# Bayesian tip-dated timeline for diversification and major biogeographic events in Muroidea (Rodentia), the largest mammalian radiation

Raquel López-Antoñanzas, Tiago Simões, Fabien Condamine, Moritz Dirnberger, Pablo Peláez-Campomanes

► To cite this version:

Raquel López-Antoñanzas, Tiago Simões, Fabien Condamine, Moritz Dirnberger, Pablo Peláez-Campomanes. Bayesian tip-dated timeline for diversification and major biogeographic events in Muroidea (Rodentia), the largest mammalian radiation. BMC Biology, 2024, 22 (1), pp.270. 10.1186/s12915-024-02053-2. hal-05346302

HAL Id: hal-05346302

https://hal.science/hal-05346302v1

Submitted on 4 Nov 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
1

Bayesian tip-dated timeline for diversification and major

2

biogeographic events in Muroidea (Rodentia), the largest

3

mammalian radiation

4

5

Raquel López-Antoñanzas¹,²*, Tiago R. Simões³, Fabien L. Condamine¹, Moritz Dirnberger¹,

6

Pablo Peláez-Campomanes²*

7

8

¹Institut des Sciences de l'Évolution de Montpellier (CNRS/UM/IRD/EPHE), Université de

9

Montpellier, 34095 Montpellier, France

10

²Departamento de Palaeobiología, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales-CSIC, Madrid, Spain

11

³Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton-NJ, 08544,

12

USA.

13

14

*Corresponding authors emails: raquel.lopez-antonanzas@umontpellier.fr;

15

pablopelaez@mncn.csic.es

16

17

**Abstract**

18

**Background:** Extinct organisms provide vital information about the time of origination and biogeography of extant groups. The development of phylogenetic methods to study evolutionary processes through time has revolutionized the field of evolutionary biology and led to an unprecedented expansion of our knowledge of the tree of life. Recent developments applying Bayesian approaches, using fossil taxa as tips to be included alongside their living relatives, have revitalized the use of morphological data in evolutionary tree inferences. Eumuroida rodents represent the largest group of mammals including more than a quarter of all

19

20

21

22

23

24
extant mammals and have a rich fossil record spanning the last ~45 million years. Despite this
wealth of data, our current understanding of the classification, major biogeographic patterns,
and divergence times for this group comes from molecular phylogenies that use fossils only as
a source of node calibrations. However, node calibrations impose several constraints on tree
topology and must necessarily make a priori assumptions about the placement of fossil taxa
without testing their placement in the tree.

**Results:** We present the first morphological dataset with extensive fossil sampling for Muroidea. By applying Bayesian morphological clocks with tip dating and process-based biogeographic models, we provide a novel hypothesis for muroid relationships and revised divergence times for the clade that incorporate uncertainty in the placement of all fossil species. Even under strong violation of the clock model, we found strong congruence between results for divergence times, providing a robust timeline for muroid diversification. This new timeline was used for biogeographic analyses, which revealed a dynamic scenario mostly explained by dispersal events between and within the Palearctic and North African regions.

**Conclusions:** Our results provide important insights into the evolution of Muroidea rodents and clarify the evolutionary pathways of their main lineages. We exploited the advantage of tip dating Bayesian approaches in morphology-based datasets and provide a classification of the largest superfamily of mammals resulting from robust phylogenetic inference, inferring the biogeographical history, diversification, and divergence times of its major lineages.

**Keywords:** Bayesian tip-dating, divergence dates, historical palaeobiography, morphological clock, Muroidea, Rodentia
47

**Background**

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

Establishing an evolutionary timescale is fundamental for tackling a great variety of topics in evolutionary biology, including the reconstruction of patterns of historical biogeography [1], coevolution and diversification [2]. Without knowledge on the timing of evolutionary events, it is not possible to test hypotheses of causality that invoke extrinsic environmental mechanisms, such as the role of tectonics or climate change in the evolution of the clades [3]. Similarly, it is not possible to determine the rate of evolutionary change in response to such causal factors [4]. The tree of life is pruned by extinction and molecular data cannot be gathered for the vast majority of extinct lineages. Hence, the fossil record once provided the gold standard in attempts to establish evolutionary timescales, which was subsequently complemented by molecular clock approaches for groups with extant representatives [5,6].

59

60

61

Besides providing fundamental calibration points for critical nodes in divergence time estimates using molecular clocks [3,7], fossil taxa can now be analyzed either alone—i.e., morphological clocks [8]—or with molecular data in total evidence dating approaches [9,10]. These advances over the past decade have made it possible to infer the placement of fossil tips without prior assumption of their location in the tree nor employing a priori constraints on tree topology, besides providing more accurate and precise estimate for lineage divergence times across nearly all branches of the tree of life—e.g. [11,12,13,14,15,16].

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

Despite the outstanding diversity of rodents among mammals, the richness of their fossil record and their importance to time scaling the molecular trees of living mammals, few attempts have been made to build phylogenies based on morphological data including both extinct and extant rodents [17,18,19]. Further, no study to date has provided a precise timeline for the evolution of its most speciose clade, Muroidea, which with more than 1695 species (Burgin et
al., 2018), is the most diverse group of mammals representing more than a quarter of its total diversity. This group of rodents have a nearly continuous fossil record since the Eocene, which is extremely valuable for informing branch length and, thus, divergence time analyses. These rodents are ubiquitous being distributed in all the geography except for Antarctica. The study of phylogenetic relationships inside the muroids is one of the most complex problems that mammalogist have to tackle. Increasing interest in this clade has led to some molecular phylogenetic analyses of living Muroidea using mitochondrial and nuclear genes, which have provided some insights into their evolutionary relationships [20,21,22,23]. So, huge efforts on molecular studies made over the past two decades, particularly those including broad taxa sampling [22-25], laid the foundation of a subdivision of muroid rodents in twenty subfamilies included in the following six primary monophyletic groups: Platacanthomyidae, Spalacidae, Calomyscidae, Nesomyidae, Cricetidae, and Muridae [23-24]. According to recent molecular studies, Platacanthomyidae with only two genera and five living species is the most basal muroid clade. It diverges from the remaining muroid families in the middle Eocene (around 40-45 Ma) [23] whereas its most ancient fossil, the sole extinct genus, †*Neocometes* has been recorded from the early Miocene of South Asia and Europe [26-27]. Spalacidae or mole rats, includes three extant subfamilies: the Asian Myospalacinae, the African and Asian Rhizomyinae (tribes Tachyoryctini and Rhizomyini) and the Spalacinae, which live in Eastern Europe, Western Asia and the Middle East. They represent the second earliest diverging clade inside Muroidea, from which they split during the Oligocene [23]. These results are in line with palaeontological data, according to which the oldest known crown spalacid, †*Prokanisamys kowalskii* (Rhizomyinae), would come from the Oligocene of Pakistan [28]. However, the first fossil recognized as a true spalacine, †*Pliospalax macovei*, comes from the Pliocene of Romania [29]. Calomyiscidae, a poorly known monogeneric family, is distributed in southwestern Asia. Due to plesiomorphic morphological dental characters, this group of rodents has been
considered by palaeontologists as belonging to a stem group inside Gerbillinae, †Myocricetodontinae [30]. However, molecular results point out to a more basal position inside Muroidea, being sister group of Nesomyidae-Muridae-Cricetidae, from which it diverges circa 20 Ma [23]. Its earliest representatives have been recorded from the Late Miocene of Europe and Turkey [31]. Nesomyidae is divided into six subfamilies Nesomyinae, Delanymyinae, Mystromyinae, Petromyscinae, Cricetomyinae and Dendromurinae, all but the Magalasy Nesomyinae live in sub-Saharan Africa and Zanzibar island. Due to their morphological diversity and dental convergence, different species inside this group were classified as belonging to Muridae or Cricetidae [32]. However, molecular genetic work has evidenced the monophyly of this group [23,33], which is sister clade of the most derived muroids (Muridae plus Cricetidae), from which it diverges circa 19 Ma. The oldest known record of nesomyids represented by the extinct species †Afrocricetodon songhori and †Notocricetodon petteri [34], comes from the Early Miocene of Africa (Kenya, Uganda and Namibia). These taxa have been placed inside the extinct subfamily †Afrocricetodontinae, which has been considered to be part of Nesomyidae.

The Muridae, Old World mice and rats, with more than 800 species [35] is the largest family of mammals. Major taxonomic issues concerning the classification of murid rodents resulted from the morphological dental disparity displayed by the teeth of their representatives, so their systematic has been largely discussed for a long time [32, 36-40]. Phylogenetic analysis using molecular data recovered Muridae as distributed in four monophyletic groups, the subfamilies Lophiomyinae, Deomyinae, Gerbillinae and Murinae, which are generally accepted [22-24]. According to these studies, the most basal murid subfamily is Lophiomyinae followed by Murinae, which is sister group of Deomyinae plus Gerbillinae. The estimation for the dates of the origin, diversification and divergence time
120

among and within these subfamilies is still controversial, and molecular results disagree
sometimes with palaeontological evidences.

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

The second-most speciose muroid family, with more than 700 living species, corresponds to that of Cricetidae, which brings together New World rats and mice (Sigmodontinae, Neotominae and Tylomyinae) and Old World hamsters and voles (Cricetinae, Arvicolinae). Molecular studies agree in recovering the sister group relationship of Cricetidae and Muridae but there are still differences in the estimated ages, in which they would have split (e.g. Early Miocene, [23]) *versus* Late Oligocene [24]. According to molecular results, diversification of cricetid rodents took place in Late Oligocene times and predates that of murids [24] whereas other authors, pointed out that the diversification of cricetids started after that of murids approximately 15 Ma [23]. The issue of estimating divergence ages with accuracy worsen by the inclusion of fossil forms, as there is no consensus regarding the definition of which fossil forms should be included in the family Cricetidae. In fact, it has been a common practice among palaeontologists to include inside Cricetidae all fossil forms having a "cricetid" dental pattern and, therefore, to integrate in this group species recorded from the middle Eocene on. However, other researchers, consider as cricetids exclusively the most derived forms recorded from the lower Miocene onwards, which probably are more directly related to present-day representatives of this family, an opinion that we share.

139

140

141

142

143

144

All in all, molecular studies dealing on rodents in general and on Muroidea in particular have used fossil taxa merely to indirectly calibrate the divergences (node-dating) between living lineages instead of using the rich fossil record of the group for tip dated evidence time estimates. Node calibrations are based on the oldest fossil record of a clade and therefore, they require a prior phylogenetic hypothesis that usually does not exist. Therefore, several different ages have been estimated for the origin and divergence among and within this important group of rodents
[e.g. 21-22, 24, 41] but no consensus has been reached. Moreover, we still ignore the answer to many important questions concerning the evolutionary origins of the muroid. In fact, we remain ignorant of the phylogenetic position of the fossil taxa with respect to their present-day relatives, which directly impact any node based fossil calibrations using only molecular data with many deep nodes having poor support. The main reason not to use the fossil species to be included alongside their living relatives in a tip-calibration is the lack of morphological data.
In fact, the huge number of muroid taxa, their high molar diversity and morphological convergence of their dental characters has prevent palaeontologists and neontologists to build comprehensive phylogenies based on discrete morphological traits including both extinct and extant representatives. It has to be taken in mind that classical definition of the relationships among fossil rodents are mainly based on dental characters because teeth are nearly the sole remains preserved in ancient rodents.

Here, we provide the first detailed timeline of muroid evolution and revision of the placement of several of its fossil members by using tip dated relaxed clock Bayesian inference.
Moreover, we use this new timetree to infer their biogeographical history and elucidate the origin and speciation events of the major branches of the muroid tree of life by applying a maximum likelihood inference of geographic range evolution taking into account non-ultrametric dated trees.

163

## 164 Results and Discussion

The analyses we present below include the most extensive palaeontological database of muroid rodents and constitutes the first attempt to build a phylogeny of Muroidea that includes fossils and extant as tips.

168

## 169 Phylogenetics: Relationships among major clades
The topology of the tree shows two large sister clades. The backbone tree that summarizes the subfamily relationship is shown in Fig. 1. Within the first major clade, Cricetidae is the earliest diverging clade. This latter is sister group of a larger clade that splits into two clades, the Megacricetodontinae on one hand and the Muridae on the other hand. The second clade includes two clades that are sister clades: †Cricetopinae (sensu Maridet and Ni [42]) and †Cricetodontinae. These results evidence that the family Cricetidae, as traditionally conceptualized by palaeontologists, that is considering all cricetid-like rodents as members of this family [42-43], is paraphyletic and that †Megacricetodontinae and †Cricetodontinae are not part of it and should be excluded. All synapomorphies shared by these clades are listed in Additional File 1: Fig. S1.

Cricetidae. The topology of our tree evidences that democricetodontines are, as suspected by some authors (e.g. [43-44], closely related to extant hamsters.

According to our results (Figs 1 and 2) this subfamily originated ~25.8 Ma in China (Figs. 2 and 4). †*Primus microps* appears as the basalmost taxon followed by the earliest deriving †*Democricetodon*, which corresponds to †*Democricetodon sui* from the Early Miocene of the Junggar Basin, China (21.9-21.16 Ma) and represents the oldest record of †*Democricetodon* in Asia [45]. Subsequently deriving taxa include the Turkish †*D. anatolicus* and †*D. doukasi*, followed by the remaining species of †*Democricetodon*. The subsequent divergence of †*D. franconicus*, †*D. mutilus* and then †*D. gracilis* and †*D. fejfari* (as sister species), reveals the first entrance of this subfamily of rodents in Europe circa 17.8 Ma, followed by a migration from Europe toward South and West central Asia ~15.2 Ma (Fig. 2).

The origin of extant cricetines, which are here represented by *Cricetus cricetus* and *Nothocricetulus migratorious* is to be found in some European species close to †*Democricetodon*: †*D. freisingensis* and †*D. gaillardi*. The basal divergence in the crown
195 clade would have occurred around 13.4 Ma (Fig. 1). This latter clade shares some non
196 exclusive synapomorphies such as the lack of lingual anteroloph (12 (0→1)) on the M1 and
197 central atoll on the M3 (52 (0→2)), the presence of the posterior spur of the anterocone
198 (anterior ectoloph, (14 (0→1)) on the M1 or a medium length mesoloph ((21 (0→1), 38
199 (0→1)) on the M1 and M2 (Additional File 1: Fig. S1).

200

201 †*Megacricetodontinae*. We find †Megacricetodontinae as the sister clade to Muridae (Fig. 1).
202 This fact, evidences that the former subfamily is closer to murid than to cricetid ancestry, which
203 led this clade outside from the Cricetidae. This result agrees with the previous hypotheses by
204 Flynn [44], in which †Megacricetodontinae are the outgroup to (Murinae, (Gerbillinae,
205 Deomyinae)) and that it could be seen as an earliest deriving Muridae. According to the
206 topology of our tree, †*Shamalina* is the most recent common ancestor of
207 †Megacricetodontinae+Muridae, from which they diverge approximately 24.3 Ma (Fig. 2).
208 Lindsay [46] suggested that †*Shamalina* (Early Miocene, Saudi Arabia) could have given rise
209 to †*Megacricetodon* whereas Wessels [47] included this taxon within the †Myocricetodontinae.
210 Within †Megacricetodontinae, there are three main clades, whose evolutionary relationships
211 cannot be fully resolved. The first one consist in the sister species, †*Punjabemys downsi* and
212 †*Sindemys shewanensis* from the Early Miocene of Pakistan [47]. Both were considered by
213 Wessels [47] as belonging to †Myocricetodontinae. However, according to our results (Fig. 2),
214 they belong to †megacricetodontines, supporting the ideas of Lindsay [48]. The second clade
215 is composed of a succession of Asian plesiomorphic species that led to †*Megacricetodon*
216 *hellenicus* from the Early Miocene of Aliveri, Greece [49]. This lineage evidences the first
217 entrance of †*Megacricetodon* into the Aegean-Anatolian region which is set up at ~20.4 Ma.
218 The third clade is constituted by a succession of lineages, the most basal of which is †*Vallaris*
219 *zappai* from the Early Miocene of Turkey, which splits into two lineages supporting two
220 independent migration events. The first one led to †*Megacricetodon* aff. *collongensis* (~17.2

221 Ma), the earliest deriving species of the typical central European † “*Megacricetodon bavaricus*

222 group” [50] and the second one includes the split between †*M. andrewsi* and †*M. primitivus* at

223 ~16 Ma. Interestingly, Oliver and Peláez-Campomanes [51] inferred at least three migration

224 events for early †*Megacricetodon* as the basis for key morphological differences they found

225 between this taxon.

226
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Summarized phylogeny of Muroidea. Maximum compatible consensus tree summarizing the relationships among subfamilies and tribes inside muroid rodents. Cones represent the sampled diversity</figcaption></figure>
230
231
232

of each subfamily and tribe and the depth of each cone corresponds to their most recent common
ancestor.

233
234
235
236
237
238
239

*Muridae.* Potential candidates have been proposed for the origin of the different subfamilies and tribes inside Muridae. For instance, †*Abudhabia* has been suggested to be good candidate for being the ancestor of Gerbillinae [52], †*Antemus* for Deomyinae [53] or Murinae [52, 54], †*Karnimata* for the tribes Rattini [54] or Arvicanthini-Millardini-Otomyini [52, 55-56], †*Progonomys* for the tribu Murini [54, 56] and for the tribes Praomyini-Murini-Apodemini [52, 55, 57] and so on.

240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253

The topology of our tree as seen above shows that Muridae is sister group to the †Megacricetodontinae, from which it diverged at ~25.4 Ma (Figs 1-2). Most of their oldest representatives belong to whole extinct lineages that, according to our results, would warrant subfamily status. So Muridae are divided into two sister main clades that diverge approximately 21.9 Ma. The first of them includes the sister subfamilies †Zramyinae and †Mellalomyinae whereas the second one, which is more speciose, shows six main lineages, the subfamilies †Dakkamyoidinae, Gerbillinae, Deomyinae and Murinae (Fig. 1). The diversification of †Dakkamyoidinae and Gerbillinae occurred within very short time intervals from each other, < 2.5 Ma (Fig. 2) whereas that of Murinae and Deomyinae started much later (15.0 Ma and 10.5 Ma, respectively) (Fig. 1). All these clades show the posterior part of the m3 reduced phylogenetic and they share the synapomorphies of having the entoconid-hypoconid reduced (83(0→1)), extremely reduced (83(1→2)), included in a single cusp (83(1→3)) or even absent (83(2→4)) and the posterosinusid small (85(0→1)) or absent (85(1→2)) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1).

254
255

†**Zramyinae:** The earliest deriving split at ~21.9 Ma within the Muridae separates the sister subfamilies †Zramyinae and †Mellalomyinae from the remaining subfamilies of this diversified
group (Figs 1-2). The systematic placement of †*Zramys* has been for a long time questioned. This genus was first considered as belonging to the Cricetidae [58], then suspected to be a †Myocricetodontinae [59] before being formally reallocated to this group [47]. Nevertheless, the phylogenetic relationships of the taxa belonging to this genus have never been formerly analysed. The genus †*Aissamys* was coined in an unpublished thesis [60]. It is therefore not available (*nomen ex dissertatione*). The type and only species of the genus, †*Aissamys seni* from Chouf Aïssa, is here considered as †*Zramys* sp. The topology of the tree shows that the polytypic African genus †*Zramys* forms a monophyletic group that belongs to the new subfamily †Zramyinae, whose origin can be inferred at approximately 16.8 Ma (Fig. 2). The †Zramyinae (node 186) share the exclusive synapomorphy of having lingual spur of the anterocone (11:0→1) on the m1. Additional non exclusive synapomorphies are the presence of posterior spur of the anterocone (14:0→1) on the M1, having an elongated M2 (34:0→1) with a posterior metaloph (39:0→2) and the presence of an anterior spur on the entoconid on the m1 (92:0→1) and m2 (93:0→1) (the latter two, being only shared by †*Notocricetodon petteri*). Moreover, the most derived †Zramyinae share the exclusive synapomorphy of having a transversal protocone spur (23:0→1) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1).

272

†*Mellalomyinae*. The extinct polytypic genus †*Mellalomys* forms a monophyletic group, which splits from †Zramyinae ~20.06 Ma (Figs 1-2). Its earliest deriving taxon is †*Mellalomys* sp. from the Early Miocene of Jebel Zelten, Libya [61]. One node up this lineage splits to give rise to two clades (Fig. 2). The first one includes all African species of the genus whereas the other one comprises the taxa recorded out of Africa and evidences a migration event from Africa towards the Arabian Peninsula and China ~16.4 Ma.

279
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Relaxed-clock Bayesian inference analysis of the morphological dataset with tip dating using the fossilized birth–death tree model. Maximum compatible consensus tree. Numbers above nodes indicate posterior probabilities, numbers below nodes indicate median estimates for the divergence times, and node bars indicate the 95% highest posterior density for divergence times for internal nodes (magenta) and tips (green).</figcaption></figure>

280

281

282

283

284

285

286
287

**†Dakkamyoidinae.** The †Dakkamyoidinae is an extinct endemic subfamily from Pakistan that splits from more derived murids ~20.7 Ma (Figs. 1-2). Its earliest deriving taxon is †*Myocricetodon sivalensis* from the Middle Miocene of Pakistan [48,62]. The inclusion of this species into the genus †*Myocricetodon* has been matter of debate [63-64]. According to the topology of the tree, †*Myocricetodon sivalensis* should be reallocated into the genus †*Dakkamyoides*. This species is sister species to the clade constituted by the two species of †*Dakkamyoides* (†D. lavocati, †D. perplexus).

288

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

**Gerbillinae.** According to our results, Gerbillinae diverged from Murinae+Deomyinae at ~19.8 Ma (Figs 1-2). These three clades share the non-exclusive synapomorphy of lacking the lingual anteroloph on the M2 (31:0→2) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1). The earliest deriving clade inside the Gerbillinae corresponds to an extinct lineage that we call here tribe †Dakkamyini (Fig. 1). Its earliest deriving most taxon is †*Dakkamys zaiani* from the Middle Miocene of Beni Mellal, Morocco [59]. †*Dakkamys zaiani* is the sister species to the clade composed of the remaining known species of †*Dakkamys* and †*Paradakkamys chinjiensis*, which come from the Middle Miocene of Pakistan (Fig. 2). Our analysis suggests that the origin of this tribe predate Middle Miocene times. According to our results (Fig. 2), †*Paradakkamys chinjiensis* should be reallocated into the genus †*Dakkamys*. The †Dakkamyini is the sister clade of a speciose group from which they diverged approximately 18.9 Ma. This latter is constituted by two sister clades. The first of them that we call here †Paradakkamyini, includes all species of †*Myocricetodon* that have developed an enterostyle on the M1 and M2 and sometimes an ectostylid on the m1. Based on these characters, Lindsay [48] excluded these taxa from the genus †*Myocricetodon* and included them together with the genus †*Dakkamys* into the Dendromurinae. However, according to our results, all these species should be reallocated into the genus †*Paradakkamys* in the tribe †Paradakkamyini inside Gerbillinae. Except for its

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

311
earliest deriving taxon †"Myocricetodon" eskihisarensis, which comes from the Middle Miocene of Turkey, the remaining species within this clade are African (†"M." jaegeri, †"M." ouaichi, †"M". seboui). The second group includes the †Myocricetodon species that are characterized by lacking enterostyle on the M1 and M2 and more derived gerbillines. Its earliest deriving taxon is †Myocricetodon parvus from Beni-Mellal, Morocco. This species is, in turn, sister to two clades. The first one is represented by †M. trerki and †M. cherifiensis whereas the second one is a larger clade that includes on one hand †M. irhoudi and †M. ouedi, and on the other hand the clade †Abudhabia radinski plus more derived gerbils. This latter group includes the living gerbils and it is supposed to be close to the ancestry of all extant members of Gerbillinae. Our results (Figs 1 and 2) agrees with those of Jaeger [59], who suggested the polyphyly of †Myocricetodon. As seen above, one of the former lineages considered to be within †Myocricetodon is excluded from the genus †Myocricetodon and reallocated into the genus †Paradakkamys. Our results agree with those pointed out by [64], who considered all species belonging to the genus †Paradakkamys and †Dakkamys as more closely related to gerbils than to murines. Moreover, the topology of our tree evidence that both †Dakkamys and †Paradakkamys belong to Gerbillinae. The most derived Gerbillinae (†Abudhabia radinski plus more derived gerbils) have sister relationships with †Myocricetodon irhoudi as suggested previously by some authors [59, 65-66]. The origin of the Gerbillinae crown-group is inferred at ~4.5 Ma ((median age; 95% highest posterior density [HPD]:3.08-6.1 Ma). Inside this group, our results show a basal split between (Desmodillus, Gerbillurus) on one hand and (Gerbillus (Psammomys, Meriones)) on the other hand. These results are in agreement with molecular studies, in which Desmodillus and Gerbillurus belongs to the tribe Taterini (Taterini II sensu Alhajeri et al. [67], which is in turn sister group of a clade that includes the tribe Gerbillini (Gerbillini I sensu Alhajeri et al. [67]) with Psammomys and Meriones being closer to one another than either is to Gerbillus. According to our morphological clock, the split between
337

Taterina and Gerbillina (here considered as subtribes) took place between the end of the Miocene and the beginning of the early Pliocene. These results are in line with the fossil record, from which we know that the oldest fossils attributed to modern gerbil genera date from the Early Pliocene (5.1 Ma) of Langebaanweg, South Africa [68].

338

339

340

341

The species belonging to the tribes †Paradakkamyini and Gerbillini share the synapomorphy of having an extreme degree of reduction on the m3 (76:3→4) with the exception of †M. *parvus*, in which the m3 is reduced but to a lesser extent (Additional File 1: Fig. S1) as it is in the representatives of the tribe †Dakkamyini. This reduction in the size of the third molars comes together with the reduction on the number of roots from two (on the m3) and three (on the M3) to one (characters 86(0→2) and 89(0→3)). The species included in the clade (†*Myocricetodon parvus* + more derived species) share the synapomorphy of lacking the entoconid on the m3 (84:1→2) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1). This synapomorphy is also present in all Deomyinae but the earliest deriving most one (†*Preacomys karsticus*).

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

**Murinae and Deomyinae.** Our results agree with molecular studies in recovering the monophyly of Gerbillinae, Murinae and Deomyinae as well as in evidencing a close relationship between these clades (Fig. 1). However, the phylogenetic position of these clades relative to one another differs from what has been recovered using molecular analyses. Molecular results indicate a sister-group relationship between Murinae and the clade Deomyinae+Gerbillinae [21-23,69]. However, the topology of our tree shows Gerbillinae as sister clade to Murinae+Deomyinae. This is a matter of great interest because Deomyinae have been solidly placed inside murines by palaeontologists on the basis of the morphology of their molars. Despite numerous attempts to morphologically demonstrate that *Acomys*, a representative of Deomyinae, did not belong to Murinae, the difficulty remained. As Jacobs and Flynn [70] pointed out, *Acomys* if not a murine, represents a very rare case of a nearly

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

359

360

361
362

perfect convergence in complex dental features among rodents. Our results based on dental
morphological data allow separating Deomyinae from Murinae but they place these subfamilies
closer to one another than either is to the Gerbillinae.

363

364

365

According to our results (Figs 1-2), Gerbillinae represents the sister clade of a large
group, the earliest deriving taxon of which is †*Ameuromys grandis* from the Late Miocene of
Egypt [71]. This species shares with some species of †*Zramys* and †*Mellalomys* the non-
exclusive synapomorphy of having three roots, the anterior one of which is divided on the m2
(78:0→1) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1). †*Ameuromys grandis* splits into two lineages. The
smaller one includes the species belonging to †*Potwarmus*, which are sister group of murines
+ deomyines, from which it diverges approximately 17.1 Ma. Therefore, our results provide
evidence that †*Potwarmus*, which was once considered a stem murine [64,56] similar to
†*Antemus* [72], does not belong to Murinae but to an early dead-end offshoot of the clade
leading to Murinae and Deomyinae.

