The Evolution of the Turtle Shell

Carapace Morphology Variations in Captive Tortoises: Insights from Three-Dimensional Analysis

The carapace morphology of tortoises is a crucial characteristic used for species identification, with features such as shell shape, roughness, and color patterns varying among species. Understanding this morphological diversity is valuable not only for taxonomic classification but also for more specialized clinical approaches. This study investigated the morphological differences in the shells of Leopard tortoises (Stigmochelys pardalis), African spurred tortoises (Centrochelys sulcata), and Greek tortoises (spur-thighed tortoises; Testudo graeca) raised in captivity. Using 3D scanners, the carapaces were modeled, and a 3D geometric morphometric method was employed to analyze shape variations and dimensional features, with landmarks applied automatically. Among the species studied, African spurred tortoises had the largest carapace size. Principal component analysis (PCA) identified PC1 and PC3 as critical factors in distinguishing between species based on morphological characteristics. Positive PC1 values, associated with a shorter carapace height, indicated a flatter or more compact shell shape. A higher PC3 value corresponded to a raised shape at the back of the shell, while a lower PC3 value indicated a raised shape at the front. Specifically, Leopard tortoises exhibited a higher carapace shape than the other species, while African spurred tortoises had shorter carapaces. An allometric effect was observed in the carapaces, where smaller specimens tended to be proportionately higher-domed, whereas larger shells displayed a lower height in shape. These findings highlight the significance of shape variations in tortoise shells, which emerge during adaptation and have important implications for taxonomy and clinical practice. Such differences should be carefully considered in veterinary care and species identification.

Origin and Evolution of the Turtle Body Plan

The origin of turtles and their uniquely shelled body plan is one of the longest standing problems in vertebrate biology. The unfulfilled need for a hypothesis that both explains the derived nature of turtle anatomy and resolves their unclear phylogenetic position among reptiles largely reflects the absence of a transitional fossil record. Recent discoveries have dramatically improved this situation, providing an integrated, time-calibrated model of the morphological, developmental, and ecological transformations responsible for the modern turtle body plan. This evolutionary trajectory was initiated in the Permian (>260 million years ago) when a turtle ancestor with a diapsid skull evolved a novel mechanism for lung ventilation. This key innovation permitted the torso to become apomorphically stiff, most likely as an adaption for digging and a fossorial ecology. The construction of the modern turtle body plan then proceeded over the next 100 million years following a largely stepwise model of osteological innovation.

Comparative analysis of the shape and size of the middle ear cavity of turtles reveals no correlation with habitat ecology

The middle ear of turtles differs from other reptiles in being separated into two distinct compartments. Several ideas have been proposed as to why the middle ear is compartmentalized in turtles, most suggesting a relationship with underwater hearing. Extant turtle species span fully marine to strictly terrestrial habitats, and ecomorphological hypotheses of turtle hearing predict that this should correlate with variation in the structure of the middle ear due to differences in the fluid properties of water and air. We investigate the shape and size of the air-filled middle ear cavity of 56 extant turtles using 3D data and phylogenetic comparative analysis to test for correlations between habitat preferences and the shape and size of the middle ear cavity. Only weak correlations are found between middle ear cavity size and ecology, with aquatic taxa having proportionally smaller cavity volumes. The middle ear cavity of turtles exhibits high shape diversity among species, but we found no relationship between this shape variation and ecology. Surprisingly, the estimated acoustic transformer ratio, a key functional parameter of impedance-matching ears in vertebrates, also shows no relation to habitat preferences (aquatic/terrestrial) in turtles. We suggest that middle ear cavity shape may be controlled by factors unrelated to hearing, such as the spatial demands of surrounding cranial structures. A review of the fossil record suggests that the modern turtle ear evolved during the Early to Middle Jurassic in stem turtles broadly adapted to freshwater and terrestrial settings. This, combined with our finding that evolutionary transitions between habitats caused only weak evolutionary changes in middle ear structure, suggests that tympanic hearing in turtles evolved as a compromise between subaerial and underwater hearing.

Microanatomy of the stem-turtle Pappochelys rosinae indicates a predominantly fossorial mode of life and clarifies early steps in the evolution of the shell

Unlike any other tetrapod, turtles form their dorsal bony shell (carapace) not from osteoderms, but by contribution of the ribs and vertebrae that expand into the dermis to form plate-like shell components. Although this was known from embryological studies in extant turtles, important steps in this evolutionary sequence have recently been highlighted by the Triassic taxa Pappochelys, Eorhynchochelys and Odontochelys, and the Permian Eunotosaurus. The discovery of Pappochelys shed light on the origin of the ventral bony shell (plastron), which formed from enlarged gastralia. A major question is whether the turtle shell evolved in the context of a terrestrial or aquatic environment. Whereas Odontochelys was controversially interpreted as aquatic, a terrestrial origin of turtles was proposed based on evidence of fossorial adaptations in Eunotosaurus. We report palaeohistological data for Pappochelys, a taxon that exemplifies earlier evolutionary stages in the formation of the bony shell than Odontochelys. Bone histological evidence reveals (1) evolutionary changes in bone microstructure in ribs and gastralia approaching the turtle condition and (2) evidence for a predominantly amphibious or fossorial mode of life in Pappochelys, which support the hypothesis that crucial steps in the evolution of the shell occurred in a terrestrial rather than fully aquatic environment.

Functional performance of turtle humerus shape across an ecological adaptive landscape

The concept of the adaptive landscape has been invaluable to evolutionary biologists for visualizing the dynamics of selection and adaptation, and is increasingly being used to study morpho-functional data. Here, we construct adaptive landscapes to explore functional trade-offs associated with variation in humerus morphology among turtles adapted to three different locomotor environments: marine, semiaquatic, and terrestrial. Humerus shape from 40 species of cryptodire turtles was quantified using a pseudolandmark approach. Hypothetical shapes were extracted in a grid across morphospace and four functional traits (strength, stride length, mechanical advantage, and hydrodynamics) measured on those shapes. Quantitative trait modeling was used to construct adaptive landscapes that optimize the functional traits for each of the three locomotor ecologies. Our data show that turtles living in different environments have statistically different humeral shapes. The optimum adaptive landscape for each ecology is defined by a different combination of performance trade-offs, with turtle species clustering around their respective adaptive peak. Further, species adhere to pareto fronts between marine-semiaquatic and semiaquatic-terrestrial optima, but not between marine-terrestrial. Our study demonstrates the utility of adaptive landscapes in informing the link between form, function, and ecological adaptation, and establishes a framework for reconstructing turtle ecological evolution using isolated humeri from the fossil record.

Prionochelys matutina Zangerl, 1953 (Testudines: Pan-Cheloniidae) from the Late Cretaceous of the United States and the evolution of epithecal ossifications in marine turtles

Background

Many neritic to nearshore species of marine adapted turtle from the Late Cretaceous of North America are thought to represent the stem lineage of Cheloniidae but due to fragmentary holotypes, low total specimen counts, and resultantly incomplete morphological character suites, are routinely placed either within or outside of crown group Chelonioidea leaving their precise cladistic affinities uncertain. Despite this systematic ambiguity, the referral of these species to either the stem of Cheloniidae or Chelonioidea belies the critical importance of these taxa in any investigation into the origins of extant marine turtles. The adequate incorporation of these species into phylogenetic studies requires the formal description of relatively complete specimens, particularly those possessing associated cranial and post-cranial material.

Methods

Remarkably complete fossil specimens of several adult and juvenile marine turtles from the Mooreville Chalk and Eutaw Formations (Alabama, USA) are formally described and assigned to Prionochelys matutina. This material provides new information into the anatomy, ontogeny, and cladistic affinities of the species. A phylogenetic hypothesis for Late Cretaceous marine turtles is then generated through the consilience of stratigraphic, morphological, and molecular data.

Results

Phylogenetic analysis places Prionochelys matutina on the stem of Cheloniidae as a member of a monophyletic clade with other putative pan-cheloniids, including Ctenochelys stenoporus, Ctenochelys acris, Peritresius martini, and Peritresius ornatus. The members of this clade possess incipient secondary palates, pronounced carapacial and plastral fontanelles at all stages of development, and are characterized by the presence of superficial ossifications at the apices of the neural keel elevations along the dorsal midline of the carapace.

Discussion

The epithecal osteoderms dorsal to the neural series (epineurals) found in Ctenochelyidae are unique among turtles. The presence of epineurals in ctenochelyid turtles shows that epithecal ossifications arose independently in both leatherback (Dermochelyidae) and hard-shelled (Cheloniidae) marine turtles. Whether or not the epineurals of Ctenochelyidae are homologous with the dermal ossicles comprising the carapace of Dermochelys coriacea remains untested however, histological thin sectioning of dermochelyid and ctenochelyd epithecal elements may reveal meaningful information in future studies.

Emerging from the rib: resolving the turtle controversies

Two of the major controversies in the present study of turtle shell development involve the mechanism by which the carapacial ridge initiates shell formation and the mechanism by which each rib forms the costal bones adjacent to it. This paper claims that both sides of each debate might be correct-but within the species examined. Mechanism is more properly "mechanisms," and there is more than one single way to initiate carapace formation and to form the costal bones. In the initiation of the shell, the rib precursors may be kept dorsal by either "axial displacement" (in the hard-shell turtles) or "axial arrest" (in the soft-shell turtle Pelodiscus), or by a combination of these. The former process would deflect the rib into the dorsal dermis and allow it to continue its growth there, while the latter process would truncate rib growth. In both instances, though, the result is to keep the ribs from extending into the ventral body wall. Our recent work has shown that the properties of the carapacial ridge, a key evolutionary innovation of turtles, differ greatly between these two groups. Similarly, the mechanism of costal bone formation may differ between soft-shell and hard-shell turtles, in that the hard-shell species may have both periosteal flattening as well as dermal bone induction, while the soft-shelled turtles may have only the first of these processes.

On the homology of the shoulder girdle in turtles

The shoulder girdle in turtles is encapsulated in the shell and has a triradiate morphology. Due to its unique configuration among amniotes, many theories have been proposed about the skeletal identities of the projections for the past two centuries. Although the dorsal ramus represents the scapular blade, the ventral two rami remain uncertain. In particular, the ventrorostral process has been compared to a clavicle, an acromion, and a procoracoid based on its morphology, its connectivity to the rest of the skeleton and to muscles, as well as with its ossification center, cell lineage, and gene expression. In making these comparisons, the shoulder girdle skeleton of anurans has often been used as a reference. This review traces the history of the debate on the homology of the shoulder girdle in turtles. And based on the integrative aspects of developmental biology, comparative morphology, and paleontology, we suggest acromion and procoracoid identities for the two ventral processes.

The evolutionary origin of the turtle shell and its dependence on the axial arrest of the embryonic rib cage

Turtles are characterized by their possession of a shell with dorsal and ventral moieties: the carapace and the plastron, respectively. In this review, we try to provide answers to the question of the evolutionary origin of the carapace, by revising morphological, developmental, and paleontological comparative analyses. The turtle carapace is formed through modification of the thoracic ribs and vertebrae, which undergo extensive ossification to form a solid bony structure. Except for peripheral dermal elements, there are no signs of exoskeletal components ontogenetically added to the costal and neural bones, and thus the carapace is predominantly of endoskeletal nature. Due to the axial arrest of turtle rib growth, the axial part of the embryo expands laterally and the shoulder girdle becomes encapsulated in the rib cage, together with the inward folding of the lateral body wall in the late phase of embryogenesis. Along the line of this folding develops a ridge called the carapacial ridge (CR), a turtle-specific embryonic structure. The CR functions in the marginal growth of the carapacial primordium, in which Wnt signaling pathway might play a crucial role. Both paleontological and genomic evidence suggest that the axial arrest is the first step toward acquisition of the turtle body plan, which is estimated to have taken place after the divergence of a clade including turtles from archosaurs. The developmental relationship between the CR and the axial arrest remains a central issue to be solved in future.