for different styles of grasping and piercing.
Architecturally, the most striking distinction is
betweenRadotina—in which the teeth resem-
ble ornament odontodes and are attached to
the cheek plate—and the three other taxa, all
of which have separate dermal jawbones and
teeth that do not resemble their dermal orna-
ment. In all of the dentitions, the teeth are
nonshedding and lack evidence of resorption.
All are carried by dermal bones that either
have ornamented facial laminae or (as in the
case of CPW.9) suture to facial bones; none
show labial tooth addition. Their phylogenetic
position among the least crownward jawed
vertebrates strongly suggests that marginal
teeth with lingual tooth addition, and possibly
distinct marginal dermal jawbones, are an-
cestral for all gnathostome dentitions.REFERENCES AND NOTES- H. Botella, H. Blom, M. Dorka, P. E. Ahlberg, P. Janvier,Nature
448 , 583–586 (2007). - D. Chen, H. Blom, S. Sanchez, P. Tafforeau, P. E. Ahlberg,
Nature 539 , 237–241 (2016). - M. M. Smith, M. I. Coates, inMajor Events in Early Vertebrate
Evolution, P. E. Ahlberg, Ed. (Taylor and Francis, 2001),
pp. 223–240. - M. M. Smith,Evol. Dev. 5 , 394–413 (2003).
- T. Ørvig,Zool. Scr. 9 , 141–159 (1980).
- M. M. Smith, Z. Johanson,Science 299 , 1235–1236 (2003).
- M. M. Smith, Z. Johanson,Science 300 , 1661 (2003).
- M. Rücklinet al.,Nature 491 , 748–751 (2012).
- Y. Hu, G. C. Young, C. Burrow, Y. Zhu, J. Lu,Palaeoworld 28 ,
525 – 534 (2019). - M. Zhuet al.,Nature 502 , 188–193 (2013).
- M. Zhuet al.,Science 354 , 334–336 (2016).
12. D. Goujet, G. C. Young, inRecent Advances in the Origin and
Early Radiation of Vertebrates, G. Arratia Fuentes, M. V. H. Wilson,
R. Cloutier, Eds. (F. Pfeil, 2004), pp. 109–126.
13. G. C. Young,Palaeontographica 167 , 10–76 (1980).
14. V. Dupret, S. Sanchez, D. Goujet, P. Tafforeau, P. E. Ahlberg,
Nature 507 , 500–503 (2014).
15. S. Kuratani, P. E. Ahlberg,Zoological Lett. 4 ,1–10 (2018).
16. T. Qiao, B. King, J. A. Long, P. E. Ahlberg, M. Zhu,PLOS ONE
11 , e0163157 (2016).
17. G. C. Young,Palaeontology 27 , 635–661 (1984).
18. M. M. Smith, B. Clark, D. Goujet, Z. Johanson,Palaeontology
60 , 829–836 (2017).
19. M. Rücklin, P. C. J. Donoghue,Biol. Lett. 11 , 20150326 (2015).
20. C. Burrow, Y. Hu, G. Young,Biol. Lett. 12 , 20160159 (2016).
21. V. Vaškaninová, P. E. Ahlberg,PLOS ONE 12 , e0174794
(2017).
22. T. Ørvig, inStructural and Chemical Organization of Teeth,
A. Mills, Ed. (Academic Press, 1967), pp. 45–110.
23. T. Ørvig,Colloq. Int. du Cent. Natl. la Rech. Sci. 218 , 41– 71
(1975).
SCIENCEsciencemag.org 10 JULY 2020•VOL 369 ISSUE 6500 215
Fig. 4. Dentition ofTlamaspisinopinatus.(A) Photo of specimen NM Lc 166,
a partly disarticulated head compressed in oblique left dorsolateral view, anterior to
the left. (B) Scan model of assembled block Lc 166 plus 167 rendered semitrans-
parent; Lc 166 is outlined in blue. Tooth-bearing bones are denoted in yellow, and
other bones of the specimen are not shown. The tooth-bearing bones cluster in the
anterior part of the head. Labeled bones are shown in (C). (C) Four tooth-bearing
bones, each shown in labial (top left), end-on (top right), lingual (middle), and occlusal
(bottom) views. Voxel size, 24.59mm. Scale bars, 10 mm [(A) and (B)]; 5 mm (C).RESEARCH | REPORTS