Access to this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Scientific Reports
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports
New cladotherian mammal
from southern Chile
and the evolution of mesungulatid
meridiolestidans at the dusk
of the Mesozoic era
Agustín G. Martinelli1,2*, Sergio Soto‑Acuña2,3*, Francisco J. Goin4, Jonatan Kaluza2,5,
J. Enrique Bostelmann6,7,8, Pedro H. M. Fonseca9, Marcelo A. Reguero4, Marcelo Leppe10 &
Alexander O. Vargas2
In the last decades, several discoveries have uncovered the complexity of mammalian evolution
during the Mesozoic Era, including important Gondwanan lineages: the australosphenidans,
gondwanatherians, and meridiolestidans (Dryolestoidea). Most often, their presence and diversity
is documented by isolated teeth and jaws. Here, we describe a new meridiolestidan mammal,
Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov., from the Late Cretaceous of southern Chile, based on a partial
jaw with ve cheek teeth in locis and an isolated upper premolar. Phylogenetic analysis places
Orretherium as the earliest divergence within Mesungulatidae, before other forms such as the Late
Cretaceous Mesungulatum and Coloniatherium, and the early Paleocene Peligrotherium. The in loco
tooth sequence (last two premolars and three molars) is the rst recovered for a Cretaceous taxon
in this family and suggests that reconstructed tooth sequences for other Mesozoic mesungulatids
may include more than one species. Tooth eruption and replacement show that molar eruption
in mesungulatids is heterochronically delayed with regard to basal dryolestoids, with therian‑
like simultaneous eruption of the last premolar and last molar. Meridiolestidans seem endemic to
Patagonia, but given their diversity and abundance, and the similarity of vertebrate faunas in other
regions of Gondwana, they may yet be discovered in other continents.
Before the establishment of metatherians and eutherians as the dominant mammals of the Cenozoic terres-
trial ecosystems of South America1–3, two main non-tribosphenic mammalian clades achieved large diversity
and dominance during the Late Cretaceous: the gondwanatherian allotherians4–7 and the meridiolestidan
cladotherians8–16. Gondwanatherians achieved a Gondwanan distribution, with a dozen species as well as inde-
terminate records from the Upper Cretaceous of Tanzania, Argentina, Chile, Madagascar, and India, as well as the
Paleogene of Argentina, Antarctica and perhaps Peru. ey had a specialized dentition for herbivorous feeding
OPEN
*
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
habits, including gliriform incisors and hypsodont molariforms in some taxa7,17. In contrast, meridiolestidans
likely represent an endemic group of South American dryolestoid cladotherians with a typically reversed triangle
pattern for the cheek teeth, though lacking the tribosphenic design (i.e., absence of a protocone and a basined
talonid)18,19.
e fossil record of meridiolestidans includes badly preserved specimens that do not allow a species-level
determination20,21, species of still poorly understood anities (e.g., Casamiquelia rionegrina, see review in Rou-
gier etal.15), and species that are clustered into two main branches: the non-bunodont Cronopio dentiacutus,
Leonardus cuspidatus, Necrolestes patagonensis, and N. mirabilis, and the bunodont mesungulatoids Reigitherium
bunodontum, Mesungulatum houssayi, M. lamarquensis, Paraungulatum rectangularis, Coloniatherium cilinskii,
and Peligrotherium tropicalis8–15,22 (Fig.1). Mesungulatids (the above species, but likely excluding Reigitherium;
see our phylogenetic analysis below) have bunodont postcanines, molarization of the last premolars, and labio-
lingually extended mesial and distal cingula on their upper and lower cheek teeth8,10,12,13,16,23,24. Meridiolestidans
were at the core of mammalian radiations in South America aer the Late Cretaceous event known as Cretaceous
Terrestrial Revolution25, with their molar morphology suggesting a trend towards greater ecological diversity15.
Meridiolestidans survived the mass extinction event at the end of the Mesozoic Era and persisted as a vestigial
group in the Cenozoic, including Peligrotherium tropicalis from the early Paleocene of Patagonia24,26–28, a bizarre
indeterminate taxon from the Eocene of Antarctica29, and two species of Necrolestes from the early Miocene of
Figure1. Location map of Río de Las Chinas Valley, Estancia Cerro Guido, Última Esperanza Province,
Chilean Patagonia. (A) Mammal Quarry location during the Late Cretaceous. Map modied from Scotese85.
(B) Mammal Quarry at the Río de Las Chinas Valley, with exposed geological formations. (C) Localities with
osteological records of Cretaceous dryolestoid mammals from South America.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Patagonia14,30,31. In addition to gondwanatherians and meridiolestidans, the current record of Late Cretaceous
mammals in South America includes two species of dryolestidans from Argentina closely related to Laurasian
forms (i.e., Groebertetherium stipanicici and G. allenensis11,15), as well as a handful of other records of uncertain
anities from Peru, Bolivia and Brazil32–35.
e dentition of dryolestoid mammals illustrates a radiation of pre-tribosphenic mammals, a group of stem
eria in which metatherians and eutherians are nested (i.e., eria36,37). e composition of Dryolestoidea
includes the traditional families Dryolestidae and Paurodontidae38–42 (grouped together as Dryolestida), plus the
clade Meridiolestida13,14. Dryolestidae is the most specious group (~ 20 species)38 with almost all of its members
coming from Laurasia, from the Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceous strata from North America and Europe38–42
and the Middle Jurassic of Asia43. Groebertherium spp. from the Late Cretaceous of Patagonia and possibly
Donodon prescriptoris from the Early Cretaceous of Africa were considered dryolestids or dryolestidans10,23,42,44,
enlarging the temporal and geographical distribution of the group. Paurodontidae, in its traditional sense, com-
prises about a dozen species mainly distributed in the Late Jurassic of North America45,46, Late Jurassic to Early
Cretaceous of Europe47,48, and a possible species in the Late Jurassic of Tanzania38; however, this family has been
considered as paraphyletic in more recent phylogenetic analyses and their members may represent early diverg-
ing dryolestidans49. e interrelationships of dryolestidans have resulted in disparate topologies according to
dierent phylogenetic studies13,14,17,22,49, deserving more in depth analysis. e recognition of meridiolestidans
as an endemic group of South American dryolestoids13 is much more recent than for these two, mainly Laura-
sian, traditional clades, which have been known since the late Nineteenth Century39–41. e rst meridiolesti-
dan recognized was Mesungulatum houssayi, which also represents the rst undisputed mammalian record for
the Mesozoic of South America50. Although eutherian anities were rst considered for Mesungulatum50, an
immediate amendment considered it as a pretribosphenic mammal related to dryolestoid cladotherians8. By that
time, intensive eldwork led by Dr. José F. Bonaparte resulted in the discovery of a diverse mammal assemblage
from the Campanian–Maastrichtian Los Alamitos Formation (northern Patagonia, Argentina), comprising as
many as 15 new species of non-therian mammals (excluding gondwanatherians), mostly based upon isolated
dental elements. Further materials coming from other localities and ages (e.g., Candeleros, Allen, La Colonia
and Salamanca formations) indicated that this diversity was overestimated; in some cases, taxa were recognized
on the basis of isolated teeth representing dierent loci of dentition in the same taxon10–13,15,38,42,51–53. e foun-
dational stone for the recognition of the South American clade Meridiolestida was based on the large number
of mammalian discoveries at the roughly coeval Los Alamitos, Allen and La Colonia formations, plus signicant
records in the mid-Cretaceous Candeleros Formation and lower Paleocene Salamanca Formation13. e whole
evidence proves that meridiolestidans evolved more disparate dental and craniomandibular morphotypes than
their relatives the dryolestid and paurodontid dryolestoids8–10,13–15,31. Contrary to this line of evidence, Averianov
etal.49 proposed an alternative hypothesis in which meridiolestidans were nested as non-cladotherian trechnoth-
erians related to spalacotheroid “symmetrodontans”. Features used to link meridiolestidans with spalacotheroids
are the presence of an anterior lower premolar with well-developed mesial and two distal accessory cusps; the
lack of a distinctive talonid; well-developed mesial and distal cingula; mesiodistally compressed roots in lower
molars; lack of angular process and a Meckel’s groove in the dentary; and masseteric process (particularly that
of Cronopio) homologous to the masseteric shelf of some spalacolestines49. Wible and Rougier31 and Rougier
etal.15 discussed this hypothesis49 and stated that some traits were wrongly scored, such as the absence of an
angular process in meridiolestidans (which is present in Cronopio, Peligrotherium and an unnamed Cretaceous
form13,21,24) or have a random distribution amongst trechnotherians, not being synapomorphic for both clades
(spalacotheroids and meridiolestidans)15,31, such as the masseteric process which is only present in Cronopio
and in few putative “symmetrodontans”15. Further, the proposal of meridiolestidans as related to “symmetro-
dontans”49 dismissed several non-dental traits15,31. However, given the disparity of craniodental morphologies
among meridiolestidans13–15,31 and the incompleteness of most taxa, the relationships of this endemic South
American group among the trechnotherians are not a fully resolved matter. e sum of cranio-dental evidence
provided by the last comprehensive analyses15,16,22,31 (including our modied dataset) supports a cladotherian
position for meridiolestidans, usually linked to dryolestidans within Dryolestoidea, a scheme we follow here.
Here we describe the southernmost record of a meridiolestidan mammal from the Upper Cretaceous Dorotea
Formation at the Magallanes Region of southernmost Chile. Two specimens are referred to a new taxon, Orre‑
therium tzen gen. et sp. nov., including an upper last premolar (hypodigm CPAP-5008) and a partial lower jaw
with the last two premolars and three molars (holotype CPAP-5007). We discuss its anities, its biogeographic
signicance, and the extent of the Mesungulatidae as a distinct family of Meridiolestida. Additionally, the lower
premolar-molar series of a single individual considerably improves our understanding on the anatomy and tooth
replacement sequence for mesungulatid mammals.
Results
Systematic palaeontology.
Mammalia Linnaeus 175854.
Meridiolestida Rougier, Apesteguía, and Gaetano 201113.
Mesungulatidae Bonaparte 19868.
Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov.
(Figs.2–5, 7).
Etymology. Orre means teeth in the language spoken by the Aonikenk, the original inhabitants of the
Patagonian plains in Chile and Argentina, and therium from the Greek thērion, beast, frequently used for mam-
mals. e species name tzen is Aonikenk for ve, the number of teeth preserved in the in locis sequence.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Holotype. CPAP-5007, partial le dentary with p2, p3 and m1-m3 (Figs.2, 3).
Hypodigm. CPAP-5008, almost complete right upper P3 with some remains of the maxillary bone (Figs.4,
5).
Comments. CPAP-5008 was found a few meters away from the lower jaw CPAP-5007; even though it can-
not be unambiguously referred to the same specimen, it is highly probable taking in account their compatible
size, stage of wear, spatial proximity and taphonomic signature in the outcrop (e.g., based on isolated pieces
from ~ 10 × 10m quarry we were able to reconstruct the lower jaw of the holotype, and the outcrop has relatively
few mammal individuals/specimens).
Horizon and locality. All specimens come from a small hill, named Mammal Quarry, located in the Río
de Las Chinas valley (50° 42′ S /72° 32′ W), Estancia Cerro Guido, Última Esperanza Province, Magallanes and
Chilean Antarctic Region, Chilean Patagonia; lower levels of the Dorotea Formation, late Campanian to early
Maastrichtian, Late Cretaceous.
Diagnosis. Small-sized mesungulatid dryolestoid (sensu phylogenetic hypothesis here obtained and previ-
ous ones13,14,31) slightly smaller than Mesungulatum houssayi and M. lamarquensis and larger than the non-
mesungulatids Reigitherium bunodontum and Leonardus cuspidatus. Orretherium diers from Mesungulatum in
having labio-lingually shorter mesial and distal cingula, more developed on the mesiolabial and distolabial sides
in m1–m2; mesial and distal cingula mesio-distally longer; more bulbous protoconid; paraconid relatively larger
than in Mesungulatum and separated of the metaconid by a distinct notch; smaller m1 relative to m2 in Orre‑
therium (subequal in Mesungulatum). e m3 of Orreotherium diers from the inferred m3 of Mesungulatum in
having a broader and mesially convex mesial cingulum; relatively smaller paraconid and larger metaconid; and
more developed swelling at the labial base of protoconid. Orretherium diers from Coloniatherium in having a
relatively smaller p2 compared to p3 and molars; large metaconid in p2, with an accessory lingual cingular cusp
next to it; lack of extra roots in p2; wider angle formed by the trigonid cusps in p3; less-developed swelling of
the labial base of the protoconid in p3; more labially expanded mesial and distal cingula in p3; postprotocristid
projected posterior to the distal surface of the metaconid in p3; only one tiny extra root in p3; m1 smaller than
m2 (m1 larger than m2 in the inferred molars of Coloniatherium); m1 sub-square instead of sub-rectangular
Figure2. Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov. (CPAP-5007, holotype). (a–c) Partial le dentary with p2-p3
and m1-m3 in occlusal (a), labial (b) and medial (c) views. Drawings made by A.G.M. ac accessory cusp, coc
coronoid crest, dc distal cingulum, de dentine, en enamel, maf masseteric fossa, mc mesial cingulum, mf mental
foramen, med metaconid, pad paraconid, prd protoconid, rm retromolar space. Scale bar: 5mm.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
in shape (the latter in Coloniatherium). Orretherium diers from Peligrotherium in having less complex lower
cingula in lower premolars and molars; lack of lower labial accessory cuspules in lower molars; more dened
main crown cusps (protoconid, paraconid, metaconid) and cristids in p3 and molars; m2 larger than m1 and m3
(in Peligrotherium m1 is larger than the remaining molars). Orretherium diers from Reigitherium in having a
triangular conguration of the main cusps of the last premolar and molars; molars with conspicuous paraconid
and postprotocristid; labio-lingually narrower molars; lack of labial accessory cuspules in molars. e P3 diers
from that of Coloniatherium in having a slightly convex mesial wall of the crown; longer post- and preparac-
ristae; metastyle more labially placed; distal cingulum more lingually expanded; slightly concave (instead of
convex) lingual wall of the base of the paracone; swelling of the lingual base of the paracone much less reduced.
e P3 of Orretherium diers from that of Peligrotherium in having labio-lingually broader and apico-basally
shorter mesial and distal cingula; paracone connected to the stylocone and the metastyle more labially placed
to the stylocone. e P3 lacks extra-roots, which are present in Coloniatherium and Peligrotherium. e P3 dif-
fers from the inferred last premolar (P4) of Reigitherium in the absence of continuous and clearly dierentiated
mesial and distal cingula; lack of ectoexid and extra-labial cusps; and in that the triangular conguration of
cusps of the primary trigon is not topologically similar. Orretherium shares with other meridiolestidans13, while
diering from most other dryolestoids, the presence of a large stylocone, similar in size to the paracone, absence
of metacone, three lower molars (and inferred three upper molars), a mesiodistally compressed root in the last
premolars and molars, and lack of a Meckel’s groove in the inner wall of the dentary.
Description. Lower premolar‑molar series. Specimen CPAP-5007 represents the holotype of Orretherium
tzen and one of the few Late Cretaceous Mesozoic mammals from South America bearing a sequence of ve
lower cheek teeth in locis (Fig.2). e le lower jaw includes the p2-p3 and m1-m3, identied on the basis of the
tooth formula of Coloniatherium and Peligrotherium12,15,24. e crown wear of p3 is less accentuated than that of
m1, suggesting that the p3 is a replacement tooth that erupted later than m1 (see below). e crown of the last
premolar and molars are dominated by one labial (protoconid) and two lingual (paraconid and metaconid) cusps
linked by crests, forming an acute “V” (Fig.2), which represent the plesiomorphic trigonid of trechnotherian
mammals and primitively the three main lower cusps of postcanine teeth18,19. e p2 is slightly mesio-distally
larger and labio-lingually narrower than p3; p3 is larger in all dimensions than the molars; m1 is smaller than m2
Figure3. Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov. (CPAP-5007, holotype). (a–d) 3D-rendering of transparent
partial le dentary with p2-p3 and m1-m3 in occlusal (a), labial (b) and ventral (c) views, highlighting the
root morphology, and dentary without teeth in dorsal view (d). Images generated by P.H.F.M. using 3D Slicer
soware. er extra root, rcr radicular canal of the root. Scale bar: 5mm.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Figure4. Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov. (CPAP-5008). (a–e) last right upper premolar (P3) in mesial (a),
occlusal (b), distal (c), lingual (d) and labial (e) views, with accompanying line drawings. Drawings made by
A.G.M. dc distal cingulum, dcc distal cingulum cusp, ladr labiodistal root, lamr labiomesial root, lir lingual
root, mc mesial cingulum, mcc mesial cingular cusp, mst metastyle, n notch, pa paracone, pst parastyle, popc
postparacrista; prpc, preparacrista; st, stylocone; stc, styloconar crest. Scale bar: 5mm.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
and m3 and m3 is smaller than m2; thus, m2 is the largest molar. In occlusal view, p2 is roughly triangular with
the acute angle facing mesially, p3 is roughly rectangular, with the major axis mesio-distally oriented, m1 and
m2 are almost quadrangular, being slightly wider than long, and m3 is trapezoidal, with the longest side facing
mesially. In occlusal view, the tooth sequence has a slightly sigmoidal line, with p2 and p3 more labially placed
than m2 and m3, the m1 having an intermediate position (Fig.2). e crown complexity increases posteriorly,
with p3 having the same conguration of the molars, and m1 and m2 very similar to each other. e m3 reduces
about 1/3 its distal width but keeps the same crown structures than m1–m2 (Fig.2).
e p2 lacks the portion of the crown mesial to the protoconid. It is a bulbous tooth, with the protoconid
occupying most of the crown. It has strong apical wear exhibiting a thick enamel layer and dentine. e labial
wall of the paraconid is strongly convex, with a swelling at the crown base. e labial wall is straighter and dis-
tolingually invaded by an accessory cingular cusp (Fig.2). e preprotocristid is stout and slopes down toward
the embrasure with the paraconid, which is not preserved. Taking into account the broken base of the crown,
a conspicuous paraconid is inferred, as in the p2 of Coloniatherium12,15. e postprotocristid is sharper and
projects disto-lingually to contact the base of the metaconid. is crest also delimits distally a concave surface.
ere is an extra thin crest over the distolabial surface of the protoconid, which descends to contact the cingular
distolabial cusp of the distal cingulum. e metacone is much smaller than the protoconid and apparently smaller
than the inferred paraconid (Fig.2). ere is a distal cingulum, separated from the metaconid and protoconid
by a deep valley. e distal cingulum runs transversally along two-thirds of its lingual portion and then curves
mesio-labially. It has minute crenulations, with a distinctive cusp at its labial end.
e p3 also lacks part of the mesial portion of the crown, but its outline is evident (Fig.2). e protoconid is
moderately procumbent, taller than in any other cheek tooth, and occupies most of the labial half of the crown.
e labial surface of the protoconid is less convex than in p2. e pre- and postprotocristid forms an angle of
50º, with the preprotocristid extending mesio-lingually to contact the base of the broken paraconid and the
transversely projected postprotocristid. e preprotocristid is slightly inclined and thick at its contact with
the paraconid (Fig.2). Both pre- and postprotocristids enclose a concave basin, which is reduced and partially
divided by a fold of the lingual wall of the protoconid. e metaconid is placed close and lingually in front of
the protoconid. In lingual view, it is the main dominant cusp, as tall as the protoconid, and considerably taller
and larger than the paraconid. e metaconid and protoconid are connected by the postprotocristid, which
extends lingually to contact the short distolingual crest of the metaconid; they form an almost right angle. e
metaconid has its tip worn out, dening a drop-shaped outline. e swelling of the lingual wall of the crown
enlarges considerably the transversal width of the tooth and positions the apex of the metaconid more labially
(medially displaced). e p3 has conspicuous mesial and distal cingula, which are mesio-distally broader at their
labial side and separated from the wall of the protoconid base by a narrow notch (Fig.2). e occlusal surface
of these cingula is partially eroded, especially the mesial one which is also incompletely preserved. e crown
conguration of p3 is similar to that of the molars, mainly diering in that the trigonid has a smaller triangular
area than the molars, but the labial and lingual swelling of the crown base plus the mesial/distal cingula result
in a larger and bulbous tooth, the largest of the cheek-tooth series. e dierences between p2 and p3 are con-
spicuous, especially in the occlusal outline, less developed cingula, and relative size (protoconid much larger in
p2 than in p3) and placement (metaconid is distolingual to protoconid in p2 instead of lingual as in p3) of the
trigonid cusps (Fig.2).
e m1–m3 have a similar morphology, with slight dierences in size among them; the m3 is characteristic
in having a narrower distal portion than the mesial one. In addition, the swelling of the crown base is stronger
in the labial side of m2–m3 than in m1 (Fig.2). e three molars have a tall protoconid, which is slightly mesio-
distally compressed at its labial sector. e pre- and postprotocristids form an angle of ~ 45º in all molars, which is
smaller than the angle of p3. e preprotocristids run obliquely and end in the mesiolabial wall of the paraconid;
Figure5. Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov. (CPAP-5008). (a–d) 3D rendering of last right upper premolar (P3)
in ventral (a), distal (b), lingual (c), and labial (d) views. Images generated by P.H.F.M. using 3D Slicer soware.
ladr labiodistal root, lamr labiomesial root, lir lingual root. Scale bar: 5mm.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
they are straight in m1-m2 and slightly bent in m3. e postprotocristids are transversal to the main dentary
axis, being straight in m1–m2 and shorter and bent in m3. e protoconids bear a lingual fold, apically sharp
(as seen in m3), which becomes rounded aer apical wear (as in m1–m2). e basin dened by the cristids of
the protoconid is larger in m2 than in m1 and m3, and its size is considerably aected by wear. e paraconid
of each molar is placed at the mesiolingual corner of the crown. It is a conical cusp, considerably smaller and
shorter than the metaconid. e separation of paraconid and metaconid is dened by a deep and narrow notch,
clearly exposed in the lingual side of m3, less aected by wear. In addition, the paraconid apex is placed higher
in relation to the mesial cingulum, dening a tall mesial wall. Along the molars, the paraconid is comparable in
size whereas the metaconid decreases backwards. e metaconid is a large cusp, subconical, subtly smaller than
the protoconid. Its labial wall is concave whereas the lingual one is almost at, dening most of the lingual prole
of the crown. e metaconid is considerably larger in m1-m2 than in p3, but due to wear, the distal crest of the
metaconid that contacts the postprotocristid is not evident in m1-m2. In m3, the distal wall of the metaconid
seems to reach the postprotocristid directly. In m1 and m3, there is no evidence of a labial crest on the metaco-
nid, which seems to be absent in m1 due to wear. In m2, the mesiolabial corner of the metaconid bears a worn
crest that descends labially to the trigonid basin, but lacks contact with the protoconid fold. e crowns of the
molars are anked by distinctive mesial and distal cingula, extended from the lingual to the labial side (Fig.2).
Both cingula are separated from the trigonid by a continuous groove, which is narrower in m2 than in m1 and
m3. e mesial and distal cingula become mesio-distally broad in the labial sector, and especially in m1-m2 they
curve towards the protoconid base, thus having a lingual component. e mesial cingulum is better developed
than the distal one, especially in m3 in which the distal portion of the crown is transversely narrow. ere is
intense wear in the cingula of m1–m2, obscuring evidence of crenulations or discrete cuspules. However, the
mesial cingulum of m3 has a conspicuous cusp at its labial end, as well as subtle constrictions that suggest tiny
cuspules. e mesial cingulum is placed slightly higher than the distal one. Extra cingula or cingular cusps on
the labial/lingual surfaces of m1-m3 are absent, contrary to the condition of Peligrotherium and Reigitherium16.
Posterior to m3 there is a retromolar space as long as half a molar size (Fig.2).
e roots of p2-m3 were virtually reconstructed by micro-CT images (Fig.3). All teeth have two main roots,
one in the mesial and the other in the distal half of the tooth. Only p3 has a tiny accessory root. e roots of p2
are unequal, the mesial one being cylindrical and the distal one transversely compressed, tapering to the root
apex (Fig.3). e mesial root is slightly postero-ventrally inclined, and longer and thicker than the distal one.
e apex of the mesial root is closer to the ventral edge of the dentary than in any other teeth. e mesial and
distal roots of p3 are subequal and both are transversely compressed (Fig.3). e tiny accessory root is placed
anterior to the labial side of the distal root. It is conical, slightly inclined and part of its base collapses with the
distal root. e roots of m1–m2 are similar, both transversely compressed, tapering to the apex root. ey are
parallel to each other and the mesial wall of the distal roots has a longitudinal, shallow groove. e roots of m3
are distinctive in size and shape, concomitant with the crown shape. e mesial root is transversely compressed,
tapering to the apex root, and slightly smaller and shorter than in the preceding molars. e distal root has a
transversely wide base but tapers abruptly and much of the root is oval in cross-section. In the p2 and molars,
the roots are taller than the crown, whereas in p3 they have a similar height (Fig.3).
Upper premolar. CPAP-5008 consists of an almost complete right upper P3 with portions of the maxillary
bone around the roots, indicating it was functional at the moment of death (Fig.4). Most of the parastyle and
metastyle cusps are broken, only preserving their bases. Parts of the roots are also broken, missing the distal
portion of the lingual root and about 2/3 of the labiodistal one. In occlusal view, the sides of the crown dene a
roughly rectangular outline, about twice wider than long, with the labial prole slightly convex and the lingual
one slightly convex. e crown has intense wear over the paracone apex and its pre- and postparacristae, and the
mesial and distal cingula. e paracone is the main cusp occupying most of the lingual half of the crown (Fig.4).
It has a conical shape, slightly mesio-distally at, and bears the pre- and postparacristae, which denes an acute
angle (~ 50º). e preparacrista extends labially, passing the level of the tip of the stylocone, and is separated from
the parastyle by a deep and narrow notch. At this point, the preparacrista is slightly thick and exhibits more wear
than the postparacrista. e postparacrista extends distolabially to the metastyle, but the crista ends lingually to
it, both separated by a wide sulcus. e paracone also bears a short labial crest that contacts the styloconar crest,
dividing two small basins (Fig.4). e stylocone is also a conspicuous conical cusp. Due to wear, it has almost
the same height as the paracone. e stylocone is positioned labially and slightly distal to the paracone, at the
mesiodistal mid-way of the crown and disconnected of the preparacrista, as occur in most other meridiolestidans
(e.g., Leonardus, Reigitherium, Mesungulatum)11–13,15,23. On the contrary, dryolestids and paurodontids have a
clear connection between the stylocone and the preparacrista42,45,47. Both the paracone and stylocone are close
to one each other, as in molarized premolars, whereas they become more distant in successive teeth15. e labial
surface of the stylocone forms the labial surface of the crown, producing a swelling at its base (Fig.4). us,
the labial wall of the stylocone has a shallow concave outline in mesial/distal views, instead of being straight
or slightly convex as in molars. e styloconal crest is very small and fuses to the labial crest of the paracone
at their embrasure. e parastyle is fully disconnected from the stylocone and the preparacrista (Fig.4). is
cusp is not preserved, but its base is somewhat compressed and bears a short cingulum on its labial surface. is
small cingulum does not extend over the labial surface and is dierent from the crenulated and complete labial
cingulum of the M1 of Mesungulatum and Coloniatherium8,12. In the P3 of Coloniatherium, a labial cingulum is
also absent15. e broken base of the metastyle is placed labiodistally and close to the stylocone; both are linked
by a sharp and short crest developed on its distal wall. Based on its broken base, the metastyle is rounded and
placed in a more apical position than the parastyle. e metastyle is separated from the distal cingulum and
postparacrista by a deep sulcus (Fig.4). In contrast, the metastyle and the labial end of the postparacrista are
almost in contact in the P3 of Coloniatherium15. e mesial and distal faces of the crown of CPAP-5008 are
anked by a conspicuous cingulum (Fig.4). e mesial cingulum extends lingually from above the level of the
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
parastyle to pass the level of the paracone apex, marking o an internal groove. e distal cingulum starts from
a attened labiodistal, small cingular cusp, located distal to the metastylar base, and extends lingually passing
the paracone apex. e distal cingulum is slightly mesio-distally narrower and more oblique than the mesial
one. Besides, the mesial cingulum seems to be placed closer to the crown base than the distal one. Both cingula
have small and worn out crenulations, especially on the lingual side. e continuous mesial and distal cingula
in the last premolars and all molars of mesungulatids, such as Mesungulatum, Coloniatherium, Peligrotherium,
and Paraungulathum, are unique traits of this group8,11,12,15,24.
CPAP-5008 has three roots, one lingual and two labial. e lingual root has a subcircular cross-section and
lacks most of its distal wall (Fig.5). It bends slightly labially. e mesiolabial root is oval in cross section, with
the main axis transversely oriented. e distal labial root has the largest base, but most of the root is broken. It
is sub-rectangular in cross-section, mesio-distally compressed, and about three times wider than long (Fig.5).
Extra-roots were not identied in the micro-CT images.
Dentary. e dentary of specimen CPAP-5007 is preserved in two parts, the one holding p2 and a second
bearing p3 to m3, with its posterior portion broken backward at the base of the coronoid process. e horizontal
ramus of the dentary is robust and transversely broad, to hold the complex system of roots. In labial view, the
ventral edge of the dentary is concave, whereas the alveolar one is irregular in its labial side and almost straight
in the lingual side (Fig.2). e lateral wall of the dentary is dorso-ventrally concave, tallest at the level of m3.
e lowest preserved point is between p2-p3 but at this part the alveolar edge is only partially preserved. One
mental foramen is preserved, here interpreted as the posteriormost one, considering that other foramina pierce
the missing anterior portion of dentary. e mental foramen seems to be large, but its posterior edge is broken.
It is placed below the crown of p2, near the ventral edge (Fig.2). A tiny nutrient foramen is also observable at the
base of the coronoid process, near the anterior edge of the masseteric fossa. e labial alveolar border exhibits an
irregular line, with the inter-radicular processes less developed than the inter-alveolar ones. Only the anterodorsal
portion of the masseteric fossa is preserved, being deeper just posterior to the base of the coronoid process. e
coronoid process is almost completely lost, preserving its base, which is transversely wide and antero-posteriorly
short, forming an antero-laterally rounded edge. e anterior surface of the coronoid base is slightly concave
and faces anteriorly, suggesting the anterior edge of the coronoid process was vertical. e base of the coronoid
process is also placed in front of the last molar, separated by a conspicuous retromolar space. e medial wall of
the dentary is almost at and considerably taller than the lateral side. ere is a shallow longitudinal depression
placed at mid-height below the cheek teeth (Fig.2), which may indicate the remnant surface of Meckel’s cartilage
that is lost during ontogeny55,56. Scars for a coronoid bone or other postdentary bones are not evident and details
of the posterior portion of the dentary (e.g., angular process, condyle) are not preserved.
Figure6. Lower cheek teeth replacement sequence in Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov. (a) Relative crown wear
on preserved cheek teeth of CPAP-5007. (b) Hypothetical stage of a juvenile, with deciduous premolars and rst
molar (H#0). (c) Inferred sequence of replacement based on (c).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Replacement sequence. Inferences on the tooth eruption sequence of Orretherium can be drawn with the avail-
able material using the relative wear over the crown as a proxy (Fig.6). In addition, we assume a diphyodont
replacement of premolars for Orretherium, a typical condition among trechnotherians57–59, and the denition of
molar as any tooth posterior to the last postcanine showing evidence of replacement, as amended by Bi etal.60,
based on Owen61. e crown wear in CPAP-5007 is as follows: (i) m1 has the most worn crown; (ii) p2 and m2
have both a roughly similar tooth wear stage, stronger than p3 and m3; (iii) the wear of m3 is roughly similar
or slightly stronger than that of p3; and (iv) the cervix of p3 is in a lower position than the remaining teeth (not
fully erupted) (Fig.6). Based on this, the following sequence is inferred: (i) m1 erupted before than p2-p3, being
functional with the deciduous (d) premolars; (ii) dp2 was replaced earlier than dp3, likely simultaneous with
eruption of m2; (iii) dp3 was replaced at the same time or slightly later than eruption of m3; (iv) possibly p3
was the last tooth to fully erupt, slightly later than m3; and (v) wear facets are conspicuous before the crowns
were fully erupted, as seen in the incomplete erupted p3 (Fig.6). is model indicates an anterior to posterior
sequence of replacement for p2-p3 (due to the lack of replacement evidence for p1, we cannot extend this con-
clusion to the entire premolar series), and an anterior to posterior eruption of molars. Based on this model, the
p2 and the molarized p3 are considered permanent premolars, and the three posterior teeth molars, as inferred
for Peligrotherium24 and Coloniatherium12. Although we cannot refer the P3 of CPAP-5008 unambiguously as
part of CPAP-5007, the crown wear of the P3 is similar to the p3, supporting that CPAP-5008 is a permanent
molarized premolar. Stronger wear on P3 could certainly indicate a dierent individual, but this is not the case.
Figure7. Time-calibrated phylogenetic trees. Simplied strict consensus tree of 12 MPTs with the position of
Orretherium tzen among meridiolestidan mammals.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Phylogenetic relationships. Our parsimony phylogenetic analysis resulted in 12 most parsimonious trees
of 1196 steps (Ci = 0.372, Ri = 0.728). A simplied strict consensus tree is shown in Fig.7 (see also Supplemen-
tary Data 1). Orretherium is nested within Meridiolestida, as sister-taxon of an unresolved clade comprising
Mesungulatum, Coloniatherium, and Peligrotherium; these four genera are considered the clade Mesungulatidae
(Fig.7). Mesungulatum is the least known taxon of the group, lacking data on most of the premolar morphol-
ogy as well as the jaw and the rest of skeleton. Except for MACN-RN 06, a le dentary with m1 and m2, tooth
sequences are interpreted based on isolated teeth15,16. Reigitherium is placed as sister taxon of mesungulatids,
as the basalmost Mesungulatoidea. Most of the meridiolestidan clades have high Bremer support values (see
Fig.S6). e crown and root dental gross morphology of the P3 and p2-m3 of Orretherium follows the typical
pattern of mesungulatids, but some traits, such as the lack of supernumerary roots in P3 and p2 and the relatively
small size of p2, place the new Chilean taxon as basal to the Late Cretaceous Mesungulatum and Coloniatherium
and the early Paleocene Peligrotherium.
Optimization of some character-states is also dicult to address, considering that the distal upper/lower
premolars of Mesungulatum and the upper molars of Orretherium are unknown. Reigitherium, originally related
to dryolestoids in its own family Reigitheriidae9 and then to docodontans62 (an early mammaliaform group),
has gained support as a meridiolestidan, particularly as a mesungulatoid, since the discoveries and reinterpre-
tation of several specimens from La Colonia Formation12,13,16. However, Harper etal.16, based on a reduced
dataset of taxa (#10) and characters (#44), obtained a clade with Reigitherium plus Peligrotherium as sister-
group of Mesungulatum plus Coloniatherium. Our results do not support the inclusion of Reigitherium within
mesungulatids, or a clade with Peligrotherium (see the Discussion) and supporting instead its position as sister
taxon of mesungulatids, as in previous studies13,14,31,63. is results from changes in some character-state coding
for Reigitherium that dier from the analysis conducted by Harper etal.16. e “high grade” of bunodonty in
Figure8. Comparison of selected le upper/lower postcanine teeth of some meridiolestian mammals and
their size based on m1. Leonardus is based on MACN-RN 172 (M1) and MACN-RN 1097 (m1), as interpreted
by Rougier etal.15; Reigitherium, Harper etal.16: Fig.3a and MPEF-PV 2238, M1; MPEF-PV 2317, m1);
Orretherium, CPAP-5008 (P3) and CPAP-5007 (m1); Mesungulatum, MACN-RN 03 (M1) and MACN-RN 06
(m1-m2); Coloniatherium, MPEF-PV 2081 (P3), MPEF-PV 2078 (M1) and MPEF-PV 2064 (m1), as interpreted
by Rougier etal.12,15; and Peligrotherium, MPEF-PV 2351, as interpreted by Páez Arango24 and Rougier etal.15.
See also Fig. S3. For comparative purposes the M1/m1 of Leonardus, m1 of Reigitherium, P3 of Reigitherium,
and P3 of Coloniatherium are inverted. Drawings made by A.G.M. cc cingular cusp, ci cingulum, dc distal
cingulum, dlac distolabial cingular cusp, mc mesial cingulum, med metaconid, mlac mesiolabial cingular cusp;
lac labial cingular cusp, mst metastyle, pa paracone, pad paraconid, pcr preprotocristid, pst parastyle, pocr
postprotocristid, popc postparacrista, prd protoconid, prpc preparacrista, stc stylocone.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Reigitherium and Peligrotherium was the main aspect that drives their sister-taxon position in Harper etal.16.
However, comparisons of the tooth characters of both taxa shows remarkable dierences (Fig.8), and mesun-
gulatids (including Peligrotherium and excluding Reigitherium) clearly highlight a morphological trend in the
dentition, with similar tooth crown topologies that increase in size and bunodonty (see below). e presence of
four premolars in Reigitherium (as expressed by Harper etal.16), together with its small size and its distinctive
crown conguration may likely indicate another peculiar radiation of South American mammals, still poorly
known but certainly close to mesungulatids.
Another dierence obtained regarding previous hypotheses13,49 is the paraphyletic condition of dryolestids
at the base of the Dryolestoidea clade (Fig.7). Furthermore, we obtained a “paurodontid” clade (Foxraptor,
Paurodon and Drescheratherium) as sister-group of Meridiolestida as in some previous analyses13,14, instead of
being early diverging dryolestidans49. Our result supports a Dryolestoidea clade as proposed in Rougier etal.13,
that was not obtained in other studies14,31. Certainly, changes in character-scorings, the inclusion of the new
taxon, and the incompleteness of several taxa may explain this result, which may be reversed by new fossils
and larger datasets. Furthermore, the morphological and temporal gaps between meridiolestidans and putative
dryolestidans from the mid-to-Late Cretaceous of Gondwana and the Jurassic-Early Cretaceous of Laurasia
indicate a still undeciphered history. e phylogenetic proposal by Averianov etal.49, in which meridiolestidans
are placed as non-cladotherian trechnotherians, is not supported by our analysis, but larger datasets coupled
with more complete specimens and more plesiomorphic South American meridiolestidans may support dierent
evolutionary scenarios in the future.
Discussion
Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov. from the Late Cretaceous of southern Chile represents the second mammal
species for the Dorotea Formation (Magallanes Basin) and the southernmost record of a Mesozoic dryolestoid.
Within the abundance of meridiolestidan mammals in terrestrial faunal associations of central and northern
Patagonia that predate the end of the Mesozoic, the occurrence of Orretherium in southern Patagonia expands
the distribution of this group further south, being at a palaeolatitude of ~ 54º S during the Late Cretaceous64.
During the Late Cretaceous, since the Campanian, the Magallanes region was palaeogeographically very close
to the West Gondwana margin65 and separated from the amalgamate West Antarctica crustal block (Antarctic
Peninsula)66. However, temporal land bridges through the Scotia Arc could facilitate intercontinental disper-
sion of organisms67. erefore, the Magallanes region and the Antarctic Peninsula could have been part of a
unique domain, bearing a typically Weddellian (Southwestern Gondwana) biota, including gondwanatherians
and meridiolestidans. e Orretherium bearing horizon of the Dorotea Formation (Magallanes Basin) seems
to be coeval with horizons of the Gamma (= Herbert Sound) Member of the Snow Hill Island Formation (late
Campanian-early Maastrichtian, James Ross Basin, Larsen Basin) of the Antarctic Peninsula crustal block. is
palaeogeographic proximity and the record of an Eocene non-therian cladotherian in the Antarctic Peninsula29
suggest a still hidden southern history for this group by the Late Cretaceous to Paleogene.
Orretherium is noticeably similar to three species recovered in the Los Alamitos (Mesungulatum houssayi8),
Allen (M. lamarquensis11), and La Colonia (Coloniatherium cilinskii12) formations and to some extent to the early
Paleocene Peligrotherium, which achieved larger body size and more bunodont cheek teeth16,24,27. e main fea-
tures shared by these taxa include: a well-developed labio-lingually extended mesial and distal cingula on upper
and lower molariforms, with occlusal contact between opposite teeth; the presence of mesio-distally compressed
roots in last premolars and molars; the presence of small extra-roots in the last premolars (at least one extra
root in the p3 of Orretherium and unknown in Mesungulatum); enlargement of the last premolar (unknown in
Mesungulatum); and presence of three premolars (unknown in Mesungulatum, inferred in Orretherium) and
three molars (Figs.8, 9).
e inferred lower postcanine series in Coloniatherium and Mesungulatum were taken from Harper etal.16
and Rougier etal.15 (see Fig.9), which are based on a pool of specimens collected in their respective type locali-
ties. Certainly, they illustrate a reliable postcanine series, also supported by isolated, mostly edentulous jaws
of Coloniatherium12 and the well-preserved and more complete specimens of Peligrotherium15,16,24,27. Data on
Mesungulatum is much more limited than for Coloniatherium and Orretherium, especially regarding the premo-
lar positions. Some considerations can be made on those reconstructed series taking into consideration the in
locis postcanines of Orretherium. We suggest that the inferred m1 (MEPF-PV 2064) and m3 (MPEF-PV 2138)
of Coloniatherium may be of a dierent, closely related taxon, considering that m1 and m2 of Orretherium and
Mesungulatum are remarkably similar in morphology (Fig.9). Specimen MEPF-PV 2064 referred to m1 of Colo‑
niatherium could represent the p3 of another smaller mesungulatid species, considering that is relatively longer
mesio-distally than the molars of Mesungulatum and Orretherium. Similarly, the m3 (MACN-RN 06) referred
to Mesungulatum could represent a last molar of another taxon, perhaps a lower tooth of Paraungulatum or a
still undescribed species, taken into consideration the large size of the paraconid related to the metaconid and
its much smaller size compared to the m1-m2, preserved in locis8 (Fig.9).
Comparison of the P3 is not possible with Mesungulatum since this position is unknown. e P3 of Orrethe‑
rium is more molarized than the P3 of Coloniatherium in having: longer post- and preparacristae; metastyle more
labially placed; distal cingulum more lingually expanded; and a less reduced swelling of the lingual base of the
paracone. In Coloniatherium, the P3 is more bulbous as is also the case of the p312,15. e P3 of Orretherium has
apico-basally shorter mesial and distal cingula than that of Peligrotherium and the main crown cusps are clearly
dened in the Chilean taxon, which is not the case of the latter. e micro-CT images did not reveal extra-roots
in the P3 of Orretherium, diering from the condition of Coloniatherium and Peligrotherium12,15,16.
Data on tooth replacement sequence in mesungulatids is limited mainly because of the lack of juveniles
and more complete specimens. However, previous studies24 mentioned that the last premolar of Peligrotherium
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
has less wear than the penultimate premolar and rst molar, indicating it was replaced. A similar condition is
observed in the lower jaw of Orretherium (Fig.6), marking the boundary between molars and premolars. e
well-documented dental replacement in the lower premolars of Dryolestes follows an alternating pattern in a
sequence: p1–p3–p2–p458, as is also similar in zhangheotheriids and possibly spalacotheriids (although the num-
ber of premolar teeth varies among species), representing the plesiomorphic condition for trechnotherians59,60.
Mesungulatids have a reduced 3p/3m count, contrasting with the 4p/8-9m of dryolestids (e.g., Dryolestes,
Amblotherium, Laolestes41,42,45), the 2-3p/4-5m of paurodontids (Paurodon, Drescheratherium, Foxraptor45,68,69),
the 5p/6-?7m of spalacotheriids (e.g., Spalacolestes, Akidolestes, Lactodens70–72), and the varied count (1-4p/4-6m)
in zhangheotheriids (e.g., 3p/5–6m, Zhangheotherium; p1-3/m6 Maotherium; 4p/4m, Anebodon60,73–75). Consid-
ering four premolars as the plesiomorphic condition for dryolestoids, and assuming that the rst premolar was
lost in mesungulatids, a similar pattern in the eruption sequence between Orretherium and Dryolestes cannot
be completely discarded: (1º) p1 (Dryolestes) = p0 (rst plesiomorphic premolar lost in Orretherium); (2º) p3
(Dryolestes) = p2 (Orretherium); 3º); p2 (Dryolestes) = p1 (not preserved in Orretherium); 4º) p4 (Dryolestes) = p3
(Orretherium). In Dryolestes the last premolar erupted just prior to the m658. Considering the reduced number of
molars (three) in mesungulatids, and that the last molar erupted slightly before the last premolar in Orretherium
(Fig.6), we interpret a heterochronic delay of molar eruption in mesungulatids with regard to basal dryolestoids.
Furthermore, the almost simultaneous eruption of the last premolar with the last molar recalls the condition
of therians76, diering from dryolestids, paurodontids, spalacotheriids, and zhangheotheriids, which possess a
higher number of molars.
Rougier etal.11 was the rst to use Mesungulatidae (erected by Bonaparte8) for a clade encompassing Mesun‑
gulatum, Coloniatherium, Reigitherium, and Peligrotherium; the two latter genera originally allocated within
Reigitheriidae and Peligrotheriidae, respectively. Later, Rougier etal.13 dened Mesungulatoidea, as the last
common ancestor of Reigitherium, Mesungulatum, and Peligrotherium plus all its descendants. A basal place-
ment for Reigitherium among mesungulatoids has been recovered in most phylogenies13,14,31. Considering the
upper molars, Bonaparte23 positioned Reigitherium (he used the holotype MACN-RN 173 as an upper molar,
which is now considered a lower molar16,62) as “derived” from a Mesungulatum pattern. Further, phylogenies of
Averianov etal.49 and Harper etal.16 nested Reigitherium as sister-taxon of Peligrotherium. e few modications
we made in the scoring of some character-states for Reigitherium (see Supplementary Data 1), mostly based on
the recently published specimens16, support previous phylogenetic studies in which it occupies a basal position
within mesungulatoids (Fig.7).
We note discrepancies in the interpretation of some structures of the cheek teeth presented by Harper etal.16.
e upper molars of Reigitherium lack the conspicuous labio-lingually extended mesial and distal cingula present
in Mesungulatum, Coloniatherium, Paraungulathum, Peligrotherium, and Orretherium (based on the molarized
P3), which fully ank the primary trigon (Fig.8). Instead, the bowed and conspicuous pre- and postparacristae
dene the mesial and distal margin of the crown contacting the mesiolabial parastyle and distolabial metastyle,
with the stylocone located in between and slightly lingual to both stylar cusps16 (Fig.8). Only a small lingual
cingulum can be observed in the upper molars of Reigitherium (Fig.8). In addition, with the exception of the
Figure9. Comparison of lower postcanine teeth among selected mesungulatid mammals. (a) Orretherium tzen
gen. et sp. nov. (CPAP-5007, holotype). (b) Coloniatherium cilinskii, premolar-molar sequence reconstructed
upon dierent individuals. (c) Mesungulatum houssayi, molar sequence based on two specimens. Drawings
made by A.G.M.; (b,c) based on Harper etal.16 and Rougier etal.15. ey are scaled by the mesiodistal length of
m2. Scale bar: 5mm.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
neomorphic ectostyles in the labial side of M1 and M2 of Reigitherium, which are autapomorphic16, together with
the lack of complete mesial and distal cingula and the bowed pre- and postparacristae, the crown shape is rather
similar to some non-mesungulatid meridiolestidans, such as Leonardus9,77 or Casamiquelia (a meridiolestidan
of still uncertain anities9,10,15), than to mesungulatids (Fig.8). Regarding the lower molars, Reigitherium diers
from mesungulatids in the absence of: (i) mesial and distal cingula fully extended labiolingually, (ii) a paraco-
nid and a noticeable oblique preparacristid, and (iii) a postparacristid transversely linked with the metaconid.
Moreover, the lower molar crown pattern of Reigitherium has well-developed mesiolabial and distolabial cingular
cusps together with other accessory labial cusps16, which result in distended labial platform representing about
1/3 of the tooth width (Fig.8). Although the mesiolabial and distolabial cingular cusps of Reigitherium are likely
homologous to the labial thickening and cusp (only seen in unworn teeth) of the mesial and distal cingula of
mesungulatids, we must be cautious in considering that they have the same character-state as was scored in
previous studies14,16. In mesungulatids, the mesial and distal cingula form a shelf that extends along most of the
mesial and distal sides of the trigonid and are not restricted to the labial side. e structure of the trigonid in
Reigitherium is also noticeably dierent to that of mesungulatids, being more rectangular than triangular (i.e.,
mesungulatids), plus the lack of the aforementioned traits (i-iii). e number of four premolars in Reigitherium16
versus three in mesungulatids12,13,15,24 and the relative size of the last premolars compared to the size of molars
(mesungulatids have large last premolars) are also traits that dierentiate them.
Consequently, these new interpretations resulted in the basal placement of Reigitherium among mesungula-
toids, contrasting with the last phylogenetic hypothesis presented by Harper etal.16. e interpretations of the
cheek teeth for Reigitherium, as shown in this study, suggest that this taxon may represent a still unrecovered
radiation of very small meridiolestidan mammals, which shared a common ancestor with mesungulatids. If so,
the tendency towards bunodonty was acquired more than once within South American meridiolestidans. Our
result supports the Mesungulatidae clade as constituted by the Late Cretaceous Orretherium, Mesungulatum, and
Coloniatherium, and the early Paleocene Peligrotherium. ese taxa show an increase in size (see Fig.S4), which
is greatest in Peligrotherium, with also an extreme bunodont dentition15,16,24,27. e placement of Paraungulatum
among mesungulatids cannot be ruled out considering the crown shape including extended mesial and distal
cingula10,22, but further specimens are needed to conrm it.
With the initial discovery of the gondwanatherian Magallanodon7, and now the mesungulatid Orretherium,
the Late Cretaceous terrestrial faunas of the Dorotea Formation in southern Chile bolster a supra-generic
mammalian homogeneity for Patagonia just before the end of the Mesozoic Era. Jurassic and Early Cretaceous
mammals from this portion of South America exhibit a distinctive scenario, formed by australosphenidans,
eutriconodonts, amphilestids, and zatherians, which were replaced by the Late Cretaceous dominance of gond-
wanatherians and meridiolestidans, with few putative dryolestid-like forms and possibly multituberculates15.
Taphonomic biases and/or lack of systematic eldwork focused on mammal fossils could be responsible for this
tendency in the fossil record, but the heavily sampled associations in central and northern Argentinian Patagonia
together with this one from southern Chile support a homogeneous mammalian fauna with numerically abun-
dant gondwanatherians and meridiolestidans, over other archaic groups, and eventually therians. Findings of
new fossiliferous sites, not only in Patagonia but also in the Antarctic Peninsula and the rest of South America are
needed to assert if Patagonia summarizes the fossil record of the continent, or even of Gondwana, or if it is only
a small piece of a marvelous history at the dusk of the Mesozoic Era. Certainly, Patagonia was an evolutionary
laboratory in which disparate body sizes and craniodental morphologies appeared and predated the establish-
ment of the Cenozoic faunas dominated by metatherian and eutherian mammals.
Methods
Fossil specimens, geologic context, and radiometric age. e studied specimens of Orretherium
tzen gen. et sp. nov. are housed at the Palaeontological Collection of Antarctica and Patagonia of the Instituto
Antártico Chileno, Punta Arenas city, Chile, under the acronym CPAP. Casts of the specimens were also depos-
ited at the Red Paleontológica U-Chile of the Laboratorio de Ontogenia y Filogenia, Departamento de Biología,
Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile, and at the Museo Nacional de Historia Natural,
Santiago, Chile. Measurements of the studied specimens are detailed in Supplementary Data 1.
e specimens were collected during picking at the Mammal Quarry as well as picking of concentrate gener-
ated aer screen washing of the sediments. e holotype CPAP-5007 was fragmented in several pieces, which
were found during both collecting processes, within an area of around 100 m2. e holotype and hypodigm
specimens of Magallanodon baikashkenke were also collected at the same quarry7.
e Mammal Quarry comprises a fossiliferous horizon located around 30m above the base of Dorotea
Formation exposed in the eastern ank of Río de Las Chinas Valley, Cerro Guido Farm, in Magallanes Region.
Sediments of Dorotea Formation (upper Campanian–Danian) ll the Magallanes (= Austral) Basin which was
a retroarc basin active during the Late Cretaceous-Neogene lapse78,79, and represents a transitional shallow
marine shelf-edge to tide-dominated delta environment80–82. e fossil-bearing mammal horizon comprises
sandy mudstones with ne-grained sandstone lenses, representing a oodplain facies associated to a meandering
uvial deposit80. e age of this level can be constrained to late Campanian-early Maastrichtian on the base of
detrital U–Pb zircon data, which provides values between 71.7 ± 1.2Ma and 74.9 ± 2.1Ma83.
Comparisons with other mammals were based on direct observation of specimens housed at MACN-Pv (RN,
Colección Río Negro; Sección Paleontología Vertebrados, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino
Rivadavia”, Buenos Aires, Argentina) and MPEF-PV (Paleontología de Vertebrados, Museo Paleontológico Egidio
Feruglio, Chubut, Argentina), as well as bibliographical sources cited along the text.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Micro‑CT scanning and processing. e specimens CPAP 5907 and CPAP 5908 were scanned at the
SkyScan 1278 scanner owned by the Plataforma Experimental Bio-CT of the Universidad de Chile (Santiago,
Chile) using a source voltage of 65kV and a current of 718 µA, with a voxel size of 50µm, generating TIFF les
in both cases. ey were scanned together and posteriorly separated in three data packages (CPAP 5907 is in two
parts). e images were segmented with the soware 3D Slicer and three-dimensional models were generated
with the same soware.
Nomenclatural acts. is published work and the nomenclatural acts it contains have been registered in
ZooBank, the proposed online registration system for the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. e
LSID for this publication is urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:63B626DC-E3E5-44C6-85E5-D796AB02343A, and the
LSIDs for the new erected taxa are: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:0C2AF2FA-AAB8-4CBE-AAFC-4082818E8C22
(Orretherium), and urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:FFD7DFEF-4BD3-4109-A5C6-EB9AE70506AC (Orretherium
tzen).
Parsimony phylogenetic analysis. To test the phylogenetic anities of Orretherium tzen gen. et sp. nov.
we added its holotype and hypodigm specimens to the phylogenetic data matrix of Rougier etal.14 plus four
characters and coding changes provided by Harper etal.16. e modications of scorings for Necrolestes by
Wible and Rougier31 were also included. Additionally, character-states were modied for some meridiolestidans
based on our observations (see Supplementary Data 1). e nal data matrix results in 59 terminal taxa and 321
characters of dental, cranial, and postcranial information. e data matrix (Supplementary Data 2) was analyzed
under equally weighted maximum parsimony using TNT v.1.5 (Tree analysis using New Technology)84. For the
analysis 48 characters were considered as additive (ordered): 2, 5, 27, 40, 42, 49, 55, 56, 57, 65, 78, 82, 83, 93, 100,
101, 114, 115, 120, 126, 134, 144, 146, 155, 171, 178, 184, 186, 187, 201, 207, 209, 228, 230, 231, 237, 240, 242,
244, 273, 276, 277, 281, 287, 289, 291, 294, and 299 (sensu Rougier etal.13). e search strategies started using
traditional heuristic search of 1000 replicates of Wagner tree followed by TBR branch swapping. e best trees
obtained were subjected to a nal round of TBR branch swapping to nd all MPTs. Decay indices (Bremer sup-
port values) for nodes are provided in Supplementary Data 1.
Data availability
Additional information, including the dataset analysed in this study is available in the Supplementary Informa-
tion les.
Received: 30 December 2020; Accepted: 24 March 2021
References
1. Simpson, G. G. Splendid Isolation: e curious history of South American mammals (Yale University Press, 1980).
2. Pascual, R. & Ortiz-Jaureguizar, E. e Gondwanan and South American episodes: Two major moments in the history of South
American mammals. J. Mammal. Evol. 14, 75–137 (2007).
3. Goin, F. J., Woodburne, M. O., Zimicz, A. N., Martin, G. M. & Chornogubsky, L. A Brief History of South American Metatherians:
Evolutionary Contexts and Intercontinental Dispersas 245 (Springer, 2016).
4. Bonaparte, J. F. A new and unusual Late Cretaceous mammal from Patagonia. J. Vert. Paleont. 6, 264–270 (1986).
5. Krause, D. W. & Bonaparte, J. F. Superfamily Gondwanatherioidea: A previously unrecognized radiation of multituberculate
mammals in South America. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90, 9379–9383 (1993).
6. Gurovich, Y. Additional specimens of sudamericid (Gondwanatheria) mammals from the Early Paleocene of Argentina. Palaeon‑
tology 51, 1069–1089 (2008).
7. Goin, F. J. et al. First Mesozoic mammal from Chile: e southernmost record of a Late Cretaceous gondwanatherian. Bol. Mus.
Nac. Hist. Nat. Chile 69, 5–31 (2020).
8. Bonaparte, J. F. Sobre Mesungulatum houssayi y nuevos mamíferos cretácicos de Patagonia. 4° Congreso Argentino de Paleontología
y Bioestratigrafía, Mendoza, Actas 2, 48–61 (1986a).
9. Bonaparte, J. F. New Late Cretaceous mammals from the Los Alamitos Formation, northern Patagonia. Nat. Geol. Res. 6, 63–93
(1990).
10. Bonaparte, J. F. New Dryolestida (eria) from the Late Cretaceous of Los Alamitos, Argentina, and paleogeographical comments.
Neues Jahrb. Geol. Paläontol. Abh. 224, 339–371 (2002).
11. Rougier, G. W., Chornogubsky, L., Casadio, S., Paéz Arango, N. & Giallombardo, A. Mammals from the Allen Formation, Late
Cretaceous Argentina. Cretac. Res. 30, 223–238 (2009).
12. Rougier, G. W., Forasiepi, A. M., Hill, R. V. & Novacek, M. J. New mammalian remains from the Late Cretaceous La Colonia
Formation, Patagonia Argentina. Acta Palaeontol. Pol. 54, 195–212 (2009).
13. Rougier, G. W., Apesteguía, S. & Gaetano, L. C. Highly specialized mammalian skulls from the Late Cretaceous of South America.
Nature 479, 98–102 (2011).
14. Rougier, G. W., Wible, J. R., Beck, R. M. D. & Apesteguía, S. e Miocene mammal Necrolestes demonstrates the survival of a
Mesozoic nontherian lineage into the late Cenozoic of South America. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 20053–20058 (2012).
15. Rougier, G. W., Martinelli, A. G. & Forasiepi, A. M. Mesozoic Mammals from South America and eir Forerunners. Springer
Earth System Sci. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ 978-3- 030- 63862-7 (2021).
16. Harper, T., Parras, A. & Rougier, G. W. Reigitherium (Meridiolestida, Mesungulatoidea) an enigmatic Late Cretaceous mammal
from Patagonia, Argentina: morphology, anities, and dental evolution. J. Mammal. Evol. 26, 447–478 (2019).
17. Krause, D. W. et al. Skeleton of Cretaceous mammal from Madagascar reects long-term insularity. Nature 581, 421–427 (2020).
18. Crompton, A. W. e origin of the tribosphenic molar in Early Mammals (eds. Kermack, D. M. & Kermack, K. A.), 65–87, Zool.
J. Linnean Soc. 50, suppl. 1 (1971).
19. Davis, B. Evolution of the tribosphenic molar pattern in early mammals, with comments on the “dual-origin” hypothesis. J. Mam ‑
mal. Evol. 18, 227–224 (2011).
20. Goin, F. J., Carlini, A. A. & Pascual, R. Un probable marsupial del Cretácico tardío del Norte de Patagonia, Argentina. 4° Congreso
Argentino de Paleontología y Bioestratigrafía, Mendoza, Actas 2, 43–47 (1986).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
21. Forasiepi, A. M., Coria, R. A., Hurum, J. & Currie, P. J. First dryolestoid (Mammalia, Dryolestida) dentary from the Coniacian of
Patagonia, Argentina. Ameghiniana 49, 497–504 (2012).
22. Chimento, N. R., Agnolin, F. L. & Novas, F. E. e Patagonian fossil mammal Necrolestes: a Neogene survivor of Dryolestoidea.
Rev. Mus. Argent. Cienc. Nat. B. Rivadavia 14,261–306 (2012).
23. Bonaparte, J. F. Approach to the signicance of the Late Cretaceous mammals of South America. Berlin Geowiss. Abt. E 13, 31–44
(1994).
24. Páez Arango, N. Dental and craniomandibular anatomy of Peligrotherium tropicalis: t he evolutionary radiation of South American
dryolestoid mammals. Unpublished Master esis, University of Louisville, 107 p. (2008).
25. Grossnickle, D. M., Smith, S. M. & Wilson, G. P. Untangling the multiple ecological radiations of early mammals. Trends Ecol.
Evol. 34, 936–949 (2019).
26. Bonaparte, J. F., Van Valen, L. M. & Kramarz, A. L. Fauna local de Punta Peligro, Paleoceno Inferior, de la Provincia de Chubut,
Patagonia Argentina. Evol. Monogr. 14, 1–61 (1993).
27. Gelfo, J. N. & Pascual, R. Peligrotherium tropicalis (Mammalia, Dryolestida) from the Early Paleocene of Patagonia, a survival from
a Mesozoic Gondwanan radiation. Geodiversitas 23, 369–379 (2001).
28. Goin, F. J. et al. Mamíferos del Banco Negro Inferior, Formación Salamanca, Cuenca del Golfo San Jorge. Relatorio: Geología y
Recursos Naturales de la Provincia del Chubut, XXI Congreso Geológico Argentino, Puerto Madryn (in press).
29. Martinelli, A. G., Chornogubsky, L., Abello, A., Goin, F. J. & Reguero, M. e rst non-therian dryolestoid from Antarctica. 2014
SCAR Open Science Conference, Auckland, Abstracts, p. 432 (2014).
30. Goin, F. J. et al. Los Metatheria sudamericanos de comienzos del Neógeno (Mioceno temprano, Edad-Mamífero Colhuehuapense).
Parte 1: Introducción, Didelphimorphia y Sparassodonta. Ameghiniana 44, 29–71 (2007).
31. Wible, J. R. & Rougier, G. W. Craniomandibular anatomy of the subterranean meridolestidan Necrolestes patagonensis Ameghino,
1891 (Mammalia, Cladotheria) from the Early Miocene of Patagonia. Ann. Carnegie Mus. 84, 183–251 (2017).
32. Mourier, T. et al. Découverte de de restes dinosauriens et mammalien d’âge crétacé supérieur à la base des couches rouges du
synclinal de Bagua (Andes nord-péruviennes): Aspects stratigraphiques, sédimentologiques et paléogéographiques concernant
la régression ni-Crétacée. Bull. Soc. Géol. France 2, 171–175 (1986).
33. Bertini, R. J., Marshall, L. G., Gayet, M. & Brito, P. Vertebrate faunas from the Adamantina and Marilia formations (upper Bauru
Group, Late Cretaceous, Brazil) in their stratigraphic and paleobiogeographic context. Neues Jahrb. Geol. Paläontol. Abh. 188,
71–101 (1993).
34. Gayet, M. et al. Middle Maastrichtian vertebrates (shes, amphibians, dinosaurs and other reptiles, mammals) from Pajcha Pata
(Bolivia). Biostratigraphic, palaeoecologic and palaeobiogeographic implications. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 169,
39–68 (2001).
35. Castro, M. C. et al. A Late Cretaceous mammal from Brazil and the rst radioisotopic age for the Bauru Group. R. Soc. Open Sci.
5, 180482. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1098/ rsos. 180482 (2018).
36. McKenna, M. C. Toward a phylogenetic classication of the Mammalia in Phylogeny of the Primates (eds. Luckett W. P. & Szalay
F. S.), 21–46, Plenum Press, New York (1975).
37. Rougier, G. W., Wible, J. R. & Novacek, M. J. Implications of Deltatheridium specimens for early marsupial history. Nature 396,
459–463 (1998).
38. Kielan-Jaworowska, Z., Cifelli, R. L. & Luo, Z.-X. Mammals from the age of dinosaurs. Origins, evolution, and structure 630 (Colum-
bia University Press, 2004).
39. Marsh, O. C. Fossil mammal from the Jurassic of the Rocky Mountains. Am. J. Sci. 15, 459 (1878).
40. Marsh, O. C. Notice of new Jurassic mammals. Am. J. Sci. 20, 396–398 (1879).
41. Simpson, G. G. Mesozoic Mammalia. VI. Genera of Morrison pantotheres. Am. J. Sci. 13, 409–416 (1927).
42. Martin, T. Dryolestidae (Dryolestoidea, Mammalia) aus dem Oberen Jura von Portugal. Abh. senckenberg. naturforsch. Ges. 550,
1–119 (1999).
43. Averianov, A. O., Martin, T. & Lopatin, A. e oldest dryolestid mammal from the Middle Jurassic of Siberia. J. Vert. Paleont. 34,
924–931 (2014).
44. Sigogneau-Russell, D. Nouveaux Mammifères theriens du Crétacé Inférieur du Maroc. C. R. Acad. Sci. 313, 279–285 (1991).
45. Simpson, G. G. American mesozoic mammalia. Memoirs Peabody Mus. 3, 1–235 (1929).
46. Prothero, D. R. New Jurasic mammals from Como Blu, Wyoming, and the interrelationships of non-tribosphenic eria. Bull.
Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 167, 277–325 (1981).
47. Krebs, B. Das Skelett von Henkelotherium guimarotae gen. et sp. nov., (Eupantotheria, Mammalia) aus dem Oberen Jura von
Portugal. Berl. geowiss. Abh. A. 133, 1–121 (1991).
48. Ensom, P. C. & Sigogneau-Russell, D. New dryolestoid mammals from the basal Cretaceous Purbeck Limestone group of southern
England. Palaeontology 41, 35–55 (1998).
49. Averianov, A. O., Martin, T. & Lopatin, A. V. A new phylogeny for basal Trechnotheria and Cladotheria and anities of South
American endemic Late Cretaceous mammals. Naturwissenschaen 100, 311–326 (2013).
50. Bonaparte, J. F. & Soria, M. F. Nota sobre el primer mamífero del Cretácico Argentino, Campaniano-Maastrichtiano (Condylarthra).
Ameghiniana 21, 178–183 (1985).
51. Averianov, A. O. Early Cretaceous “symmetrodont”mammal Gobiotheriodon from Mongolia and the classication of “Symmetro-
donta”. Acta Palaeont. Pol. 47, 705–716 (2002).
52. Gaetano, L. C., Marsicano, C. A. & Rougier, G. W. A revision of the putative Late Cretaceous triconodonts from South America.
Cretac. Res. 46, 90–100 (2013).
53. Bonaparte, J. F. & Migale, L. A. Protomamíferos y mamíferos Mesozoicos de América del Sur. 441 pp. (Fundación de Historia
Natural Felix de Azara, Buenos Aires, 2015).
54. Linnaeus, C. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, dierentiis,
synonymis, locis. Vol. 1: Regnum animale. Editio decima, reformata. Laurentius Salvius, Stockholm (1758).
55. Zeller, U. Die Entwicklung und Morphologie des Schädels von Ornithorhynchus (Mammalia: Prototheria: Monotremata). Abh.
Senckenberg. naturf. Ges. 545, 1–188 (1989).
56. Tomo, S., Ogita, M. & Tomo, I. Development of mandibular cartilages in the rat. Anat. Rec. 249, 233–239 (1997).
57. Butler, P. M. & Krebs, B. A pantotherian milk dentition. Paläont. Z. 47, 256–258 (1973).
58. Martin, T. Tooth replacement in Late Jurassic Dryolestidae (Eupantotheria, Mammalia). J. Mamm. Evol. 4, 1–18 (1997).
59. Luo, Z.-X., Kielan-Jaworowska, Z. & Cifelli, R. L. Evolution of dental replacement in mammals in Fanfare for an Uncommon
Paleontologist ‑ Festschri in Honor of Dr. Malcolm C. McKenna (eds. Dawson, M.R & Lillegraven, J. A.), 159–175, Bull. Carnegie
Mus. Nat. Hist. 36 (2004).
60. Bi, S. et al. A new symmetrodont mammal (Trechnotheria: Zhangheotheriidae) from the Early Cretaceous of China and trech-
notherian character evolution. Sci. Rep. 6, 26668. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ srep2 6668 (2016).
61. O wen, R. On the Anatomy of Vertebrates Vol. III (Mammals, 1868).
62. Pascual, R., González, P., Ardolino, A. & Puerta, P. F. A highly derived docodont from the Patagonian Late Cretaceous: evolutionary
implications for Gondwanan mammals. Geodiversitas 22, 395–414 (2000).
63. O’Meara, R. N. & ompson, R. S. Were there Miocene meridolestidans? Assessing the phylogenetic placement of Necrolestes
patagonensis and the presence of a 40 million year merdiolestidan ghost lineage. J. Mammal. Evol. 21, 271–284 (2014).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol.:(0123456789)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
64. van Hinsbergen, D. J. J. et al. A paleolatitude calculator for paleoclimate studies. PLoS ONE 10(6), e0126946. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1371/ journ al. pone. 01269 46 (2015).
65. Poblete, F. et al. Late Cretaceous–early Eocene counterclockwise rotation of the Fueguian Andes and evolution of the Patagonia-
Antarctic Peninsula system. Tectonophysics https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tecto. 2015. 11. 025 (2016).
66. Jordan, T. A., Riley, T. R. & Siddoway, C. S. e geological history and evolution of West Antarctica. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1,
117–133. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s43017- 019- 0013-6 (2020).
67. Reguero, M., Goin, F., Hospitaleche, C. A., Dutra, T. & Marenssi, S. Late Cretaceous/Paleogene West Antarctica Terrestrial Biota
and Its Intercontinental Anities 120 (Springer, 2013).
68. Krebs, B. Drescheratherium acutum gen. et sp. nov., ein neuer Eupantotherier (Mammalia) aus dem Oberen Jura von Portugal.
Berl. geowiss. Abh. E. 28, 91–111 (1998).
69. Bakker, R. T. & Carpenter, K. A new latest Jurassic vertebrate fauna from the highest levels of the Morrison Formation at Como
Blu, Wyoming, with comments on Morrison biochronology. Part III. e mammals: A new multituberculate and a new paurodont.
Hunteria 2, 2–8 (1990).
70. Cifelli, R. L. & Madsen, S. K. Spalacotheriid symmetrodonts (Mammalia) from the medial Cretaceous (upper Albian or lower
Cenomanian) Mussentuchit local fauna, Cedar Mountain Formation, Utah, USA. Geodiversitas 21, 167–214 (1999).
71. Li, G. & Luo, Z.-X. A Cretaceous symmetrodont therian with some monotreme-like postcranial features. Nature 439, 195–200
(2006).
72. Han, G. & Meng, J. A new spalacolestine mammal from the Early Cretaceous Jehol Biota and implications for the morphology,
phylogeny, and palaeobiology of Laurasian ‘symmetrodontans’. Zool. J. Linnean Soc. 178, 343–380 (2016).
73. Hu, Y.-M., Wang, Y.-Q., Luo, Z.-X. & Li, C.-K. A new symmetrodont mammal from China and its implications for mammalian
evolution. Nature 390, 137–142 (1997).
74. Rougier, G. W., Ji, Q. & Novacek, M. J. A new symmetrodont mammal with fur impressions from the Mesozoic of China. Acta
Geol. Sin. 77, 7–14 (2003).
75. Luo, Z.-X. & Ji, Q. New study on dental and skeletal features of the Cretaceous “symmetrodontan” mammal Zhangheotherium. J.
Mamm. Evol. 12, 337–357 (2005).
76. Luckett, W. P. An ontogenetic assessment of dental homologies in therian mammals in Mammal Phylogeny, Volume 2–Mesozoic
Dierentiation, Multituberculates, Monotremes, Early erians, and Marsupials (eds. Szalay, F. S., Novacek, M. J. & McKenna, M.
C.), 182–204, Springer-Verlag, Inc. (1993).
77. Chornogubsky, L. New remains of the dryolestoid mammal Leonardus cuspidatus from the Los Alamitos Formation (Late Creta-
ceous, Argentina). Paläontol. Z. 85, 343–350 (2011).
78. Romans, B. W. et al. Evolution of deep-water stratigraphic architecture, Magallanes Basin. Chile. Mar. Pet. Geol. 28, 612–628 (2011).
79. Cuitiño, J. I., Varela, A. N., Ghiglione, M. C., Richiano, S. & Poiré, D. G. e Austral-Magallanes Basin (southern Patagonia): A
synthesis of its stratigraphy and evolution. Lat. Am. J. Sedimentol. Basin Anal. 26, 155–166 (2019).
80. Manríquez, L. M., Lavina, E. L., Fernández, R. A., Trevisan, C. & Leppe, M. A. Campanian-Maastrichtian and Eocene stratigraphic
architecture, facies analysis, and paleoenvironmental evolution of the northern Magallanes Basin (Chilean Patagonia). J. South
Am. Earth Sci. 93, 102–118 (2019).
81. George, S. W. et al. Chronology of deposition and unconformity development across the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary, Magal-
lanes-Austral basin, Patagonian Andes. J. South Am. Earth Sci. 97, 102237 (2020).
82. Rivera, H. A. et al. Tectonic controls on the Maastrichtian-Danian transgression in the Magallanes-Austral foreland basin (Chile):
Implications for the growth of the Southern Patagonian Andes. Sediment. Geol. 403, 105645 (2020).
83. Gutiérrez, N. M. et al. Tectonic events reected by palaeocurrents, zircon geochronology, and palaeobotany in the Sierra Baguales
of Chilean Patagonia. Tectonophysics 695, 76–99 (2017).
84. Golobo, P. A. & Catalano, S. A. TNT version 1.5, including a full implementation of phylogenetic morphometrics. Cladistics 32,
221–238 (2016).
85. Scotese, C. R. Map Folio 17, Late Cretaceous, (Maastrichtian, 68 Ma), PALEOMAP PaleoAtlas for ArcGIS, vol 2, Cretaceous
Paleogeographic, Paleoclimatic and Plate Tectonic Reconstructions. PALEOMAP Project, Evanston, IL (2013).
Acknowledgements
We thank Bárbara Aravena, Catalina Ferrada, Cristine Trevisan, Dániel Bajor, Felipe Suazo, Guillermo Aguirreza-
bala, Héctor Mansilla, Héctor Ortiz, Jhonatan Alarcón, José A. Palma, Juan Pablo Pino, Leslie M. E. Manríquez,
Luna Núnéz, Rodrigo Otero, Marcelo Miñana, Roy A. Fernández, Sarah Davis, Valentina Poblete, Verónica Milla,
and Vicente Muñoz for their valuable eld assistance. We also thank Javier Reinoso for the assistance with the
picking on concentrates. INACH and Estancia Cerro Guido provide us with invaluable logistic support. We
also thank to Daniela Poblete of the Plataforma Experimental Bio-CT of the Universidad de Chile for allowing
the access and assistance with the CT equipment. For access to collection we are grateful to Eduardo Ruigómez
(MPEF). AGM especially acknowledge sustaining discussions on South American Mesozoic mammals with
Guillermo W. Rougier, Analía M. Forasiepi and the late José F. Bonaparte during the last decades. We also thank
the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia” (Buenos Aires), the Conicet (Argentina),
the Fundación Felix de Azara, Universidad de Maimónides (Buenos Aires), and the Museo Municipal de Cien-
cias Naturales “Carlos Ameghino” (Mercedes). is research was supported by an Anillo Grant ACT-172099
(PIA-ANID Chile) and a FONDECYT grant N° 1151389 “Paleogeographic patterns v/s climate change in South
America and the Antarctic Peninsula during the latest Cretaceous: A possible explanation for the origin of the
Austral biota?”. We appreciate the comments made by the reviewers omas Martin and Alexander Averianov
and the Editor Robin Beck that considerably improved the text.
Author contributions
A.G.M., S.S.-A. and A.O.V. planned and designed the study and research; A.G.M. wrote the main manuscript text
and run the phylogenetic analyses; A.G.M., S.S.-A. and P.H.M.F. prepared all the gures; all authors contributed
to write parts of the manuscript text; all authors discussed and reviewed the nal manuscript.
Competing interests
e authors declare no competing interests.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Vol:.(1234567890)
Scientic Reports | (2021) 11:7594 |
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Additional information
Supplementary Information e online version contains supplementary material available at https:// doi. org/
10. 1038/ s41598- 021- 87245-4.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.G.M.orS.S.-A.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional aliations.
Open Access is article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or
format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the
Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. e images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the
material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from
the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/.
© e Author(s) 2021
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com