100 Years of Deuterostomia (Grobben, 1908): Cladogenetic and Anagenetic Relations within the Notoneuralia Domain
Michael Gudo, Tareq Syed

TL;DR
This paper revisits the evolutionary history of deuterostomes, emphasizing molecular and developmental data, and advocates for the acrania-like origin hypothesis within the chordate scenario, supported by biomechanical considerations.
Contribution
It introduces a detailed anagenetic model for early deuterostome evolution, focusing on the acrania-like ancestor and integrating biomechanical evidence.
Findings
Supports the deuterostome-protostome division with revised internal relationships.
Proposes the acrania-like ur-deuterostome as the most plausible ancestor.
Highlights biomechanical advantages of the hydroskeleton hypothesis.
Abstract
Results from molecular systematics and comparative developmental genetics changed the picture of metazoan and especially bilaterian radiation. According to this new animal phylogeny (introduced by Adoutte et al. 1999/2000), Grobbens (1908) widely favoured protostome-deuterostome division of the Bilateria can be upheld, but only with major rearrangements within these superphyla. On the cladogenetic level, the Protostomia are split into two unexpected subgroups, the Lophotrochozoa and Ecdysozoa. The deuterostomes are split into the subgroups Chordata and Ambulacraria, which is not novel since Grobben (1908) introduced the Deuterostomia in this way (together with the Chaetognatha as a third line). However, many details of the new deuterostome phylogeny do not fit traditional, morphology-based reconstructions. As a consequence, three relatively unexpected proposals for early deuterostome…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsInvertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
