Turtles More Like Lizards on Evolutionary Tree, New Gene Study Finds

Genetic data show turtles and lizards had a close common ancestor.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

by Chloe McIver of Nature magazine

Turtles should sit on the same branch of the tree of life as lizards, according to a genetic analysis that could clear up a long-standing mystery over the creature's origin.

Palaeontologists have long used morphological data, obtained by looking closely at the physical characteristics of fossils and living relatives, to show the evolutionary relationship between different species. In recent decades, however, genetic comparisons have become important.


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.


But molecules and fossils don't always agree, and this has created a lot of confusion for the turtle. A study published today in Biology Letters could put the beleaguered reptile in its rightful place using genetic analysis.

Odd one out

Turtles have proved particularly problematic to categorize because they look so different from other reptiles, most of which belong to the Diapsida clade. Diapsids' skulls all have two holes, called temporal fenestrae, which carry muscles that attach to the jaws.

According to the fossil record, turtles first appeared in the Triassic period around 230 million years ago, and have changed little since. Crucially, turtles lack temporal fenestrae, suggesting that they are the living relatives of a more primitive reptilian form that pre-dates the diapsids. Consequently, they were set aside in their own clade, somewhere between amphibians and the rest of the reptiles.

However, there are two other possibilities that would bring turtles into the diapsid fold. One is that turtles are more closely related to birds and crocodiles than to lizards. Most of the genetic studies undertaken so far support this.

The other possibility is that turtles are much more closely related to lizards and snakes, with this group sharing a more recent common ancestor than the rest of the diapsid clade.

Disappearing act

Genetic analysis of a turtle, a lizard and an alligator1 now supports the latter hypothesis. This implies that the ancestors of turtles did once have temporal fenestrae in their skulls, but that these have disappeared as turtles evolved.

"What we've been able to provide is unambiguous evidence for one hypothesis over the others," says molecular palaeobiologist Kevin Peterson of Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, a coauthor on the new study.

The work differs from previous efforts because it used microRNAs, short regulatory genetic molecules found in cells. They are particularly useful for solving phylogenetic puzzles because, although additional microRNAs can develop over millions of years of evolution, once established in a clade they are rarely lost.

MicroRNAs have been used to determine other similarly deep phylogenetic relationships, and most scientists agree that they are reliable tools. What makes the conclusion of this study particularly convincing is the fact that it agrees with an existing hypothesis that is also supported by morphological data.

"Over the years, as we've been trying to reconstruct the tree of life, there's been a sort of to and fro between anatomy and fossils on the one hand, and molecules on the other," says Mike Benton, a palaeontologist at the University of Bristol, UK, who was not involved in the study. For turtles, he says, this is "the first time we have anatomy and molecules seeming to agree."

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on July 19, 2011.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe