosciences. Comput. Geosci. 27, 381–400 (2001)

  19. 19.

    & The morphology and phylogenetic position of Apsaravis ukhaana from the Late Cretaceous of Mongolia. Am. Mus. Novit. 3387, 1–47 (2002)

  20. 20.

    & The deep divergences of neornithine birds: a phylogenetic analysis of morphological characters. Cladistics 19, 553 (2003)

  21. 21.

    , & Geología de cabo Lamb, isla Vega, Antártida. Contribución Instituto Antártico Argentino 530, 1–43 (2001)

  22. 22.

    New material of Juncitarsus (Phoenicopteridae), with a guide for differentiating that genus from the Presbyornithidae (Aves: Anseriformes). Smithson. Contr. Paleobiol. 89, 245–251 (1999)

  23. 23.

    et al. in Biomineralization: Patterns and Evolutionary Trends (ed. Carter, J. G.) 471–530 (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1990)

  24. 24.

    in Mesozoic Birds: Above the Heads of Dinosaurs (eds Chiappe, L. M. & Witmer, L. M.) 421–431 (Univ. California Press, Berkeley, 2002)

  25. 25.

    , & Dinosaurian growth rates and bird origins. Nature 412, 405–408 (2001)

  26. 26.

    & Evolutionary explosions and the phylogenetic fuse. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 151–156 (1998)

  27. 27.

    & Relationships and evolution of flamingos (Aves: Phoenicopteridae). Smithson. Contr. Zool. 316, 1–73 (1980)

  28. 28.

    PAUP* Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4.0. (Sinaur Associates, Sunderland, 2002)

  29. 29.

    The anseriform relationships of Anatalavis Olson and Parris (Anseranatidae), with a new species of the London Clay. Smithson. Contr. Paleobiol. 89, 231–243 (1999)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Museo de La Plata for permission to CT scan and sample MLP 93-I-3-1 for histological analysis; M. Fox for repreparation of the fossil; M. Reguero, S. Marenssi and E. Olivero for stratigraphic information; T. Rowe and J. Humphries of UTCT lab for assistance with CT imaging; R. Edwards for photographs; A. Viñas for line drawings; B. Creisler for consultation on species name validity; and M. Norell for comments on the manuscript. Support for this project from an NSF Office of Polar Programs grant to J.A.C., the AMNH Division of Paleontology and Yale University is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 8208, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, USA

    • Julia A. Clarke
  2. North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, 11 West Jones Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1029, USA

    • Julia A. Clarke
  3. Museo de La Plata-CONICET, Paseo del Bosque s/n. La Plata (1900), Argentina

    • Claudia P. Tambussi
  4. Centro de Investigaciones Científicas y TTP- CONICET, Matteri y España, 3105 Diamante, Entre Ríos, Argentina

    • Jorge I. Noriega
  5. Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Conradi Building, Dewey Street and Palmetto Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32306-1100, USA

    • Gregory M. Erickson
  6. Division of Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79 Street, New York, New York 10024-5192, USA

    • Gregory M. Erickson
  7. Department of Geology, The Field Museum, 1400 South Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60605, USA

    • Gregory M. Erickson
  8. High-Resolution X-Ray Computed Tomography Facility, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station, C-1100, Austin, Texas 78712-0254, USA

    • Richard A. Ketcham

Authors

  1. Search for Julia A. Clarke in:

  2. Search for Claudia P. Tambussi in:

  3. Search for Jorge I. Noriega in:

  4. Search for Gregory M. Erickson in:

  5. Search for Richard A. Ketcham in:

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia A. Clarke.

Supplementary information

Word documents

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Data

    This file contains the following sections:  I. Photograph and volume renderings using CT data, highlighting the bone and rendering the matrix semi-transparent to elements preserved within the other half of the Vegavis iaai concretion (MLP 93-I-3-1).  II. Photograph of the latex peel of the primary block of the Vegavis iaai concretion (MLP 93-I-3-1) prior to preparation.  III. Characters able to be evaluated for Vegavis of the analyzed datasets and the states present in that taxon (entries take the form "character number: character state").  IV. Measurements of the Vegavis iaai holotype specimen (MLP 93-I-3-1) and additional differential diagnosis from Presbyornithidae.  V. Details of the provenience of the Vegavis iaai holotype specimen. The file also contains further information concerning the CT data, and additional references.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03150

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.