Evolution of molluscs explained

See also: Evolution of cephalopods.

The evolution of the molluscs is the way in which the Mollusca, one of the largest groups of invertebrate animals, evolved. This phylum includes gastropods, bivalves, scaphopods, cephalopods, and several other groups.The fossil record of mollusks is relatively complete, and they are well represented in most fossil-bearing marine strata. Very early organisms which have dubiously been compared to molluscs include Kimberella and Odontogriphus.

Fossil record

Good evidence exists for the appearance of gastropods, cephalopods and bivalves in the Cambrian period . However, the evolutionary history both of the emergence of molluscs from the ancestral group Lophotrochozoa, and of their diversification into the well-known living and fossil forms, is still vigorously debated.

Debate occurs about whether some Ediacaran and Early Cambrian fossils are molluscs.[1] Kimberella, from about, has been described by some palaeontologists as "mollusc-like",[2] [3] but others are unwilling to go further than "probable bilaterian".[4] There is an even sharper debate about whether Wiwaxia, from about, was a mollusc, and much of this centers on whether its feeding apparatus was a type of radula or more similar to that of some polychaete worms.[5] Nicholas Butterfield, who opposes the idea that Wiwaxia was a mollusc, has written that earlier microfossils from are fragments of a genuinely mollusc-like radula.[6] This appears to contradict the concept that the ancestral molluscan radula was mineralized.[7]

However, the Helcionellids, which first appear over in Early Cambrian rocks from Siberia and China,[8] [9] are thought to be early molluscs with rather snail-like shells. Shelled molluscs therefore predate the earliest trilobites.[10] Although most helcionellid fossils are only a few millimeters long, specimens a few centimeters long have also been found, most with more limpet-like shapes. The tiny specimens have been suggested to be juveniles and the larger ones adults.[11]

Some analyses of helcionellids concluded these were the earliest gastropods.[12] However, other scientists are not convinced these Early Cambrian fossils show clear signs of the torsion characteristic of modern gastropods, that twists the internal organs so the anus lies above the head.[13] [14]

Volborthella, some fossils of which predate, was long thought to be a cephalopod, but discoveries of more detailed fossils showed its shell was not secreted, but built from grains of the mineral silicon dioxide (silica), and it was not divided into a series of compartments by septa as those of fossil shelled cephalopods and the living Nautilus are. Volborthellas classification is uncertain.[15] The Late Cambrian fossil Plectronoceras is now thought to be the earliest clearly cephalopod fossil, as its shell had septa and a siphuncle, a strand of tissue that Nautilus uses to remove water from compartments it has vacated as it grows, and which is also visible in fossil ammonite shells. However, Plectronoceras and other early cephalopods crept along the seafloor instead of swimming, as their shells contained a "ballast" of stony deposits on what is thought to be the underside, and had stripes and blotches on what is thought to be the upper surface.[16] All cephalopods with external shells except the nautiloids became extinct by the end of the Cretaceous period .[17] However, the shell-less Coleoidea (squid, octopus, cuttlefish) are abundant today.[18]

The Early Cambrian fossils Fordilla and Pojetaia are regarded as bivalves.[19] [20] [21] [22] "Modern-looking" bivalves appeared in the Ordovician period, .[23] One bivalve group, the rudists, became major reef-builders in the Cretaceous, but became extinct in the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event.[24] Even so, bivalves remain abundant and diverse.

The Hyolitha are a class of extinct animals with a shell and operculum that may be molluscs. Authors who suggest they deserve their own phylum do not comment on the position of this phylum in the tree of life[25]

Phylogeny

The phylogeny (evolutionary "family tree") of molluscs is a controversial subject. In addition to the debates about whether Kimberella and any of the "halwaxiids" were molluscs or closely related to molluscs, debates arise about the relationships between the classes of living molluscs. In fact, some groups traditionally classified as molluscs may have to be redefined as distinct but related.

Molluscs are generally regarded members of the Lophotrochozoa, a group defined by having trochophore larvae and, in the case of living Lophophorata, a feeding structure called a lophophore. The other members of the Lophotrochozoa are the annelid worms and seven marine phyla.[26] The diagram on the right summarizes a phylogeny presented in 2007.

Because the relationships between the members of the family tree are uncertain, it is difficult to identify the features inherited from the last common ancestor of all molluscs.[27] For example, it is uncertain whether the ancestral mollusc was metameric (composed of repeating units)—if it was, that would suggest an origin from an annelid-like worm.[28] Scientists disagree about this: Giribet and colleagues concluded, in 2006, the repetition of gills and of the foot's retractor muscles were later developments,[29] while in 2007, Sigwart concluded the ancestral mollusc was metameric, and it had a foot used for creeping and a "shell" that was mineralized.[30] In one particular branch of the family tree, the shell of conchiferans is thought to have evolved from the spicules (small spines) of aplacophorans; but this is difficult to reconcile with the embryological origins of spicules.[27]

The molluscan shell appears to have originated from a mucus coating, which eventually stiffened into a cuticle. This would have been impermeable and thus forced the development of more sophisticated respiratory apparatus in the form of gills.[10] Eventually, the cuticle would have become mineralized,[10] using the same genetic machinery (the engrailed gene) as most other bilaterian skeletons.[28] The first mollusc shell almost certainly was reinforced with the mineral aragonite.[31]

The evolutionary relationships 'within' the molluscs are also debated, and the diagrams below show two widely supported reconstructions:

Morphological analyses tend to recover a conchiferan clade that receives less support from molecular analyses,[32] although these results also lead to unexpected paraphylies, for instance scattering the bivalves throughout all other mollusc groups.[33]

However, an analysis in 2009 using both morphological and molecular phylogenetics comparisons concluded the molluscs are not monophyletic; in particular, Scaphopoda and Bivalvia are both separate, monophyletic lineages unrelated to the remaining molluscan classes; the traditional phylum Mollusca is polyphyletic, and it can only be made monophyletic if scaphopods and bivalves are excluded.[34] A 2010 analysis recovered the traditional conchiferan and aculiferan groups, and showed molluscs were monophyletic, demonstrating that available data for solenogastres was contaminated.[35] Current molecular data are insufficient to constrain the molluscan phylogeny, and since the methods used to determine the confidence in clades are prone to overestimation, it is risky to place too much emphasis even on the areas of which different studies agree.[36] Rather than eliminating unlikely relationships, the latest studies add new permutations of internal molluscan relationships, even bringing the conchiferan hypothesis into question.[37]

Further references

Further reading

Notes and References

  1. Book: Nelson R Cabej. 2019. Epigenetic Mechanisms of the Cambrian Explosion. Elsevier Science. 152. 9780128143124.
  2. Fedonkin, M.A. . Waggoner, B.M. . 1997 . The Late Precambrian fossil Kimberella is a mollusc-like bilaterian organism . Nature . 388 . 6645 . 868 . 10.1038/42242 . 1997Natur.388..868F. 4395089 . free .
  3. New data on Kimberella, the Vendian mollusc-like organism (White Sea region, Russia): palaeoecological and evolutionary implications . Fedonkin, M.A., Simonetta, A. and Ivantsov, A.Y. . Geological Society, London, Special Publications . 2007 . 157–179 . 10.1144/SP286.12 . 2008-07-10 . 286 . 1 . 2007GSLSP.286..157F . 331187 . https://web.archive.org/web/20080721232846/http://www.geosci.monash.edu.au/precsite/docs/workshop/prato04/abstracts/fedonkin2.pdf . 2008-07-21 . dead .
  4. Butterfield, N.J. . 2006 . Hooking some stem-group "worms": fossil lophotrochozoans in the Burgess Shale . BioEssays . 28 . 12 . 1161–6 . 10.1002/bies.20507 . 17120226. 29130876 .
  5. Caron, J.B. . Scheltema, A. . Schander, C. . Rudkin, D. . 2006-07-13 . A soft-bodied mollusc with radula from the Middle Cambrian Burgess Shale . Nature . 442 . 7099 . 159–163. 10.1038/nature04894 . 16838013 . 2006Natur.442..159C . 1912/1404 . 4431853 . free .
  6. Butterfield, N.J. . An Early Cambrian Radula. Journal of Paleontology . May 2008. 82 . 3 . 543–554. 10.1666/07-066.1. 86083492.
  7. 224–230 . 2 . 194 . 1998 . 28570844. 1543051. Biological Bulletin . 10.2307/1543051 . Lins . R. . U. . Farina . Minerals of the radular apparatus of Falcidens sp. (Caudofoveata) and the evolutionary implications for the Phylum Mollusca . M. . Cruz .
  8. Parkhaev, P. Yu. . 2007 . The Cambrian 'basement' of gastropod evolution . Geological Society, London, Special Publications . 286 . 1 . 978-1-86239-233-5 . 415–421 . 2009-11-01 . 10.1144/SP286.31. 2007GSLSP.286..415P . 130979274 .
  9. 10.1016/j.palaeo.2007.03.046. Steiner . M. . Li . G. . Qian . Y. . Zhu . M. . Erdtmann . B. D. . Neoproterozoic to Early Cambrian small shelly fossil assemblages and a revised biostratigraphic correlation of the Yangtze Platform (China) . Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology . 254 . 1–2 . 67 . 2007 . 2007PPP...254...67S.
  10. B. . J.. Pojeta Jr. Molluscan Phylogeny: the Paleontological Viewpoint. 186. Runnegar. Science. 4161. 311–317. Oct 1974 . 1739764. 17839855. 10.1126/science.186.4161.311. 1974Sci...186..311R . 46429653.
  11. Mus, M. M.. Palacios, T.. Jensen, S. . 2008 . Size of the earliest molluscs: Did small helcionellids grow to become large adults? . Geology . 36 . 2 . 175 . 10.1130/G24218A.1. 2008Geo....36..175M.
  12. Journal of Paleontology. Latest Early Cambrian Small Shelly Fossils, Trilobites, and Hatch Hill Dysaerobic Interval on the Quebec Continental Slope . 287–305 . 76. Landing. E. . 2. 1307143 . 2002. 10.1666/0022-3360(2002)076<0287:LECSSF>2.0.CO;2. Geyer . G.. K. E.. Bartowski .
  13. Book: Frýda, J.. Nützel, A. and Wagner, P.J.. Phylogeny and evolution of the Mollusca. Ponder, W.F. . Lindberg, D.R.. 239–264. Paleozoic Gastropoda. California Press. 2008. 978-0-520-25092-5. https://books.google.com/books?id=nm0IZAQQ6S0C&pg=RA1-PA239.
  14. Kouchinsky. A.. 2000. Shell microstructures in Early Cambrian molluscs. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 45. 2. 119–150. 4 Nov 2009.
  15. Book: Hagadorn, J.W. . Waggoner, B.M. . amp . 2002 . 135–150 . The Early Cambrian problematic fossil Volborthella: New insights from the Basin and Range . Corsetti, F.A. . Proterozoic-Cambrian of the Great Basin and Beyond, Pacific Section SEPM Book 93 . SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology) . bot: unknown . https://web.archive.org/web/20060911152548/http://www.amherst.edu/~jwhagadorn/publications/volb.pdf . 2006-09-11.
  16. Book: Vickers-Rich, P., Fenton, C.L., Fenton, M.A. and Rich, T.H.. The Fossil Book: A Record of Prehistoric Life. Courier Dover Publications. 1997. 0-486-29371-8. 269–272.
  17. Marshall C.R.. Ward P.D. . 1996 . Sudden and Gradual Molluscan Extinctions in the Latest Cretaceous of Western European Tethys . Science . 274 . 5291 . 1360–1363 . 10.1126/science.274.5291.1360 . 8910273. 1996Sci...274.1360M . 1837900 .
  18. Web site: A Broad Brush History of the Cephalopoda. Monks. N.. 2009-03-21.
  19. Pojeta, J. . 2000 . Cambrian Pelecypoda (Mollusca). American Malacological Bulletin . 15 . 157–166.
  20. Schneider, J.A. . Bivalve systematics during the 20th century. Journal of Paleontology . 2001. 75 . 6 . 1119–1127. 10.1666/0022-3360(2001)075<1119:BSDTC>2.0.CO;2.
  21. 10.1111/j.1502-3931.1999.tb00534.x. The first evolutionary-adaptive lineage within fossil molluscs. Lethaia. 32. 2. 155. 2007. Gubanov . A. P. . Kouchinsky . A. V. . Peel . J. S. .
  22. Gubanov, A.P.. Peel, J.S.. The early Cambrian helcionelloid mollusc Anabarella Vostokova. Palaeontology . 46 . 5 . 1073–1087 . 10.1111/1475-4983.00334. 2003. 84893338. free.
  23. Zong-Jie, F.. An introduction to Ordovician bivalves of southern China, with a discussion of the early evolution of the Bivalvia. Geological Journal . 41 . 3–4 . 10.1002/gj.1048. 303–328. 2006. 129430674.
  24. Raup, D.M.. Jablonski, D.. Geography of end-Cretaceous marine bivalve extinctions . Science . 1993. 260 . 5110 . 971–973 . 10.1126/science.11537491 . 11537491. 1993Sci...260..971R .
  25. Malinky . J. M. . 10.1666/08-094R.1 . Permian Hyolithida from Australia: The Last of the Hyoliths? . Journal of Paleontology . 83 . 147–152 . 2009 . 85924056 .
  26. Web site: Introduction to the Lophotrochozoa. University of California Museum of Paleontology. 2008-10-02.
  27. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.04.027. 15242797. 2004. Henry . J.. Okusu . A.. Martindale . M.. The cell lineage of the polyplacophoran, Chaetopleura apiculata: variation in the spiralian program and implications for molluscan evolution. 272. 1. 145–160. Developmental Biology . free.
  28. Wray. Wedeen. 10.1046/j.1525-142x.2000.00077.x. 2000. 340–347. Kostriken. Desalle. 11256378. Lindberg. Gates. Staton. 6. 2. R.. R.. C. J.. C. G.. Jacobs . J. L.. Evolution & Development. Molluscan engrailed expression, serial organization, and shell evolution. D. R.. R. D.. D. K.. 25274057.
  29. Lindgren, A.R.. Giribet . A. R. . G.. Huff, S.W. . S. W. . A.. Schrödl, M . M.. Nishiguchi, M.K. . M. K.. Evidence for a clade composed of molluscs with serially repeated structures: monoplacophorans are related to chitons. Okusu, A. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 103. 20. 7723–7728. May 2006 . 16675549. 1472512. 10.1073/pnas.0602578103. 2006PNAS..103.7723G . free .
  30. Sigwart . J. D.. Sutton . M. D.. Deep molluscan phylogeny: synthesis of palaeontological and neontological data. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 1624. 274. 2413–2419. Oct 2007. 17652065. 2274978. 10.1098/rspb.2007.0701. For a summary, see Web site: The Mollusca . University of California Museum of Paleontology. 2 October 2008.
  31. S. M.. Seawater chemistry and early carbonate biomineralization. Science. 316. 5829. Porter. 1302. Jun 2007 . 0036-8075. 17540895. 10.1126/science.1137284. 2007Sci...316.1302P . 27418253.
  32. Winnepenninckx, B . Backeljau, T . De Wachter, R . Investigation of molluscan phylogeny on the basis of 18S rRNA sequences . 1996. Molecular Biology and Evolution . 13 . 10 . 1306–1317 . 8952075 . 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025577. free .
  33. Passamaneck . Y.. Schander . C.. Halanych . K.. Investigation of molluscan phylogeny using large-subunit and small-subunit nuclear rRNA sequences.. Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution. 32. 1. 25–38. 2004. 15186794. 10.1016/j.ympev.2003.12.016.
  34. 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00255.x. Phylogenetic analysis of 73 060 taxa corroborates major eukaryotic groups. 2009. Goloboff . Pablo A.. Catalano . Santiago A.. Mirande . J. Marcos. Szumik . Claudia A.. Arias . J. Salvador. Källersjö . Mari. Farris . James S.. Cladistics. 25. 3. 211–230 . 34879616. 84401375. free. 11336/78055. free.
  35. 10.1016/j.ympev.2009.07.028. 19647088. 2010. Wilson . N.. Rouse . G.. Giribet . G.. Assessing the molluscan hypothesis Serialia (Monoplacophora+Polyplacophora) using novel molecular data.. 54. 1. 187–193. Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution .
  36. 1. 6. Frontiers in Zoology. Phylogenetic support values are not necessarily informative: the case of the Serialia hypothesis (a mollusk phylogeny). 12. 2009. 10.1186/1742-9994-6-12. 2710323. 19555513 . H.. Wägele. Klussmann-Kolb . H.. Letsch . J. . A.. Mayer . B.. Misof . C.. Wägele. free.
  37. Vinther . J. . Sperling . E. A. . Briggs . D. E. G. . Derek Briggs . Peterson . K. J. . A molecular palaeobiological hypothesis for the origin of aplacophoran molluscs and their derivation from chiton-like ancestors . Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences . 279 . 1732 . 1259–68 . 2011 . 10.1098/rspb.2011.1773 . 21976685 . 3282371.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Evolution of molluscs".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.