Visitors   Views   Downloads

The phylogenetic origin and evolution of acellular bone in teleost fishes: insights into osteocyte function in bone metabolism

View preprint
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
5 days ago
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
7 days ago
RT @paleorxiv: New preprint via @PeerJPreprints: The phylogenetic origin and evolution of acellular bone in teleost fishes: insights into o…
New preprint via @PeerJPreprints: The phylogenetic origin and evolution of acellular bone in teleost fishes: insights into osteocyte function in bone metabolism https://t.co/3SN3A6rGc2 HT @DonaldDavesne
RT @fishphylogeny: Cool! The distribution of acellular bone is something that I have always wanted to see studied in light of new phylogen…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
10 days ago
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
10 days ago
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @fishphylogeny: Cool! The distribution of acellular bone is something that I have always wanted to see studied in light of new phylogen…
10 days ago
RT @fishphylogeny: Cool! The distribution of acellular bone is something that I have always wanted to see studied in light of new phylogen…
10 days ago
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
RT @fishphylogeny: Cool! The distribution of acellular bone is something that I have always wanted to see studied in light of new phylogen…
RT @fishphylogeny: Cool! The distribution of acellular bone is something that I have always wanted to see studied in light of new phylogen…
RT @fishphylogeny: Cool! The distribution of acellular bone is something that I have always wanted to see studied in light of new phylogen…
RT @fishphylogeny: Cool! The distribution of acellular bone is something that I have always wanted to see studied in light of new phylogen…
11 days ago
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
11 days ago
RT @DonaldDavesne: Most modern teleost species have no osteocytes in their bone. We review its phylogenetic distribution, suggesting a key…
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

Supplemental Information

Table S1. Complete list of actinopterygian (ray-finned fish) taxa surveyed by our literature review, including supplementary species obtained with our SRµCT data (Table 1)

In the case of old literature, species names were often outdated. We used FishBase (Froese & Pauly, 2018) and the Catalog of Fishes (Eschmeyer, Fricke, & van der Laan, 2018) to locate the corresponding valid names.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27406v1/supp-1

Fig. S1. Time-calibrated multilocus tree of extant actinopterygians (ray-finned fishes), obtained from optimising bone type on the topology T1 (Near et al., 2012)

The character states are ‘cellular bone’ (in dark blue) and ‘acellular bone’ in (yellow). Character states for coded species are at the tips, and the reconstructed ancestral states at the nodes.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27406v1/supp-2

Fig. S2. Time-calibrated multilocus tree of extant and fossil actinopterygians (ray-finned fishes), obtained from optimising bone type on the topology T2 (Betancur-R., Ortí, & Pyron, 2015)

The character states are ‘cellular bone’ (in dark blue) and ‘acellular bone’ in (yellow). Character states for coded species are at the tips, and the reconstructed ancestral states at the nodes.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27406v1/supp-3

Fig. S3. Time-calibrated multilocus tree of extant actinopterygians (ray-finned fishes), obtained from optimising bone type on the topology T3 (Hughes et al., 2018)

The character states are ‘cellular bone’ (in dark blue) and ‘acellular bone’ in (yellow). Character states for coded species are at the tips, and the reconstructed ancestral states at the nodes.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.27406v1/supp-4

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Donald Davesne conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

François J. Meunier conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Armin D. Schmitt performed the experiments, prepared figures and/or tables, approved the final draft.

Matt Friedman contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Olga Otero conceived and designed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Roger B. J. Benson performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

Supplementary Information include the following: The complete list of ray-finned fish taxa surveyed by our litterature review, including new species obtained with our SRµCT data (Table S1).

Time-calibrated multilocus trees of extant (and fossil in the case of S2) actinopterygians, obtained from the optimisation of the character states 'cellular bone' and 'acellular bone' on three topologies (Figs. S1, S2 and S3).

Funding

This work was supported by the Leverhulme Trust (RPG-2016-168) and by a Junior Research Fellowship at Wolfson College, University of Oxford (D.D.). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies