Content uploaded by Zhe-Xi Luo
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Zhe-Xi Luo
Content may be subject to copyright.
LETTER doi:10.1038/nature10291
A Jurassic eutherian mammal and divergence of
marsupials and placentals
Zhe-Xi Luo
1
, Chong-Xi Yuan
2
, Qing-Jin Meng
3
& Qiang Ji
2
Placentals are the most abundant mammals that have diversified
into every niche for vertebrates and dominated the world’s terrestrial
biotas in the Cenozoic. A critical event in mammalian history is the
divergence of eutherians, the clade inclusive of all living placentals,
from the metatherian–marsupial clade
1–8
.Herewereportthe
discovery of a new eutherian of 160Myr from the Jurassic of
China, which extends the first appearance of the eutherian–placental
clade by about 35Myr from the previous record, reducing and
resolving a discrepancy between the previous fossil record and the
molecular estimate for the placental–marsupial divergence
9–13
.This
mammal has scansorial forelimb features, and provides the ancestral
condition for dental and other anatomical features of eutherians.
Class Mammalia
Clade Boreosphenida
14
Infraclass Eutheria
Order and family incertae sedis
Juramaia sinensis
gen. et sp. nov.
Etymology. Jura, Jurassic; maia, mother, in reference to placental
affinities; sinensis, of China. The binomial refers to ‘Jurassic mother
from China’.
Holotype. Beijing Museum of Natural History (BMNH) PM1143
(Fig. 1) is preserved with full dentition, incomplete skull, anterior part
of postcranial skeleton and residual soft tissues, such as hairs.
Locality and age. The Daxigou site of Jianchang County of Liaoning
Province in the Middle–Late Jurassic Tiaojishan formation. The forma-
tion was datedby the SHRIMP U–Pb methodon zircon at 164–165 Myr
in the neighbouring Ningcheng area
15
and its stratigraphic equivalent
dated by the
40
Ar/
39
Ar method on sanidines at 160.760.4 Myr in the
Beipiao area
16
(Supplementary Information).
Diagnosis. I
5
–C
1
–P
5
–M
3
/I
4
–C
1
–P
5
–M
3
(Fig. 2), with identical for-
mula as the eutherian Eomaia
3
and typical count of five premolars
and three molars for Cretaceous eutherians
1
. Molars tribosphenic,
with derived eutherian features of distinctive paraconule, incipient
metaconule (M2 only), long preprotocrista past the paracone and long
postprotocrista past the metacone. The postmetacrista and the
extended postprotocrista of an upper molar form two separate ranks
of shearing crests that pass the prevallid crest (paracristid) of the
succeeding lower molar (Fig. 3). The preparacrista and the preproto-
crista form two ranks of shearing crests that pass the postvallid crest
(protocristid) of the preceding lower molar. This kind of stepwise or
en-echelon shearing is much better developed in Juramaia than in
most metatherians
17
. Distinct from metatherians in lacking the vertical
keel of the paraconid and the hypoconulid shelf
18,19
and in lacking the
close approximation of the hypoconulid and the entoconid as in
Sinodelphys
7
or the twinning of these cusps in other metatherians
6
.
Differs from metatherians (except Sinodelphys) in lacking the inflected
mandibular angle and flat ventral surface ofthe angle. Juramaia sinensis
is similar to many eutherians in having the posterior mental foramen of
the mandible below the p4–p5 junction, by contrast to metatherians
that have the posterior mental foramen below m1. Juramaia sinensis is
similar to several Cretaceous eutherians in retaining a deciduous dP3 in
the middle of the right premolar series
1
but differs from metatherians
wherein replacement only occurs at the ultimate premolar position
6,20
.
Juramaia sinensis differs from all australosphenidans in lacking the
continuous mesial cingulid and the wrapping cingulid, and from most
australosphenidan and pseudotribosphenidan mammals in lacking the
postdentary trough on the mandible
14,21–24
. Among the earliest-known
eutherians, Juramaia sinensis differs from Eomaia in having a two-
rooted upper canine
3
, and from Acristatherium in having different
numbers of upper and lower incisors, a larger M3 and absence of
1
Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA.
2
Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing 100037, China.
