What in the World Was Macrauchenia?

Ancient DNA puts Darwin's mystery mammal in its place

Macrauchenia

Macrauchenia on a comfy Ice Age day. 

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


For an animal that’s been dead since the close of the Ice Age, Macrauchenia has been awfully stubborn. For over a century and a half, paleontologists have been trying to figure how this camel-like beast fits into the wider mammal family tree. Now, with the help of some ancient DNA, the experts have an answer.

Way back in 1838, while poking around for fossils near Puerto San Julian in Patagonia, a young Charles Darwin found some odd bones. He thought that they might belong to some sort of prehistoric llama. Those remains, later analyzed by Richard Owen – Britain’s foremost anatomist at the time – were given the name Macrauchenia patachonica. It wasn’t quite like anything anyone had seen before. The proportions were llama-like, as Darwin has expected, but it didn’t seem to fit in with any living group of mammals.

More fossils only made Macrauchenia stranger. A nasal opening high on the skull implied a tapir-like trunk hanging off the herbivore’s face, and paleontologists eventually categorized the mammal as a litoptern – an unusual group of South American mammals with a fossil record spanning from just after the demise of the non-avian dinosaurs to the close of the Pleistocene. It was perhaps the chief example of enigmatic South American native ungulates – SANUs – that superficially resembled beasts from elsewhere but had evolved independently. How do you categorize horses that aren't horses and elephants that aren't elephants?


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.


Locations of sampled Macrauchenia. Credit: Westbury et al 2017

Start from any twig on the tree of life and you should be able to follow that back through the tangle of branches to find common ancestry and the unfolding of evolutionary changes. In the case of Macrauchenia, however, the bones alone weren’t getting paleontologists very far. Different analyses popped the herbivore out on various places in the mammal family tree. South America’s “splendid isolation” led to the evolution of some truly confounding mammals.

Here’s where the new study by geneticst Michael Westbury and colleagues comes in. Even though previous attempts to gather genetic tidbits from Macrauchenia bones failed, a new approach and subsequent analysis assembled a nearly complete mitochondrial genome for the fossil mammal. And with this new information, they were finally able to find a place for Macrauchenia.

In the resulting tree, Macrauchenia and its litoptern relatives came out as the sister taxon to perissodactyls. Or, in other words, one branch over from the larger group that contains rhinos, tapirs, horses, and their closest relatives. More than that, Westbury and coauthors report, these two lineages split from each other about 66 million years ago, right at the beginning of the Age of Mammals. Darwin’s mystery mammal was one of the last remaining members of a group that first sprung up right after the likes of Triceratops was swept off the scene, another example of how catastrophic extinction opens up new evolutionary possibilities.


Reference:

Westbury, M., Baleka, S., Barlow, A., Hartmann, S., Paijmans, J., Kramarz, A., Forasiepi, A., Bond, M., Gelfo, J., Reguero, M. Mendoza, P., Taglioretti, M., Scaglia F., Rinderknecht, A., Jones, W., Mena, F., Billet, G., de Muizon, C., Aguilar, J., MacPhee, R., Hofreiter, M. 2017. A mitogenomic timetree for Darwin’s enigmatic South American mammal Macrauchenia patachonica. Nature Communications. doi: 10.1038/ncomms15951

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