Why coelacanths are not ‘living fossils’

Citations Over TimeTop 10% of 2013 papers

Abstract

A series of recent studies on extant coelacanths has emphasised the slow rate of molecular and morphological evolution in these species. These studies were based on the assumption that a coelacanth is a 'living fossil' that has shown little morphological change since the Devonian, and they proposed a causal link between low molecular evolutionary rate and morphological stasis. Here, we have examined the available molecular and morphological data and show that: (i) low intra-specific molecular diversity does not imply low mutation rate, (ii) studies not showing low substitution rates in coelacanth are often neglected, (iii) the morphological stability of coelacanths is not supported by paleontological evidence. We recall that intra-species levels of molecular diversity, inter-species genome divergence rates and morphological divergence rates are under different constraints and they are not necessarily correlated. Finally, we emphasise that concepts such as 'living fossil', 'basal lineage', or 'primitive extant species' do not make sense from a tree-thinking perspective.

Related Papers

• → Time scale of eutherian evolution estimated without assuming a constant rate of molecular evolution.(2003)146 cited
• → The Molecular Clock and Evolutionary Rates Across the Tree of Life(2020)15 cited
• → Understanding Neutral Genomic Molecular Clocks(2007)8 cited
• → Nucleotide sequences of immunoglobulin epsilon genes of chimpanzee and orangutan: DNA molecular clock and hominoid evolution.(1987)47 cited
• → Metabolic Rate Calibrates the Molecular Clock: Reconciling Molecular and Fossil Estimates of Evolutionary Divergence(2004)8 cited