3
Beijing Museum of Natural History, Beijing 100050, China.
c
P3–dP3
P5
M1–3
m3
cv2
oc
ag
dc
hh
ra
sn
ul
ManusJu
M1–3
p5
ph
P3–dP3
P2
C
I1–5
cod
cl ac cos
cv7 hh ph
tv1
enf ecc
ra mc
ca
ul
ht
r13
10 mm10 mm
5 mm 3 mm
Scaphoid
Hamate
a
cd
b
r8
ol
r2
sp
cv1
tv13
Figure 1
|
Holotype specimen of
Juramaia sinensis
, Beijing Museum of
Natural History (BMNH) PM1343B. a,b, Specimen photograph and
morphological identification. c, Restoration of the partly preserved skeleton
and skull. d, Restoration of hand (ventral view; alignment of incomplete and
scattered carpals is conjectural). Abbreviations: ac, acromion (scapula); ag,
angular process (dentary); C, c, upper or lower canine; ca, carpals; cl, clavicle;
cod, coronoid (dentary); cos, coracoid process (scapula); cv1–7, cervical
vertebrae 1–7; dc, dentary condyle; ecc, ectepicondyle; enf, entepicondylar
foramen; hh, humeral head; ht, humeral trochlea; I1–5, upper incisors 1–5; Ju,
jugal; M, m, upper or lower molar; manus, hand; mc1–5, metacarpals 1–5; oc,
occipital condyles; ol, olecranon process; P1–5, upper premolars 1–5; ph,
phalanges; r1–13; thoracic ribs 1–13; ra, radius; sn, semilunar notch (ulna); sp.,
scapular spine; tv1–13, thoracic vertebrae 1–13; ul, ulna.
442 | NATURE | VOL 476 | 25 AUGUST 2011
Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
©2011
diastemata between the anterior upper premolars
6
. It differs from
Prokennalestes,Murtoilestes and Acristatherium in having a much
lower protocone and longer postprotocrista
1,25,26
,fromallknown
Early Cretaceous eutherians in a deeper ectoflexus on P5–M2, and from
Montanalestes in having larger lower premolars 3 and 4. See
Supplementary Information for full differential diagnosis and summary
of morphological distinction from other Mesozoic mammal groups.
Our study has firmly placed Juramaia among the basal-most
eutherians, the Mesozoic relatives to the Cenozoic placental mammals
(Fig. 3), by phylogenetic analyses of two independent morphological
data sets (Supplementary Information). Juramaia is more closely
related to extant placentals than all metatherians of the Cretaceous
including Sinodelphys and Deltatheridium. In the first parsimony ana-
lysis of a comprehensive data set of all Mesozoic mammaliaform
clades
24
,Juramaia and Montanalestes form an unresolved polytomy
with the Eomaia–Prokennalestes clade and other eutherians (Fig. 3,
left). Placement of Juramaia with eutherians is corroborated by ana-
lysis of a second and complementary data set of the largest sampling of
Cretaceous eutherians
4,5
;Juramaia is placed in a more crown-ward
position than the Early Cretaceous eutherian Acristatherium
5
(Sup-
plementary Information). Our analysis by the mammaliaform data set
reaffirms that the autralosphenidan mammals
21
are not eutherians
14
;
they represent a separate lineage of Mesozoic mammalian diversity,
and are stem taxa to monotremes
1,14
, as corroborated by most of the
recent independent studies
4,12,22–24
.
Juramaia, at an age of 160 Myr (refs 15, 16), establishes a much older
geological time for the split of the metatherian–marsupial and the
eutherian–placental lineages than previously shown by the fossil
record. The previously earliest eutherian record is Eomaia and the
metatherian record is Sinodelphys, both about 125 Myr (refs 3, 7).
The next oldest eutherian with a direct geochronological dating is
Acristatherium at 123 Myr (ref. 5). Juramaia extends the first appear-
ance of eutherians from these previous records by about 35 Myr.
Because Juramaia is unambiguously placed on the placental side of
the marsupial–placental divergence, the marsupial–placental diver-
gence must have occurred before Juramaia. Therefore this new fossil
serves to re-set the minimal age at 160Myr for the basal-most diver-
sification of marsupials and placentals, the two clades that collectively
make up 99.9% of all living mammals and are very important in
terrestrial ecosystems, especially after the Cretaceous/Tertiary extinc-
tion of non-avian dinosaurs.
Timing of the divergence of marsupials and placentals is critical for
calibrating the rates of evolution in therian mammals, especially for
molecular evolutionary studies and comparative genomics
2,10,13
.
Previously, some molecular time estimates for marsupial and placental
divergence postulated significantly older windows for this divergence
than the then-oldest fossil records
3,7
. However, these and other pre-
vious molecular estimates differed widely. Several were compatible
with relatively young placental intraordinal divergences (for example,
ref. 10), and just about all showed wide error margins (reviewed by
ab
c
h
g
ef
i
d
Stylocone
Ectoexus
Post-
Metacrista
cusp (C)
Pre-parastyle
Paracone
Preprotocrista
1 mm
Paraconule
Anterior
(mesial)
Lateral (labial)
Protocone
Protoconal
swelling Protocone
Pre-
parastyle
P5
P3 P5
P4
tallest
dP3
p2 p4
mf
3 mm
I5
I3
i4
C
M1
M3
cod
dc
ag
m3
m1
P4P3
Paracone
M1 M2 M3
Post-
protocrista
Metacone
2 mm
2 mm
Parastyle
Figure 2
|
Dental and mandibular features of
Juramaia sinensis
(BMNH
PM1343B). a–d, Right upper M2 in mesial, occlusal, labial and distal views
(composite restoration from both the right and the left sides). e, Stereo
photographs of right premolars and molars. f, Stereo photographs of left
premolars and molars. g, Right P3–M3 in occlusal view. h, Left upper dentition
restoration in labial view. i, Left lower dentition (restoration) and mandible.
Grey-shaded areas represent reconstruction from incomplete bone or tooth
structure or mould outline in matrix. Abbreviations: ag, angular process; cod,
coronoid process of dentary; dc; dentary condyle; M, m, upper and lower
molars; mf, mental foramen; P, p, upper and lower premolars; dP3, deciduous
P3 in situ. Terminology of tribosphenic molar follows Fig. 11.1 of ref. 1.
LETTER RESEARCH
25 AUGUST 2011 | VOL 476 | NATURE | 443
Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
©2011
ref. 13). Regarding the marsupial–placental split, recent molecular rate
studies provided estimates of 147.7 65.5 Myr (ref. 11), or 160 Myr
(median) with a 95% highest posterior distribution of 143–178 Myr
(ref. 12), or a window of 193–186 Myr (ref. 9). This new eutherian fossil
age is now similar to the age of placentals at 160 Myr with 95%
posterior distribution from 143 to 178 Myr by the latest molecular
estimate
12
. The age of Juramaia has now set the minimal divergence
time by the fossilto coincide with the range ofmolecular time estimates,
serving as a corroboration of thenewest fossil record with themolecular
clock of evolution. The 160-Myr-old Juramaia also has important
implications for mammalian evolution as a whole. Eutherian mammals
are nested in the more inclusive Mesozoic boreosphenidan clade (Fig.3,
node 1), for which the previously earliest record had been entirely Early
Cretaceous
1,27
. The eutherian Juramaia requires that the ghost-lineages
of boreosphenid and cladotherian mammals would also extend to the
Middle Jurassic. Therefore the magnitude of the mammalian faunal
turnover from the Early to Middle Jurassic is greater than previously
known, and the Early–Middle Jurassic is a critical transition for the
appearance of more of the derived mammalian clades
1,2
.
Phylogenetically, Juramaia sinensis is one of the basal-most eutherians
and it is currently the earliest-known eutherian (Fig. 3); therefore,
this fossil provides crucial inferences on the ancestral features of all
eutherians. Juramaia weighed about 15–17 g, and was an insectivore
based on tooth morphology. Its long preprotocrista (Fig. 2c, d) and
postprotocrista (Fig. 3e) enhance the en-echelon shearing in which
more than one crest of the upper molar, arranged in stepwise pattern,
shears past the surfaces of the trigonid of the lower molar. This is
especially prominent on the posterior face of the upper molar (post-
vallum) (Fig. 3e–i), an important derived character of eutherians com-
pared with other tribosphenic mammals
17
(Fig. 3).
The forelimb and shoulder girdle of Juramaiashow several eutherian
apomorphies and lack such metatherian features as the supra-scapular
notch and the expanded ectepicondylar shelf on the humerus for the
supinator muscle
7,28,29
. Its manual phalanges suggest a scansorial
adaptation (Fig. 1d). Proximal phalanges of three digits show protuber-
ances of the annular ligament of the digital flexor muscle tendon,
suggesting a gripping capability of the hand, common in scansorial
extant mammals
3,7
. In the third manual digit, the proximal phalanx is
2.77 mm long, the intermediate phalanx is 2.39mm and the metacarpal
is 4.26 mm. The phalangeal index ((proximal 1intermediate pha-
langes)/metacarpal 3100) (ref. 30) is 121 for Juramaia.Mostextant
mammals with this index value are arboreal. The proximal phalangeal
index (proximal/intermediate phalanges 3100) is 65 for Juramaia.
Extant placental carnivorans, primates and dermopterans with this
value also tend to be arborealists, but rodents with this value are all
terrestrial
30
. Compared with fossil mammals of the Early Cretaceous
Yixian formation, phalangeal indices of Juramaia are between Eomaia
scansoria, a scansorial mammal, and the eutriconodont Jeholodens
jenkinsi, which is interpreted to be terrestrial
7
. In its habitat preference,
Juramaia should be similar to the eutherian Eomaia scansoria,tothe
Maastrichtian
Late
Monotremataformes
Kielantherium
Peramus
Juramaia (160 Myr)
Dryolestes
Montanalestes
Prokennalestes
Murtoilestes
Eomaia (125 Myr)
Sinodelphys (125 Myr)
Holoclemensia
Deltatheridium
Atokatheriidum
Australosphenidans
Cretaceous
EarlyLateMiddle
JurassicTriassic
Early
Campanian
Santonian
Coniacian
Turonian
Cenomanian
Albian
Aptian
Barremian
125
145.5
161.2
175.6
199.6
Myr
Theriamorpha
Theriiformes
Trechnotheria
Hauterivian
Valanginian
Berriasian
Tithonian
Kimmeridgian
Oxfordian
Callovian
Bathonian
Bajocian
Aalenian
Toarcian
Pliensbachian
Sinemurian
Hettangian
99.6
65.5
Myr
Cenozoic
monotremes
Cenozoic
placentals
Late
Cretaceous
eutherians
Late
Cretaceous
metatherians
Cenozoic
marsupials 1 cm 2 mm
2 mm
A Didelphis
B Alphadon
C Deltatheridium
D Kielantherium
E Juramaia
F Murtoilestes
G Kennalestes
H Gypsonictops
I Protungulatum
ab
Figure 3
|
Time-calibrated phylogeny of the eutherian
Juramaia
among
other boreosphenidan mammals, and comparative morphologyof some key
molar features. a, Basal eutherianand metatherian phylogeny from parsimony
analysis of data set of ref. 24 (446 characters of 103 cynodont–mammaliaform
clades; based on the strict consensus of 172 equally parsimonious trees (each
with treelength 2,243; consistency index 0.373, retention index 0.803) from
1,000 PAUP heuristic runs, without any topology constraints and with all
multi-state characters unordered, multi-state taxa interpreted as
polymorphism). Placement of Juramaia in eutherians is significantly different
(*P,0.050) from suboptimal hypotheses of Juramaia as either a
boreosphenidan or a metatherian by Templeton tests. This topology is
corroborated by a separate analysis on a different and complementary data set
by refs 4, 5 (389 informative characters of 71 eutherian taxa and outgroups), by
the strict consensus of 41 equally parsimonious trees, from 1,000 heuristic runs,
without topology constraints and 33 multi-state characters ordered, multi-state
taxa as polymorphism. Placement of Juramaia among basal eutherians is
consistent with topologies from constrained search under molecular
scaffolding of extant taxa in the main data set of ref. 24 and the complementary
data set of refs 4, 5 (details in Supplementary Information). b, The increaseden-
echelon postvallum shearing of upper molars in the earliest eutherians
17
,in
contrast to metatherians
18
that lack a strongly developed postvallum shearing
by metacingulum, except for the Late Cretaceous Pediomys
1
. Nodes (1)
Cladotheria, (2) Boreosphenida
1,2
, (3) crown Theria, (4) Eutheria (including
Placentalia), and (5) Metatheria (including Marsupialia).
RESEARCH LETTER
444 | NATURE | VOL 476 | 25 AUGUST 2011
Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
©2011
Cretaceous and Early Cenozoic metatherians
7,28
and to living scansorial
or arboreal didelphids
30
. The scansorial habits are also corroborated by
the forelimb features, which are indicative of that habitat preference in
extant mammals, such as the hypertrophied acromion and the acute
posterior angle of the scapula
28
.
The earliest-known eutherians Juramaia and Eomaia and the earliest
metatherian Sinodelphys are scansorial mammals, and differ from con-
temporary Mesozoic mammals, most which are terrestrial
1,2
.Thissug-
gests that the phylogenetic split of eutherians and metatherians and
their earliest evolution are accompanied by major ecomorphological
diversification, notably scansorial adaptation, which made it possible
for therians to exploit arboreal niches.
Received 26 December 2010; accepted 10 June 2011.
1. Kielan-Jaworowska, Z., Cifelli, R. L. & Luo, Z.-X. Mammals from the Age of Dinosaurs:
Origins, Evolution, and Structure (Columbia Univ. Press, 2004).
2. Luo, Z.-X. Transformation and diversification in the early mammalian evolution.
Nature 450, 1011–1019 (2007).
3. Ji, Q. et al. The earliest known eutherian mammal. Nature 416, 816–822 (2002).
4. Wible, J. R., Rougier, G. W., Novacek, M. J. & Asher, R. J. The eutherian mammal
Maelestes gobiensis from the Late Cretaceous of Mongolia and the phylogeny of
Cretaceous Eutheria. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 327, 1–123 (2009).
5. Hu, Y. M., Meng, J., Li, C.-K. & Wang, Y.-Q. New basal eutherian mammal from the
Early Cretaceous Jehol biota, Liaoning,China. Proc. R. Soc. B 277, 229–236(2010).
6. Rougier, G. W., Wible, J. R. & Novacek, M. J. Implications of Deltatheridium
specimens for early marsupial history. Nature 396, 459–463 (1998).
7. Luo, Z.-X.,Ji, Q., Wible, J. R.& Yuan, C.-X. An Early Cretaceous tribosphenicmammal
and metatherian evolution. Science 302, 1934–1940 (2003).
8. Wilson, G. P. & Riedl, J. A. New specimen reveals deltatheroidan affinities of the
North American Late Cretaceous mammal Nanocuris. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 30,
872–884 (2010).
9. van Rheede, T. et al. The platypusis in its place: nuclear genes and Indels confirm
the sister grouprelation of monotremes and therians. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23, 587–597
(2006).
10. Kitazoe, Y. et al. Robust time estimation reconciles views of the antiquity of
placental mammals. PLoS ONE 2, e384 (2007).
11. Bininda-Emonds, O. R. P. et al. The delayed rise of present-day mammals. Nature
446, 507–512 (2007).
12. Phillips, M. J., Bennett, T. H. & Lee, M. S. Y. Molecules, morphology, and ecology
indicate a recent, amphibious ancestry for echidnas.Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106,
17089–17094 (2009).
13. Benton, M. J.,Donoghue, P. C. J. & Asher, R. J. in The Timetreeof Life (eds Hedges, S.
B. & Kumar S.) 35–86 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2009).
14. Luo, Z.-X., Cifelli, R. C. & Kielan-Jaworowska, Z. Dual origin of tribosphenic
mammals. Nature 409, 53–57 (2001).
15. Liu, Y.-Q., Liu,Y.-X., Ji, S.-A. & Yang, Z.-Q. U-Pb zircon age forthe Daohugou Biota at
Ningcheng of Inner Mongolia and comments on related issues. Chin. Sci. Bull. 51,
2634–2644 (2006).
16. Chang, S.-C., Zhang, H.-C., Renne, P. R. & Fang, F. High-precision 40Ar/39Ar age
constraints on the basal Lanqi Formation and its implications for the origin of
angiosperm plants. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 279, 212–221 (2009).
17. Crompton, A. W. & Kielan-Jaworowska, Z. in Studies in the Development, Function
and Evolutionof Teeth (eds Butler, P. M. & Joysey, K. A.) 249–287 (Academic Press,
1978).
18. Cifelli, R. L. & de Muizon, C. Dentition and jaw of Kokopellia juddi, a primitive
marsupialor near marsupial from the medialCretaceous of Utah. J. Mamm. Evol.4,
241–258 (1997).
19. Averianov,A. O., Archibald, J. D. & Ekdale,E. G. New material of the Late Cretaceous
deltatheroidan mammal Sulestes from Uzbekistan and phylogenetic
reassessment of the metatherian eutherian dichotomy. J. Syst. Palaeontology 8,
301–330 (2010).
20. Cifelli, R. L. et al. Origin of marsupial pattern of tooth replacement: fossil evidence
revealed by high resolution X-ray CT. Nature 379, 715–718 (1996).
21. Rich, T. H. et al. EarlyCretaceous mammalsfrom Flat Rocks, Victoria, Australia. Rec.
Queen Victoria Mus. 106, 1–35 (1999).
22. Martin, T. & Rauhut, O. W. M. Mandible and dentition of Asfaltomylos patagonicus
(Australosphenida, Mammalia) and the evolution of tribosphenic teeth. J. Vertebr.
Paleontol. 25, 414–425 (2005).
23. Rougier, G. W. et al. New Jurassic mammals from Patagonia, Argentina: a
reappraisal of australosphenidan morphology and interrelationship. Am. Mus.
Novit. 3566, 1–54 (2007).
24. Luo, Z.-X., Ji, Q. & Yuan, C.-X. Convergent dental evolution in pseudotribosphenic
and tribosphenic mammals. Nature 450, 93–97 (2007).
25. Kielan-Jaworowska, Z. & Dashzeveg, D. Eutherian mammals from the Early
Cretaceous of Mongolia. Zool. Scr. 18, 347–355 (1989).
26. Averianov, A. O. & Skutschas, P. P. A new genus of eutherian mammal from the
Early Cretaceous of Transbaikalia, Russia. Acta Palaeontol. Pol. 46, 431–436
(2001).
27. Sigogneau-Russell, D., Hooker, J. J. & Ensom, P. C. The oldest tribosphenic
mammal from Laurasia (Purbeck Limestone Group, Berriasian, Cretaceous, UK)
and its bearing on the ‘dual origin’ of Tribosphenida. C. R. Acad. Sci. II 333,
141–147 (2001).
28. Argot, C. Functional-adaptive anatomyof the forelimb in the Didelphidae, and the
paleobiology of the Paleocene marsupials Mayulestes ferox and Pucadelphys
andinus. J. Morphol. 247, 51–79 (2001).
29. Asher, R. J., Horovitz, I. & Sanchez-Villagra, M. R. First combined cladistic analysis
of marsupial mammal interrelationships. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 33, 240–250
(2004).
30. Kirk, E. C., Lemelin, P., Hamrick, M. W., Boyer, D. M. & Bloch, J. I. Intrinsic hand
proportions of euarchontans and other mammals: Implications for the locomotor
behavior of plesiadapiforms. J. Hum. Evol. 55, 278–299 (2008).
Supplementary Information is linked to the online version of the paper at
www.nature.com/nature.
AcknowledgementsWe thank A. R. Tabrum for his meticulous preparationof the fossil,
Y.-Q. Zhang for casting, and M. A. Klingler for assistancewith graphics. During thiswork,
we benefited from discussion with Y.-Q. Liu on field geology and dating, and with
R. J. Asher, K. C. Beard,R. L. Cifelli, M. R. Dawson, T. Martinand J. R. Wible for discussion
on mammal phylogeny. J. Wible and M. Dawson helped to improve the manuscript.
Supportwas given to Z.-X.L. from theNational Science Foundation(USA), to C.-X.Y.from
the National Natural Science Foundation-China and the Chinese Academy of
Geological Sciences, and to Q.J. from the 973 Project of the Ministry of Science and
Technology of China and funding from the Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences.
Author Contributions Z.-X.L. and Q.J. designed the research plan. All authors
participated in morphological studies. Z.-X.L. and C.-X.Y. performed phylogenetic
analyses. Z.-X.L. wrote the paper with discussion from all authors.
Author Information Reprints and permissions information is available at
www.nature.com/reprints. The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Readers are welcome to comment on the online version of this article at
www.nature.com/nature. Correspondence and requests for materials should be
addressed to Z.-X.L. (luoz@carnegiemnh.org).
LETTER RESEARCH
25 AUGUST 2011 | VOL 476 | NATURE | 445
Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
©2011