Placodermi

The earliest identifiable placoderm fossils are of Chinese origin and date to the early Silurian. At that time, they were already differentiated into antiarchs and arthrodires, as well as other, more primitive, groups. Earlier fossils of basal Placodermi have not yet been discovered.

The Silurian fossil record of the placoderms is both literally and figuratively fragmented. Until the discovery of Silurolepis (and then, the discoveries of Entelognathus and Qilinyu), Silurian-aged placoderm specimens consisted of fragments. Some of them have been tentatively identified as antiarch or arthrodire due to histological similarities; and many of them have not yet been formally described or even named. The most commonly cited example of a Silurian placoderm, Wangolepis of Silurian China and possibly Vietnam, is known only from a few fragments that currently defy attempts to place them in any of the recognized placoderm orders. So far, only three officially described Silurian placoderms are known from more than scraps:

• the basal antiarch Silurolepis, from the Ludlow epoch of Yunnan, China, known from an almost complete thoracic armor
• Entelognathus, a placoderm incertae sedis that combines features of primitive arthrodires with jaw anatomy otherwise only seen in bony fish and tetrapods.
• Qilinyu, a close relative of Entelognathus that further links Entelognathus as a transitional form between placoderms and other stem-gnathostomes and crown-group gnathostomes.

The first officially described Silurian placoderm is an antiarch, Shimenolepis, which is known from distinctively ornamented plates from Hunan, China. It is originally considered that is from from the late Llandovery, although later study reconsidered its age at Ludfordian.[17] Shimenolepis plates are very similar to the early Devonian yunnanolepid Zhanjilepis, also known from distinctively ornamented plates.[5][18] In 2022, Xiushanosteus is described from complete fossils from Telychian, late Llandovery of Chongqing, China.[19]

Paleontologists and placoderm specialists suspect that the scarcity of placoderms in the Silurian fossil record is due to placoderms' living in environments unconducive to fossil preservation, rather than a genuine scarcity. This hypothesis helps to explain the placoderms' seemingly instantaneous appearance and diversity at the very beginning of the Devonian.

During the Devonian, placoderms went on to inhabit and dominate almost all known aquatic ecosystems, both freshwater and saltwater.[20] But this diversity ultimately suffered many casualties during the extinction event at the Frasnian–Famennian boundary, the Late Devonian extinctions. The remaining species then died out during the end-Devonian extinction; not a single placoderm species has been confirmed to have survived into the Carboniferous.

The earliest studies of placoderms were published by Louis Agassiz, in his five volumes on fossil fishes, 1833–1843. In those days, placoderms were thought to be shelled jawless fish akin to ostracoderms. Some naturalists even suggested that they were shelled invertebrates or even turtle-like vertebrates.

In the late 1920s, Dr. Erik Stensiö, at the Swedish Museum of Natural History in Stockholm, established the details of placoderm anatomy and identified them as true jawed fishes related to sharks. He took fossil specimens with well-preserved skulls and ground them away, one tenth of a millimeter at a time. After each layer had been removed, he made an imprint of the next surface in wax. Once the specimens had been completely ground away (and so destroyed), he made enlarged, three-dimensional models of the skulls to examine the anatomical details more thoroughly. Many other placoderm specialists thought that Stensiö was trying to shoehorn placoderms into a relationship with sharks; however, as more fossils were found, placoderms were accepted as a sister group of chondrichthyans.

Much later, the exquisitely preserved placoderm fossils from Gogo reef changed the picture again. They showed that placoderms shared anatomical features not only with chondrichthyans but with other gnathostome groups as well. For example, Gogo placoderms show separate bones for the nasal capsules as in gnathostomes; in both sharks and bony fish those bones are incorporated into the braincase.[21][22]

Placoderms also share certain anatomical features only with the jawless osteostracans; because of this, the theory that placoderms are the sister group of chondrichthyans has been replaced by the theory that placoderms are a group of stem gnathostomes.

Dunkleosteus

Coccosteus

Titanichthys

Arthrodira ("jointed neck") were the most diverse and numerically successful of the placoderm orders, occupying roles from giant apex predators to detritus-nibbling bottom dwellers. They had a movable joint between armour surrounding the head and body. As the lower jaw moved down, the head shield moved, allowing for a larger opening. All arthrodires, save for Compagopiscis, lacked teeth, and used instead the sharpened edges of a bony plate, termed a "tooth plate," as a biting surface (Compagopiscis had true teeth in addition to tooth plates). The eye sockets are protected by a bony ring, a feature shared by birds and some ichthyosaurs. Early arthrodires, such as the genus Arctolepis, were well-armoured fishes with flattened bodies. The largest member of this group, Dunkleosteus, was a true "superpredator" of the latest Devonian period, reaching 3 to as much as 8 metres in length. In contrast, the long-nosed Rolfosteus measured just 15 cm. Fossils of Incisoscutum have been found containing unborn fetuses, indicating that arthrodires gave birth to live young.[23]

Bothriolepis canadensis

Antiarchi ("opposite anus") were the second most successful order of placoderms known, after the Arthrodira. The order's name was coined by Edward Drinker Cope, who, after incorrectly identifying the first fossils as being those of an armored tunicate, mistakenly thought the eye-hole was the mouth, and the opening for the anal siphon was on the other side of the body, as opposed to having both oral and anal siphons together at one end. The front portions of their bodies were heavily armoured, to the point of literally resembling a box with eyes, with the sometimes scaled, sometimes naked rear portions often becoming sinuous, particularly with later forms. The pair of pectoral fins were modified into a pair of caliper-like, or arthropod-like limbs. In primitive forms, such as Yunnanolepis, the limbs were thick and short, while in advanced forms, such as Bothriolepis, the limbs were long and had elbow-like joints. The function of the limbs is still not perfectly understood, but most hypothesize that they helped their owners pull themselves across the substrate, as well as allowing their owners to bury themselves into the substrate.

Brindabellaspis stensioi

Brindabellaspida ("Brindabella's shield") was a long-snouted placoderm from the Early Devonian. When it was first discovered in 1980, it was originally regarded as a weejasperaspid acanthothoracid due to anatomical similarities with the other species found at the same locality. According to Philippe Janvier, anatomical similarities in the brain of Brindabellaspis stensioi and the brain of a jawless fish suggest it is a basal placoderm closest to the ancestral placoderm. Various Early to Middle Devonian placoderm incertae sedis have also been inserted in the order.

Phyllolepis orvini

Phyllolepida ("leaf scales") were flattened placoderms found throughout the world. Like other flattened placoderms they were bottom-dwelling predators that ambushed prey. Unlike other flattened placoderms, they were freshwater fish. Their armour was made of whole plates, rather than the numerous tubercles and scales of Petalichthyida. The eyes were on the sides of the head, unlike visual bottom-dwelling predators, such as stargazers or flatfish, which have eyes on the top of their head. The orbits for the eyes were extremely small, suggesting the eyes were vestigial and that the phyllolepids may have been blind.

Kimbryanodus williamburyensis

Ptyctodontida ("folded teeth") were lightly armoured placoderms with big heads, big eyes and long bodies. They have a strong but superficial resemblance to modern day chimaeras. Their armour was reduced to a pattern of small plates around the head and neck. Like the extinct and related acanthothoracids, and the living and unrelated holocephalians, most of the ptyctodontids are thought to have lived near the sea bottom and preyed on shellfish. On account of their lack of armour, some paleontologists have suggested that the Ptyctodontida were not placoderms, but holocephalians or the ancestors of holocephalians. Anatomical examinations of whole fossil specimens have shown that the similarities between these two groups are superficial. The major differences were that holocephalians have shagreen on their skin, while ptyctodontids do not; the armoured plates and scales of holocephalians are made of dentine, while those of ptyctodontids are made of bone; the craniums of holocephalians are similar to sharks, while those of ptyctodontids are similar to those of other placoderms; and, most importantly, that holocephalians have true teeth, while ptyctodonts have beak-like tooth plates. Ptyctodontids were sexually dimorphic, with the males having pelvic claspers and possibly claspers on the head as well.

Asterosteus

Rhenanida ("Rhine fish") were flattened, ray-like, bottom-dwelling predators with large, upturned mouths that lived in marine environments. The rhenanids were once presumed to be the most primitive, or at least the closest to the ancestral placoderm, as their armour was made of unfused components—a mosaic of tubercles—as opposed to the solidified plates of "advanced" placoderms, such as antiarchs and arthrodires. However, through comparisons of skull anatomies, rhenanids are now considered to be the sister group of the antiarchs. When rhenanids die, their "mosaics" come apart, and it has been suggested that the rarity of rhenanids in the fossil record reflects postmortem disassociation, and is not an actual rarity of the species.

Palaeacanthaspis

Acanthothoraci ("spine chests") were a group of chimaera-like placoderms closely related to the rhenanid placoderms. Superficially, acanthoracids resembled scaly chimaeras or small, scaly arthrodires with blunt rostrums. They were distinguished from chimaeras by a pair of large spines that emanate from their chests, the presence of large scales and plates, tooth-like beak plates, and the typical bone-enhanced placoderm eyeball. They were distinguished from other placoderms due to differences in the anatomy of their skulls, and due to patterns on the skull plates and thoracic plates that are unique to this order. From what can be inferred from the mouthplates of fossil specimens, acanthothoracids were shellfish hunters ecologically similar to modern-day chimaeras. Competition with their relatives, the ptyctodont placoderms, may have been one of the main reasons for the acanthothoracids' extinction prior to the mid-Devonian extinction event.

Lunaspis

Petalichthyida ("thin-plated fish") were small, flattened placoderms, typified by their splayed fins and numerous tubercles that decorated all of the plates and scales of their armour. They reached a peak in diversity during the Early Devonian and were found throughout the world. The petalichthids Lunaspis and Wijdeaspis are among the best known. There was an independent diversification event that occurred in what is now Southern China, producing a handful of unique genera that were once placed in their own order, "Quasipetalichthyida", named after the first discovered species there, Quasipetalichthys haikouensis. Soon after the petalichthids' diversification, they went into decline. Because they had compressed body forms, it is supposed they were bottom-dwellers that pursued or ambushed smaller fish. Their diet is not clear, as none of the fossil specimens found have preserved mouth parts.

Pseudopetalicthys problematica

Pseudopetalichthyida ("false petalichthyids") is a group of elongated, possibly flattened fishes comprising three, poorly preserved and poorly studied genera. It is known only from rare fossils in Lower Devonian strata in Hunsrück, Germany. Like Stensioella heintzi, and the Rhenanida, the pseudopetalichthids had armour made up of a mosaic of tubercles. Like Stensioella heintzi, the pseudopetalichthids' placement within Placodermi is suspect. The matter is not easy to resolve because there are no complete, undamaged and articulated specimens. The anatomical studies done on the crushed specimens that have been found indicate that if they are placoderms, they may be a group more advanced than the ptyctodonts. As such, placoderm experts consider Pseudopetalichthyida to be the sister group of the Arthrodires + Phyllolepida + Antiarchi trichotomy and the Acanthothoraci + Rhenanida dichotomy.

Stensioella heintzi

Stensioellida ("[Heintz's] little Stensio") contains another problematic placoderm of uncertain affinity, known only from the Lower Devonian Hunsrück slates of Germany. Stensioella was a thin fish that, when alive, looked vaguely like an elongated ratfish, or a skinny Gemuendina with thin, strap-like pectoral fins. Similar to those of the Rhenanida, its armour was a complex mosaic of small, scale-like tubercles. The shoulder joints of its armour are similar to other placoderms, and there are superficial similarities in skull plates, and even more superficial similarities between its tubercles and the tubercles of the rhenanids. It is tentatively placed within Placodermi as a primitive placoderm, though some paleontologists believe the rationale for the placement is inadequate. The paleontologist Philippe Janvier has suggested that Stensioella is not a placoderm, but instead is a holocephalian. If this is true, then the holocephalians diverged from sharks before the Chondrichthyan Devonian radiation.[24] Critics of Janvier's position say that aside from a bodyplan superficially similar to primitive holocephalians, the two groups have little else in common anatomically.