New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Meet the First Placental Mammal

Meet the first placental mammal

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

They may run, swim or fly. They may weigh less than a penny or more than a dozen school buses. From humans to whales to bats, the placental mammals—so named for the placenta that nourishes the fetus during development—are mind-bogglingly diverse. (The placental mammals are one of three major groups of mammals; the other two are the egg-laying monotremes and the pouched marsupials.) For years researchers have been attempting to piece together when the placentals originated and when the group's modern orders, such as the primates and the bats, first emerged. Now an analysis of thousands of anatomical features of modern and extinct mammals, as well as molecular sequences from living species, is helping them to do just that. The study also hints at what the ancestral placental mammal—the one that ultimately gave rise to creatures as disparate as tree sloths and sea lions—looked like.

Previous attempts to reconstruct the evolutionary history of mammals yielded conflicting scenarios. Fossil evidence suggested that the placentals burst onto the scene shortly after a dinosaur-snuffing asteroid slammed into the earth around 65 million years ago. Studies that instead rely on molecular data indicate that the group appeared as early as 100 million years ago, when dinosaurs were still thriving.

The new study controverts the early origin model, concluding that the placentals originated after the mass extinction event, with the first modern groups evolving two million to three million years later—after the breakup of the supercontinent Gondwana. Maureen A. O'Leary of Stony Brook University and her collaborators described their findings in the February 8 Science.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Perhaps the coolest part of the paper is the bit where the authors reconstruct the characteristics of the hypothetical placental ancestor (above)—a tree-climbing, insect-eating beastie that weighed between six and 245 grams and gave birth to one hairless baby at a time, among other fascinating details. I'd love to see what other hypothetical ancestors look like—last common ancestor of chimps and humans, anyone?

Adapted from Observations at blogs.ScientificAmerican.com/observations

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and was formerly senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong
Scientific American Magazine Vol 308 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Yes, We're Related” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 308 No. 5 (), p. 24
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0513-24a

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe