Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-fnpn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-01T19:37:09.599Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Late Miocene Mauremys (Testudines, Geoemydidae) from Tuscany (Italy): Evidence of terrapin persistence after a mammal turnover

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Francesco Chesi ,
Massimo Delfino  and
Lorenzo Rook
Francesco Chesi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Firenze, Via G. La Pira 4, I-50121 Firenze, Italy;
Massimo Delfino
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Firenze, Via G. La Pira 4, I-50121 Firenze, Italy;
Lorenzo Rook
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, Università di Firenze, Via G. La Pira 4, I-50121 Firenze, Italy;
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The occurrence of freshwater turtle remains in the late Miocene lignites of southern Tuscany (Montebamboli and Casteani, Italy) has been known since the nineteenth century. Three chelonian species were recognized by Ristori in 1891: Emys depressa, E. campanii, and E. parva. Revision of their type material, together with the study of new fossils from a different but correlated locality, Pian Calcinaio (Scansano), allows one to state that they can be referred to the genus Mauremys and that they belong to one single species. the new combination M. campanii (Ristori, 1891) is here proposed. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that M. campanii is closely related to the modern post-Miocene group of Mauremys species and shows a sister-group relationship with the Plio-Pleistocene M. gaudryi. the remains of M. campanii come from an insular setting which progressively lost its endemic mammal fauna, defined as the Oreopithecus Zone Fauna, enabling us to compare the pattern of survival of the chelonians with that of the mammals. in contrast to the radical turnover suffered by mammals, softshell turtles (Trionyx sp.) and terrapins (M. campanii) are present both in the pre-Messinian V1-V2 and Messinian V3 assemblages. Terrestrial tortoises (Testudo amiatae Pantanelli, 1893, Testudo s.l.) show a different pattern, because they appear only in the V3 assemblage, possibly because they apparently dispersed into Italy as recently as the Messinian. M. campanii represents the southernmost evidence of the genus Mauremys in the uppermost Miocene of Europe, filling a gap in the palaeogeographic and chronological distribution of this genus.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 83 , Issue 3 , May 2009 , pp. 379 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbazzi, L., Delfino, M., Gallai, G., Trebini, L., and Rook, L. 2008. New data on the vertebrate assemblage of Fiume Santo (North-West Sardinia, Italy), and overview on the late Miocene Tusco-Sardinian palaeobioprovince. Palaeontology 51:425–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ammon, L. V. 1911. Schildkröten aus dem Regensburger Braunkohlenton. Jahresbericht Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins zu Regensburg, 12:1–35.Google Scholar
Bachmayer, F. and Mlynarski, M. 1983. Die Fauna der pontischen Höhlen- und Spaltenfüllungen bei Kohfidisch, Burgenland (Osterreich). Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien, 85/A:107–128.Google Scholar
Bailon, S. 1991. Amphibiens et reptiles du Pliocène et du Quaternaire de France et d'Espagne: mise en place et évolution des faunes. Ph.D. dissertation, Université de Paris VII, 2 volumes, 499 p.Google Scholar
Barbadillo, L. J., Garcia-Paris, M., and Sanchiz, B. 1997. Origenes y relaciones evolutivas de la herpetofauna Iberica, p. 47–100. In Pleguezuelos, J. M. (ed.), Distribucion y biogeografia de los anfibios y reptiles en España y Portugal. Monografías de Herpetología, Volumen 3. Universidad de Granada and Asociación Herpetológica Española, Granada.Google Scholar
Benvenuti, M., Papini, M., and Rook, L. 2001. Mammal biochronology, UBSU and paleoenvironment evolution in a post-collisional basin: evidence from the Late Miocene Baccinello–Cinigiano basin in southern Tuscany, Italy. Bollettino della Società Geologica Italiana, 120:97–118.Google Scholar
Bergounioux, F.-M. 1933. Monographie paléontologique de la faune de Vertébrés des Sables de Montpellier. II. Chéloniens. Travaux du Laboratoire de Geologie de la Faculte des Sciences de Lyon, 23(2):5–21.Google Scholar
Bergounioux, F.-M. 1936. Broilia manuascencis, nov. sp.: tortue paludine de l'Oligocène de Manosque. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, série 5, 6:59–62.Google Scholar
Bernor, R. L., Fortelius, M., and Rook, L. 2001. Evolutionary biogeography and paleoecology of the “Oreopithecus bambolii Faunal Zone” (Late Miocene, Tusco–Sardinian Province). Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana, 40:139–148.Google Scholar
Böhme, M. and Ilg, A. 2003. fosFARbase. A relational database of lower vertebrates (fish, amphibians, and reptiles) from the Neogene of Eurasia. Available athttp://www.wahre-staerke.com. Accessed March 11, 2008.Google Scholar
Busack, S. D. and Ernst, C. H. 1980. Variation in the Mediterranean populations of Mauremys Gray 1869 (Reptilia, Testudines, Emydidae). Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 49:251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerling, T. E., Harris, J. M., MacFadden, B. J., Leakey, M. G., Quade, J., Elsenmann, V., and Ehleringer, J. R. 1997. Global vegetation change through the Miocene/Pliocene boundary. Nature, 389:153–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesi, F., Delfino, M., Abbazzi, L., Carboni, S., Lecca, L., and Rook, L. 2007. New fossil vertebrate remains from San Giovanni di Sinis (Late Pleistocene, Sardinia): the last Mauremys (Reptilia, Testudines) in the central Mediterranean. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 113(2):287–297.Google Scholar
Crusafont-Pairo, M. and Golpe-Posse, J. M. 1974. Nuevos yacimientos del Terciario continental del N.E. de España. Acta Geologica Hispánica, 9:81–83.Google Scholar
Delfino, M. 2002. Erpetofaune italiane del Neogene e del Quaternario. Ph.D. dissertation, Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia, 382 p.Google Scholar
Delfino, M. and Rook, L. 2008. African crocodylians in the Late Neogene of Europe: a revision of Crocodylus bambolii Ristori, 1890. Journal of Paleontology, 82(2):336–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delfino, M., Rage, J. C., and Rook, L. 2003. Tertiary mammal turnover phenomena: what happened to the herpetofauna? Deinsea, 10:153–161.Google Scholar
Duméril, A. M. C. 1806. Zoologie analytique, ou méthode naturelle de classification des animaux, rendue plus facile à l'aide de tableaux synoptiques. Paris, 344 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esteban, M. 1996. An overview of Miocene reefs from Mediterranean areas: general trend and facies models, p. 3–53. In Franseen, E. K., Esteban, M., Ward, W. C., and Rouchy, J. (eds.), Models for carbonate stratigraphy from Miocene reef complexes of Mediterranean region (SEPM Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology). Geological Society Publishing House, Tulsa.Google Scholar
Fritz, U. and Havas, P. 2007. Checklist of chelonians of the world. Vertebrate Zoology, 57(2):149–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaffney, E. S. and Meylan, A. B. 1988. A phylogeny of turtles, p. 157–219. In Benton, M. J. (ed.), The phylogeny and classification of the Tetrapods. Volume 1: Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Gray, J. E. 1869. Notes on the families and genera of tortoises (Testudinata), and on the characters afforded by the study of their skulls. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1869:165–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guasparri, G. 1992. Guida ai Musei. L'accademia dei Fisiocritici di Siena. Editoriale Donchisciotte, San Quirico d'Orcia, 166 p.Google Scholar
Hervet, S. 2000. Tortues du Quaternaire de France: critères de détermination, répartitions chronologique et géographique. Mésogée, 58:3–47.Google Scholar
Hervet, S. 2003. Le groupe “Palaeochelys sensu lato–Mauremys” dans le contexte systématique des Testudinoidea aquatiques du Tertiaire d'Europe occidentale. Apports à la biostratigraphie et à la paléobiogéographie. Ph.D. dissertation, Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle de Paris. 619 p.Google Scholar
