Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Turtles as diapsid reptiles

Abstract

THE traditional classification of reptiles is based on a single key character, the presence and style of fenestration in the temporal region of the skull. Snakes, lizards, crocodiles, dinosaurs and others are 'diapsids', in that they have (at least primitively) two holes in the temporal region. Reptiles in which the skull is completely roofed, with no temporal fenestration, are the 'anapsids'. These include many Palaeozoic forms such as captorhinomorphs, procolophonids and pareiasaurs, but also include Testudines (turtles and tortoises). Consistent with this assumption, recent analyses of the affinities of Testudines have included Palaeozoic taxa only, placing them as akin to captorhinomorphs1 or procolophonids2 or nested within pareiasaurs3,4. Here we adopt a broader perspective, adding a range of Mesozoic and extant taxa to the analysis. Our result robustly supports the diapsid affinities of turtles, and so requires reassessment of the use of turtles as 'primitive' reptiles in phylogenetic reconstruction. More generally, it illustrates the difficulties of treating groups, such as the Testudines, that have extant members with peculiar morphologies that mask phylogenetic affinity; the hazards of relying on key characters such as temporal fenestration, which may mislead; the problems of outgroup choice for wide-ranging, inclusive analyses that include data from Recent and extinct groups; and the difficulties of judging the value of parsimony when applied to such inclusive analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gaffney, E. S. & Meylan, P. A. in The Phytogeny and Classification of the Tetrapods Vol. 1 (ed. Benton, M. J.) 157–219 (Clarendon, Oxford, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Laurin, M. & Reisz, R. R. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 113, 165–223 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee, M. S. Y. Biol. Rev. 70, 459–547 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee, M. S. Y. Nature 379, 812–815 (1996).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Williston, S. W. J. Geol. 25, 411–421 (1917).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rieppel, O. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 98, 27–62 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gaffney, E. S. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 194, 1–263 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Laurin, M. & Reisz, R. R. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 113, 165–223 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Laurin, M. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 101, 59–95 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. deBraga, M. & Reisz, R. R. Palaeontology 38, 199–212 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sues, H.-D. J. Vert. Paleont. 7, 138–144 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Burke, A. C. J. Morphol. 199, 363–378 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gauthier, J. A., Kluge, A. G. & Rowe, T. Cladistics 4, 104–209 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lakjer, T. Studien über die Trigeminus-versorgte Kaumuskulatur der Sauropsiden (C. A. Reitzel, Copenhagen, 1926).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Goodrich, E. S. Proc. R. Soc. Lend. B 89, 261–276 (1916).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. Broom, R. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 51, 39–65 (1924).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Donoghue, M. J., Doyle, J. A., Gauthier, J. A., Kluge, A. G. & Rowe, T. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20, 431–460 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cope, E. D. Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. 17, 11–26 (1892).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rieppel, O. Fieldiana (Geol.) 28, 1–85 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rieppel, O. Zoology 98, 298–308 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rieppel, O. Fieldiana (Zool.) 68, 1–25 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rieppel, O. J. Zool. 231, 487–509 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. DeBeer, G. The Development of the Vertebrate Skull (Clarendon, Oxford, 1937).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rieppel, O. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 109, 301–325 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shubin, N. H. & Alberch, P. Evol. Biol. 20, 319–387 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sewertzoff, A. N. Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat. Moscou 21, 1–430 (1908).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rieppel, O. J. Vert. Paleont. 13, 31–47 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee, M. S. Y. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263, 111–117 (1996).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rieppel, O., deBraga, M. Turtles as diapsid reptiles. Nature 384, 453–455 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1038/384453a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/384453a0

This article is cited by

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.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing