The skull and jaw musculature as guides to the ancestry of salamanders

The fossil record provides no evidence supporting a unique common ancestry for frogs, salamanders and apodans. The ancestors of the modern orders may have diverged from one another as recently as 250 million years ago, or as long ago as 400 million years according to current theories of various authors. In order to evaluate the evolutionary patterns of the modern orders it is necessary to determine whether their last common ancestor was a rhipidistian fish, a very primitive amphibian, a labyrimhodom or a ‘lissamphibian’. The broad cranial similarities of frogs and salamanders, especially the dominance of the braincase as a supporting element, can be associated with the small size of the skull in their immediate ancestors. Hynobiids show the most primitive cranial pattern known among the living salamander families and “provide a model for determining the nature of the ancestors of the entire order. Features expected in ancestral salamanders include: (1) Emargination of the cheek; (2) Movable suspensorium formed by the quadrate, squamosal and pterygoid; (3) Occipital condyle posterior to jaw articulation; (4) Distinct prootic and opisthotic; (5) Absence ol otic notch; (6) Stapes forming a structural link between braincase and cheek. In the otic region, cheek and jaw suspension, the primitive salamander pattern (resembles most closely the microsaurs among known Paleozoic amphibians, and shows no significant features in common with either ancestral frogs or the majority of labyrinth odonts. The basic pattern of the adductor jaw musculature is consistent within both frogs and salamanders, but major differences are evident between the two groups. The dominance of the adductor mandibulae externus in salamanders can be associated with the open cheek in all members of that order, and the small size of this muscle in frogs can be associated with the large otic notch. The spread of different muscles over the otic capsule, the longus head ol the adductor mandibulae posterior in frogs and the superficial head of the adductor mandibulae internus in salamanders, indicates that fenestration of the skull posterodorsal to the orbit occurred separately in the ancestors of the two groups. Reconstruction of the probable pattern of the jaw musculature in Paleozoic amphibians indicates that frogs and salamanders might have evolved from a condition hypothesized for primitive labyrinthodonts, but the presence of a large otic notch in dissorophids suggests specialization toward the anuran, not the urodele condition. The presence of either an einarginated cheek or an embayment of the lateral surface of the dentary and the absence of an otic notch in microsaurs indicate a salamander-like distribution of die adductor jaw muscles. The ancestors of frogs and salamanders probably diverged from one another in the early Carboniferous, Frogs later evolved from small labyrinthodonts and salamanders from microsaurs. Features considered typical of lissamphibians evolved separately in the two groups in the late Permian andTriassic.     

Early development of chondrocranium in the tailed frog Ascaphus truei (Amphibia: Anura): Implications for anuran palatoquadrate homologies

Chondrocranial development in Ascaphus truei was studied by serial sectioning and graphical reconstruction. Nine stages (21–29; 9–18 mm TL) were examined. Mesodermal cells were distinguished from ectomesenchymal (neural crest derived) cells by retained yolk granules. Ectomesenchymal parts of the chondrocranium include the suprarostrals, pila preoptica, anterior trabecula, and palatoquadrate. Mesodermal parts of the chondrocranium include the orbital cartilage, posterior trabecula, parachordal, basiotic lamina, and otic capsule. Development of the palatoquadrate is as follows. The pterygoid process first connects with the trabecula far rostrally; their fusion progresses caudally. The ascending process connects with a mesodermal bar that extends from the orbital cartilage to the otic capsule, and forms the ventral border of the dorsal trigeminal outlet. This bar is the “ascending process” of Ascaphus adults; it is a neurocranial, not palatoquadrate structure. The basal process chondrifies in an ectomesenchymal strand running from the quadrate keel to the postpalatine commissure. Later, the postpalatine commissure and basal process extend anteromedially to contact the floor of the anterior cupula of the otic capsule, creating separate foramina for the palatine and hyomandibular branches of the facial nerve. Based on these data, and on comparison with other frogs and salamanders, the anuran anterior quadratocranial commissure is homologized with the pterygoid process of salamanders, the anuran basal process (=“pseudobasal” or “hyobasal” process) with the basal process of salamanders, and the anuran otic ledge with the basitrabecular process of salamanders. The extensive similarities in palatoquadrate structure and development between frogs and salamanders, and lacking in caecilians, are not phylogenetically informative. Available information on fossil outgroups suggests that some of these similarities are primitive for Lissamphibia, whereas for others the polarity is uncertain. J. Morphol. 231:63-100, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Salamander-like development in a seymouriamorph revealed by palaeohistology

The amniotes generally lay eggs on land and are thereby differentiated from lissamphibians (salamanders, frogs and caecilians) by their developmental pattern. Although a number of 330-300-Myr old fossils are regarded as early tetrapods placed close to amniotes on the basis of anatomical data, we still do not know whether their developmental pattern was more similar to those of lissamphibians or amniotes. Here we report palaeohistological and skeletochronological evidence supporting a salamander-like development in the seymouriamorph Discosauriscus. Its long-bone growth pattern, slow diaphyseal growth rate and delayed sexual maturity (at more than 10 years old) are more comparable with growth features of extant salamanders rather than extant amniotes, even though they are mostly hypothesized to be phylogenetically closer to living amniotes than salamanders.     

Has the importance of the amniote egg been overstated?

The evolution of the amniote egg is commonly regarded as an important milestone in the history of the vertebrates, an innovation that completed the transition from aquatic to fully terrestrial existence by permitting eggs to be laid away from standing water. This view derives ultimately from the recapitulationist theories of Haeckel, and rests on the assumption that extant frogs and salamanders are good models for the reproductive habits of early tetrapods and the ancestors of the amniotes. It also assumes that it is more difficult to lay eggs on land than in water, and that the amniote egg is an adaptation to the physical rigours that eggs encounter in terrestrial environments. Taken together, these assumptions comprise what may be termed the 'Haeckelian framework' for the origin of vertebrate terrestriality. Several independent lines of evidence suggest that the assumptions of the Haeckelian framework are false. There appear to be no theoretical reasons to assume that the evolution of terrestrial egg-laying was difficult, or required a structure as elaborate as the amniote egg. The physical conditions eggs encounter in the terrestrial environments where they are actually laid are quite mild. Land may in fact be an easier place to lay eggs than water. In addition, analysis of the distribution of key reproductive character states among vertebrates provides no evidence that the 'typical amphibian' reproductive mode is primitive for tetrapods. Amniotes are as likely as frogs or salamanders to retain primitive reproductive character states.     

Morphology of the temporal skull region in tetrapods: research history,functional explanations,and a new comprehensive classification scheme

The morphology of the temporal region in the tetrapod skull traditionally has been a widely discussed feature of vertebrate anatomy. The evolution of different temporal openings in Amniota (mammals, birds, and reptiles), Lissamphibia (frogs, salamanders, and caecilians), and several extinct tetrapod groups has sparked debates on the phylogenetic, developmental, and functional background of this region in the tetrapod skull. This led most famously to the erection of different amniote taxa based on the number and position of temporal fenestrae in their skulls. However, most of these taxa are no longer recognised to represent natural groupings and the morphology of the temporal region is not necessarily an adequate trait for use in the reconstruction of amniote phylogenies. Yet, new fossil finds, most notably of parareptiles and stem-turtles, as well as modern embryological and biomechanical studies continue to provide new insights into the morphological diversity of the temporal region. Here, we introduce a novel comprehensive classification scheme for the various temporal morphotypes in all Tetrapoda that is independent of phylogeny and previous terminology and may facilitate morphological comparisons in future studies. We then review the history of research on the temporal region in the tetrapod skull. We document how, from the early 19th century with the first recognition of differences in the temporal region to the first proposals of phylogenetic relationships and their assessment over the centuries, the phylogenetic perspective on the temporal region has developed, and we highlight the controversies that still remain. We also compare the different functional and developmental drivers proposed for the observed morphological diversity and how the effects of internal and external factors on the structure of the tetrapod skull have been interpreted.     

Fetal adaptations for viviparity in amphibians

Live‐bearing has evolved in all three orders of amphibians—frogs, salamanders, and caecilians. Developing young may be either yolk dependent, or maternal nutrients may be supplied after yolk is resorbed, depending on the species. Among frogs, embryos in two distantly related lineages develop in the skin of the maternal parents' backs; they are born either as advanced larvae or fully metamorphosed froglets, depending on the species. In other frogs, and in salamanders and caecilians, viviparity is intraoviductal; one lineage of salamanders includes species that are yolk dependent and born either as larvae or metamorphs, or that practice cannibalism and are born as metamorphs. Live‐bearing caecilians all, so far as is known, exhaust yolk before hatching and mothers provide nutrients during the rest of the relatively long gestation period. The developing young that have maternal nutrition have a number of heterochronic changes, such as precocious development of the feeding apparatus and the gut. Furthermore, several of the fetal adaptations, such as a specialized dentition and a prolonged metamorphosis, are homoplasious and present in members of two or all three of the amphibian orders. At the same time, we know little about the developmental and functional bases for fetal adaptations, and less about the factors that drive their evolution and facilitate their maintenance. J. Morphol. 276:941–960, 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Vertebral development and amphibian evolution

Amphibians provide an unparalleled opportunity to integrate studies of development and evolution through the investigation of the fossil record of larval stages. The pattern of vertebral development in modern frogs strongly resembles that of Paleozoic labyrinthodonts in the great delay in the ossification of the vertebrae, with the centra forming much later than the neural arches. Slow ossification of the trunk vertebrae in frogs and the absence of ossification in the tail facilitate the rapid loss of the tail during metamorphosis, and may reflect retention of the pattern in their specific Paleozoic ancestors. Salamanders and caecilians ossify their centra at a much earlier stage than frogs, which resembles the condition in Paleozoic lepospondyls. The clearly distinct patterns and rates of vertebral development may indicate phylogenetic separation between the ultimate ancestors of frogs and those of salamanders and caecilians within the early radiation of ancestral tetrapods. This divergence may date from the Lower Carboniferous. Comparison with the molecular regulation of vertebral development described in modern mammals and birds suggests that the rapid chondrification of the centra in salamanders relative to that of frogs may result from the earlier migration of sclerotomal cells expressing Pax1 to the area surrounding the notochord.     

Cranial muscles of the anurans leiopelma hochstetteri and ascaphus truei and the homologies of the mandibular adductors in lissamphibia and other gnathostomes

The frogs Ascaphus truei and Leiopelma hochstetteri are members of the most basal lineages of extant anurans. Their cranial muscles have not been previously described in full and are investigated here by dissection. Comparison of these taxa is used to review a controversy regarding the homologies of the jaw adductor muscles in Lissamphibia, to place these homologies in a wider gnathostome context, and to define features that may be useful for cladistic analysis of Anura. A new muscle is defined in Ascaphus and is designated m. levator anguli oris. The differences noted between Ascaphus and Leiopelma are in the penetration of the jaw adductor muscles by the mandibular nerve (V³). In the traditional view of this anatomy, the paths of the trigeminal nerve branches define homologous muscles. This scheme results in major differences among frogs, salamanders, and caecilians. The alternative view is that the topology of origins, insertions, and fiber directions are defining features, and the nerves penetrate the muscle mass in a variable way. The results given here support the latter view. A new model is proposed for Lissamphibia, whereby the adductor posterior (levator articularis) is a separate entity, and the rest of the adductor mass is configured around it as a folded sheet. This hypothesis is examined in other gnathostomes, including coelacanth and lungfish, and a possible sequence for the evolution of the jaw muscles is demonstrated. In this system, the main jaw adductor in teleost fish is not considered homologous with that of tetrapods. This hypothesis is consistent with available data on the domain of expression of the homeobox gene engrailed 2, which has previously not been considered indicative of homology. Terminology is discussed, and “adductor mandibulae” is preferred to “levator mandibulae” to align with usage in other gnathostomes. J. Morphol., 2011. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Miniaturization and its effects on cranial morphology in plethodontid salamanders, genus Thorius (Amphibia, Plethodontidae): II. The fate of the brain and sense organs and their role in skull morphogenesis and evolution

Relative size and arrangement of the brain and paired sense organs are examined in three species of Thorius, a genus of minute, terrestrial salamanders that are among the smallest extant tailed tetrapods. Analogous measurements of representative species of three related genera of larger tropical (Pseudoeurycea, Chiropterotriton) and temperate (Plethodon) salamanders are used to identify changes in gross morphology of the brain and sense organs that have accompanied the evolution of decreased head size in Thorius and their relation to associated changes in skull morphology. In adult Thorius, relative size (area measured in frontal plane, and length) of the eyes, otic capsules, and brain each is greater than in adults of all of the larger genera; relative size of the nasal capsules is unchanged or slightly smaller. Interspecific scaling phenomena--negative allometry of otic capsule, eye and brain size, isometry or slight positive allometry of nasal capsule size, all with respect to skull length--also are characteristic of intraspecific (ontogenetic) comparisons in both T. narisovalis and Pseudoeurycea goebeli. Predominance of the brain and eyes in Thorius results in greater contact and overlap among these structures and the nasal capsules in the anterior portion of the head. This is associated with anterior displacement of both the eyes and nasal capsules, which now protrude anterior to the skull proper; a change in eye shape; and medial deformation of anterior braincase walls. Posteriorly, predominance of the otic capsules has effected a reorientation of the jaw suspensorium to a fully vertical position that is correlated with the novel presence of a posteriorly directed squamosal process and shift in origin of the quadropectoralis muscle. Many of these changes in cranial morphology may be explained simply as results of mechanical (physical) interactions among the skeletal, nervous, and sensory components during head development at reduced size. This provides further evidence of the role of nervous, sensory, and other "soft" tissues in cranial skeletal morphogenesis, and reinforces the need to consider these tissues in analyses of skull evolution.     

Patterns of peripheral innervation of the tongue and hyobranchial apparatus in caecilians (Amphibia: Gymnophiona).

The innervation of the musculature of the tongue and the hyobranchial apparatus of caecilians has long been assumed to be simple and to exhibit little interspecific variation. A study of 14 genera representing all six families of caecilians demonstrates that general patterns of innervation by the trigeminal, facial, glossopharyngeal, and vagus nerves are similar across taxa but that the composition of the "hypoglossal" nerve is highly variable. Probably in all caecilians, spinal nerves 1 and 2 contribute to the hypoglossal. In addition, in certain taxa, an "occipital," the vagus, and/or spinal 3 appear to contribute fibers to the composition of the hypoglossal nerve. These patterns, the lengths of fusion of the contributing elements, and the branching patterns of the hypoglossal are assessed according to the currently accepted hypothesis of phylogenetic relationships of caecilians, and of amphibians. An hypothesis is proposed that limblessness and a simple tongue, with concomitant reduced complexity of innervation of muscles associated with limbs and the tongue, has released a constraint on pattern of innervation. As a consequence, a greater diversity and, in several taxa, greater complexity of neuroanatomical associations of nerve roots to form the hypoglossal are expressed.     

The hyal and ventral branchial muscles in caecilian and salamander larvae: Homologies and evolution

Amphibians (Lissamphibia) are characterized by a bi‐phasic life‐cycle that comprises an aquatic larval stage and metamorphosis to the adult. The ancestral aquatic feeding behavior of amphibian larvae is suction feeding. The negative pressure that is needed for ingestion of prey is created by depression of the hyobranchial apparatus as a result of hyobranchial muscle action. Understanding the homologies of hyobranchial muscles in amphibian larvae is a crucial step in understanding the evolution of this important character complex. However, the literature mostly focuses on the adult musculature and terms used for hyal and ventral branchial muscles in different amphibians often do not reflect homologies across lissamphibian orders. Here we describe the hyal and ventral branchial musculature in larvae of caecilians (Gymnophiona) and salamanders (Caudata), including juveniles of two permanently aquatic salamander species. Based on previous alternative terminology schemes, we propose a terminology for the hyal and ventral branchial muscles that reflects the homologies of muscles and that is suited for studies on hyobranchial muscle evolution in amphibians. We present a discussion of the hyal and ventral branchial muscles in larvae of the most recent common ancestor of amphibians (i.e. the ground plan of Lissamphibia). Based on our terminology, the hyal and ventral branchial musculature of caecilians and salamanders comprises the following muscles: m. depressor mandibulae, m. depressor mandibulae posterior, m. hyomandibularis, m. branchiohyoideus externus, m. interhyoideus, m. interhyoideus posterior, m. subarcualis rectus I, m. subarcualis obliquus II, m. subarcualis obliquus III, m. subarcualis rectus II‐IV, and m. transversus ventralis IV. Except for the m. branchiohyoideus externus, all muscles considered herein can be assigned to the ground plan of the Lissamphibia with certainty. The m. branchiohyoideus externus is either apomorphic for the Batrachia (frogs + salamanders) or salamander larvae depending on whether or not a homologous muscle is present in frog tadpoles. J. Morphol., 2011. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Microsaurs as possible apodan ancestors

The specific ancestry and nature of the relationships of modern amphibians have not yet been established. Detailed comparisons of the anatomy of the skull roof, palate and braincase of living apodans and the Paleozoic microsaur Goniorhynchus demonstrate greater similarities than between apodans and any other group of amphibians, fossil or recent. Unlike any other amphibians, extensive pleurosphenoid ossifications are developed in the area of the Vth nerve, uniting the otic capsule with the sphenethmoid. Other important features that they share (although not uniquely) include the presence of all the primitive dermal elements of the palate, a solidly roofed temporal region, a row of palatal teeth parallel to the marginal dentition and a row of teeth on the medial surface of the lower jaw. The stapes has a similar configuration and position, totally different from that of frogs and salamanders. Such similarities do not necessarily prove close relationship, but indicate the necessity for considering that apodans may have an ancestry distinct from that of frogs and salamanders.     

Molecular Evidence for the Early History of Living Amphibians

The evolutionary relationships of the three orders of living amphibians (lissamphibians) has been difficult to resolve, partly because of their specialized morphologies. Traditionally, frogs and salamanders are considered to be closest relatives, and all three orders are thought to have arisen in the Paleozoic (>250 myr). Here, we present evidence from the DNA sequences of four mitochondrial genes (2.7 kilobases) that challenges the conventional hypothesis and supports a salamander–caecilian relationship. This, in light of the fossil record and distribution of the families, suggests a more recent (Mesozoic) origin for salamanders and caecilians directly linked to the initial breakup of the supercontinent Pangaea. We propose that this single geologic event isolated salamanders and archaeobatrachian frogs on the northern continents (Laurasia) and the caecilians and neobatrachian frogs on the southern continents (Gondwana). Among the neobatrachian frog families, molecular evidence supports a South American clade and an African clade, inferred here to be the result of mid-Cretaceous vicariance.     

Development of the tectum in Gymnophiones,with comparison to other amphibians

Tectal development in a number of caecilian (Gymnophiona: Amphibia) species was examined and compared with that in frogs and salamanders. The caecilian optic tectum develops along the same rostrocaudal and lateromedial gradients as those of frogs and salamanders. However, differences exist in the time course of development. Our data suggest that, as in salamanders, simplification of morphological complexity in caecilians is due to a retardation or loss of late developmental stages. Differences in the time course of development (heterochrony) among different caecilian species are correlated with phylogenetic history as well as with variation in life histories. The most pronounced differences in development occur between the directly developing Hypogeophis rostratus and all other species examined. In this species, the increase in the degree of morphological complexity is greatly accelerated. J. Morphol. 236:233–246, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

The phylogeny of amphibian metamorphosis

Frogs have one of the most extreme metamorphoses among vertebrates. How did this metamorphosis evolve? By combining the methods previously proposed by Mabee and Humphries (1993) and Velhagen (1997), I develop a phylogenetic method suited for rigorous analysis of this question. In a preliminary analysis using 12 transformation sequence characters and 36 associated event sequence characters, all drawn from the osteology of the skull, the evolution of metamorphosis is traced on an assumed phylogeny. This phylogeny has lissamphibians (frogs, salamanders, and caecilians) monophyletic, with frogs the sister group of salamanders. Successive outgroups used are temnospondyls and discosauriscids, both of which are fossil groups for which ontogenetic data are available. In the reconstruction of character evolution, an unambiguous change (synapomorphy) along the branch leading to lissamphibians is a delay in the lengthening of the maxilla until metamorphosis, in accordance with my previous suggestion (Reiss, 1996). However, widening of the interpterygoid vacuity does not appear as a synapomophy of lissamphibians, due to variation in the character states in the outgroups. From a more theoretical perspective, the reconstructed evolution of amphibian metamorphosis involves examples of heterochrony, through the shift of ancestral premetamorphic events to the metamorphic period, caenogenesis, through the origin of new larval features, and terminal addition, through the origin of new adult features. Other changes don't readily fit these categories. This preliminary study provides evidence that metamorphic changes in frogs arose as further modifications of changes unique to lissamphibians, as well as a new method by which such questions can be examined.     

Evolution of the tetrapod ear: an analysis and reinterpretation

The dominant view of tetrapod otic evolution–the “standard view”–holds that the tympanum developed very early in tetrapod history and is homologous in all tetrapods and that the opercular process of the rhipidistian hyomandibula is homologous to the tympanic process of the stapes in lower tetrapods. Under that view, the labyrinthodont amphibians of the Paleozoic are usually considered ancestral to reptiles, and thus the “otic notch” of labyrinthodonts and the tympanum it presumably contained form the starting-point for middle ear evolution in reptiles. Four problems have classically been identified with the standard view: the differing relationships of the internal mandibular branch of N. VII (chorda tympani) to the processes of the stapes in amniotes and anurans; the differing orientations of the stapes in key fossil and living groups; the location of the tympanum in early fossil reptiles; and the transferral of the tympanum, during the origin of mammals, from the stapes to the articular bone of the lower jaw. An examination of these problems and of the solutions proposed under the standard view reveals the ad hoc, and therefore unsatisfactory, nature of the proposed solutions. To organize and review alternative hypotheses of otic evolution an analytical table is constructed, using three characters (tympanic process, Nerve VII, tympanum), each with two possible states. A total of eight hypotheses about middle ear evolution are possible under this system, one of which is the standard view. The seven “non-standard” hypotheses, only five of which have been argued in the literature, are briefly examined. Six of the “non-standard” hypotheses appear unattractive for various reasons, including reliance on ad hoc arguments. The seventh was first proposed by Gaupp in 1898. It is today almost universally ignored but apparently largely for historical rather than scientific reasons. This hypothesis, her called the “alternative view”, appears to rest on assumptions equally as plausible as those of the standard view. Moreover, it offers a solution of the problems associated with the standard view without, apparently, raising any similarly serious problems. This paper compares the standard and alternative views of middle ear evolution in detail. Comparison proceeds on two levels. On one level, they are compared in terms of the hypotheses of phyletic tetrapod relationships each promotes and how strongly each supports its hypothesis. Both views promote the same hypothesis of tetrapod relationships. The alternative view is the more parsimonious, but the difference is not considered sufficient to provide a choice. On another level, the two views are compared in terms of their implications for: (1) the evolution of relative and absolute auditory perceptive ability; (2) the origin of reptiles; (3) the evolution of the suspensorium and cranial kinesis; and (4) the origin and evolution of recent amphibians. The nature of the data required for a test of the implications of the two views is specified in each case. Where data are available. the alternative view is consistent and the standard view is inconsistent with these data. We conclude that the alternative view is the preferable hypothesis of middle-ear evolution. This conclusion implies the following: the tympanic membranes and the tympanic processes of the stapes in recent mammals, reptiles + birds. and frogs. are not homologous; the evolution of “special periotic systems” in the ancestors of amphibians and amniotes were independent events and preceded the evolution of tympanic membranes; the amphibian tympanic membrane. probably including that of labyrinthodonts. is not ancestral to that of amniotes. and that labyiinthodonts with an otic notch are not suitable as amniote ancestors; the stapes of early reptiles functioned primarily as part of the jaw suspension rather than in hearing; the mechanisms and abilities of sound perception in recent tetrapods are likely to be diverse rather than forming parts of a cline; and the lack of a tympanum in Gymnophiona and Caudata may be a retention of a primitive condition.     

Sexual size dimorphism in caecilian amphibians: analysis, review and directions for future research

Sexual dimorphism, widespread in the animal kingdom, describes differences between the sexes in size, shape and many other traits. Sexual size dimorphism (SSD) plays a significant role in understanding life history evolution and mating systems. The snakelike morphology of limbless caecilian amphibians lacking obvious secondary sexual characters (in contrast to frogs and salamanders) impedes accurate intrasexual comparisons. In this study, sexual size dimorphism in the oviparous caecilian Ichthyophis cf. kohtaoensis, a phylogenetically basal caecilian, was analysed. Females were larger in all body and head characters tested. However, when adjusted to body size (total length), females differed only in their cloacal shape. Clutch volume was positively correlated to female body size, thus female fecundity increased with body size supporting the hypothesis of a fecundity-selected SSD in the oviparous Ichthyophis cf. kohtaoensis. A review of the present SSD data for caecilians shows that many species are monomorphic for body size but show dimorphism in head size, while other species demonstrate female-biased SSD. Male-biased SSD has not been reported for caecilians. To understand life history evolution in caecilians, further studies on the reproductive biology of other taxa are urgently needed, in particular for rhinatrematids and uraeotyphlids. New data will allow phylogenetically controlled comparative analyses to fully explore the pattern of SSD among caecilian lineages.