Hervet, S. 2004. Systématique du groupe Palaeochelys sensu latu–Mauremysr (Chelonii, Testudinoidea) du Tertiaire d'Europe occidentale: principaux résultats. Annales de Paléontologie, 90:13–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hervet, S. and de Broin de Lapparent, F. 2000. Palaeochelys mlynarskii n. sp., de l'Oligocène supérieur de Rott (Allemagne), et redescription de l'espèce type P. bussenensis Meyer, 1847. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences de Paris, Sciences de la Terre et des planetes, 331:563–569.Google Scholar
Hirayama, R. 1985. Cladistic analysis of batagurine turtles (Batagurinae: Emydidae: Testudinoidea): a preliminary result. Studia Geologica Salmanticensia, vol. spec. 1 (Studia Palaeocheloniologica1):141–157.Google Scholar
Hürzeler, J. and Engesser, B. 1976. Les faunes de mammifères néogènes du Bassin de Baccinello (Grosseto, Italie). Comptes Rendus de l'Academie des Sciences de Paris, série 2, 283:333–336.Google Scholar
ICZN [International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature]. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Fourth Edition. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, 306 p.Google Scholar
Kotsakis, T. and Mori, D. 1981. Note di paleoerpetologia piemontese. I. I Cheloni del Messiniano superiore di Santa Vittoria d'Alba (Cuneo). Rivista Piemontese di Storia Naturale, 2:89–98.Google Scholar
Kovar-Eder, J., Jechorek, H., Kvacek, Z., and Parashiv, V. 2008. The integrated plant record: an essential tool for reconstructing Neogene zonal vegetation in Europe. Palaios, 23(3):97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovar-Eder, J., Kvacek, Z., Zastawniak, E., Givulescu, R., Hably, L., Mihajlovic, D., Teslenko, J., and Walther, H. 1996. Floristic trends in the vegetation of the Paratethys surrounding areas during Neogene time, p. 395–413. In Bernor, R. L., Fahlbush, V., and Mittmann, H.-W. (eds.), The evolution of Western Eurasian Neogene mammal faunas III. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Krenz, J. G., Naylor, G. J. P., Shaffer, H. B., and Janzen, F. J. 2005. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution of turtles. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 37:178–191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhn, O. 1964. Fossilium catalogus. I: Animalia. Pars 107: Testudines. Fisher, Questedt, 300 p.Google Scholar
Lapparent de Broin de, F. 2000. African chelonians from the Jurassic to the present: phases of development and preliminary catalogue of the fossil record. Palaeontologia Africana, 36:43–82.Google Scholar
Lapparent de Broin de, F. 2001. The European turtle fauna from the Triassic to the present. Dumerilia, 4(3):155–218.Google Scholar
Lapparent de Broin de, F. and VanDijk, P. P. 1999. Chelonia from the Late Miocene of Baynunah Formation, Emirate of Abu Dabi, Hill, A. (ed.), Fossil vertebrates of Arabia. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
Martini, I. P. and Sagri, M. 1993. Tectono-sedimentary characteristics of Late Miocene-Quaternary extensional basins of the Northern Apennines, Italy. Earth Science Review, 34:197–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merciai, G. 1907. Sopra alcuni resti di vertebrati miocenici delle ligniti di Ribolla. Atti della Società Toscana di Scienze Naturali, Memorie, 23:79–87.Google Scholar
Merrem, B. 1820. Tentamen systematis amphibiorum. Krieger, Marburg, 191 p.Google Scholar
Meyer, H. V. 1852. Mitteilungen an Prof. Bronn Emys und Clemmys Arten in der von Haslach. … r. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geognosie, Geologie und Petrefaktenkunden, Briefwechsel, II, B:301–306.Google Scholar
Paraskevaïdis, I. 1955. Zwei Schildkrötenreste aus dem Obermiozän von Chios. Annales Géologiques des Pays Helléniques, 6:133–141.Google Scholar
Peters, K. F. 1868. Zur Kenntniss der Wirbelthiere aus den Miocänschichten von Eibiswald in Steiermark. I. Die Schildkrötenreste. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse, 57:72–74.Google Scholar
Pictet, F. J. and Humbert, A. 1856. Monographie de la Molasse suisse; matériaux pour la paléontologie suisse. J. Kessmann, Genève, 71 p.Google Scholar
Portis, A. 1879. Di alcuni fossili terziarii del Piemonte e della Liguria appartenenti all'ordine dei Chelonii. Memorie della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, serie 2, 32:113–134.Google Scholar
Purschke, C. A. 1885. Clemmys sarmatica n. sp. aus dem Tegel von Hernals bei Wien. Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse, 50:185–192.Google Scholar
Rage, J. C. 1997. Palaeobiological and palaeogeographical NMB-Background of the European Herpetofauna, p. 23–29. In Gasc, J.-P., Cabela, A., Crnobrnja-Isailovic, J., Dolmen, D., GrossenNMB-Bacher, K., Haffner, P., Lescure, J., Martens, H., Martínez Rica, J. P., Maurin, H., Oliveira, M. E., Sofianidou, T. S., Veith, M., and Zuiderwijk, A. (eds.), Atlas of Amphibians and Reptiles in Europe. Societas Europaea Herpetologica and Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (SPN/IEGB/MNHN), Paris.Google Scholar
Reinach, A. V. 1900. Schildkrötenreste im Mainzer Tertiärbecken und in benachbarten, ungefähr gleichartigen Ablagerungen. Abhandlungen herausgegeben von der Senckenbergischen Natturforschenden Gesellschaft, 28:1–135.Google Scholar
Ristori, G. 1891. I cheloniani fossili di Montebamboli e Casteani (Maremma, Toscana). Atti della Società Toscana di Scienze Naturali, Processi Verbali, 7:304–307.Google Scholar
Ristori, G. 1895. Cheloniani fossili di Montebamboli e Casteani. Con appendice sui cheloniani fossili del Casino (Siena). Pubblicazioni della Facoltà di Scienze Matematiche Fisiche e Naturali dell'Università di Firenze, 21:1–104.Google Scholar
Roger, O. 1902. Wirbelthierreste aus dem Obermiocän der bayerisch-schwäbischen Hochebene. Berichte des Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins fur Schwäben und Neuburg, 35:1–63.Google Scholar
Rook, L. 1999. Late Turolian Mesopithecus (Mammalia, Primates, Colobinae) from Italy. Journal of Human Evolution, 36:535–547.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rook, L., Abbazzi, L., and Engesser, B. 1999. An overview on the Italian Miocene land mammal faunas, p. 191–204. In Agustí, J., Rook, L., and Andrews, P. (eds.), The evolution of Neogene terrestrial ecosystems in Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rook, L., Gallai, G., and Torre, D. 2006. Lands and endemic mammals in the Late Miocene of Italy: constrains for paleogeographic outlines of Tyrrhenian area. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 238:263–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rook, L., Renne, P., Benvenuti, M., and Papini, M. 2000. Geochronology of Oreopithecus-bearing succession at Baccinello (Italy) and the extinction pattern of European Miocene hominoids. Journal of Human Evolution, 39:577–582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosen, B. R. 1999. Palaeoclimatic implications of the energy hypothesis from Neogene corals of the Mediterranean region, p. 309–327. In Agustí, J., Rook, L., and Andrews, P. (eds.), The evolution of Neogene terrestrial ecosystems in Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rütimeyer, L. 1876. Über Pliocän und Eisperiode auf beiden Seiten der Alpen. H. Georg's Verlag, Basel, 80 p.Google Scholar
Sacco, F. 1889. I Cheloni astiani del Piemonte. Memorie della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, serie 2, 39:427–461.Google Scholar
Spinks, P. Q., Shaffer, H. B., Iverson, J. B., and McCord, W. P. 2004. Phylogenetic hypotheses for the turtle family Geoemydidae. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 32:164–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suc, J.-P., Fauquette, S., Bessedik, M., Bertini, A., Zheng, Z., Clauzon, G., Suballyova, D., Diniz, F., Quezel, P., Feddi, N., Clet, M., Bessais, E., Bachiri Taoufiq, N., Meon, H., and Combourieu-Nebout, N. 1999. Neogene vegetation changes in West European and West circum-Mediterranean areas, p. 378–388. In Agustí, J., Rook, L., and Andrews, P. (eds.), The evolution of Neogene terrestrial ecosystems in Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. L. 2002. PAUP. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and other methods). Version 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.Google Scholar
Weithofer, A. 1888. Alcune osservazioni sulla fauna delle Ligniti di Casteani e Montebamboli (Toscana). Bollettino del Reale Comitato Geologico d'Italia, 11– 12:363–368.Google Scholar