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

Murinae and Deomyinae share the exclusive synapomorphy of having on the M1 an
anterocone divided with its lingual part larger than the labial one (6:2→3) These two clades
together with *Potwarmus* share the exclusive synapomorphy of having the main cusps of the
M1 forming rows (4:1→2) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1).

376

377

378

379

Deomyinae is a subfamily of rodents mainly endemic from Africa (except for the genus *Acomys*, which is also found in the Middle East and Crete). The origin of this clade is set up approximately 10.5 Ma. Its most earliest deriving member is †*Preacomys karsticus* from the early Late Miocene (circa 10 Ma) of Harasib, Namibia [73], which is sister species of the remaining taxa of this subfamily. Deomyinae share the exclusive synapomorphy of having the hypocone of the M3 lingual to the protocone (58:3→4) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1).

380

381

382

383

384

385

Interestingly, Jacobs and Flynn [70] pointed out that if *Acomys* is not a Murinae, it
should have diverged from the latter prior to †*Progonomys* or †*Antemus*. Our results, are in

386
387

line with the thoughts of these authors and evidence a split between Deomyinae and Murinae prior to †*Progonomys* and †*Antemus* (see below).

388

389

†*Antemus* is known by two Pakistani species, †*Antemus mancharensis*, the oldest one from the late Early Miocene (ca. 15 Ma, [47]), and †*Antemus chinjiensis*, the youngest, (13.8-13.05 Ma [57]). The topology of our tree suggests that the most basal stem murine is †*Antemus mancharensis*, which is not unexpected given the absence of a real t1 in some M1 of this species, which show a low ridge instead [47:218]. †*Antemus chinjienis* and †*Progonomys manolo* insert sequentially on the stem. Both taxa show a true t1 on all their M1 (novelty already fixed), the development of which already started in †*A. mancharensis* (without reaching fixation in this taxon). The presence of a t1 may have taken place at ~15.02 Ma, age at which we establish the origin of Murinae (Figs 1-2). Our results show agreement with the fossil record, with the oldest murine rodent dating back approximately 15Ma. According to the topology of our tree, †*Progonomys manolo* leads to two main clades, the first of which with †*Karnimata darwini* as the most basal taxon, leads to the tribe Apodemini, from which it splits at approximately 9.8 Ma. The second clade splits into two clades, the first of which shows as basal †*Mus auctor* and leads to the tribes Praomyini and Murini as sister groups whereas the second one has as basal most taxon †*Karnimata huxleyi* that give rise to the tribes Rattini and Arvicanthini. Interestingly, despite this work focuses on exploring deeper nodes inside Muridae, even a small representation of murines allows recovering the monophyly of this subfamily inside murids. In this way, Murinae shares the synapomorphies of having a t1 but no lingual branch of the anterio cingulum on the M2 (32:1→3), the presence of the anterolabial cuspid (A1) (96:0→3) and labial cuspids (C1 or/and C3) on the m2 (102:0→2). Crown Murinae, which are here represented by all murines but †*Antemus* and †*Progonomys*, are characterized by the presence of a t1 together with the loss of the lingual branch of the anterior cingulum on the M2 (32:3→4), by having t3 (33:2→3) on the M2, a large t1 on the M3

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411
412

(44:2→4) and the entoconid and hypoconid merged in a single cusp on the m3 (83:1→3). Our

413

findings also support the monophyly of the tribes analysed here: Arvicanthini, Rattini, Murini,

414

Praomyini and Apodemini (synapomorphies are shown in Additional File 1: Fig. S1).

415

Moreover, our analysis identifies a closer relationship between Apodemini and the sister tribes

416

Murini and Praomyini than either is to Arvicanthini, which is in agreement with molecular

417

studies [23, 74] and palaeontological data [56]. The basal position of *Golunda* inside the

418

Arvicanthini, followed by the divergence of *Oenomys* has also been recovered in molecular

419

studies [23, 74]. However, we recognize two clearly separate species inside †*Karnimata* that

420

would give rise independently to the tribes Apodemini (†K. darwini) on one hand and

421

Arvicanthini and Rattini (†K. huxleyi) on the other hand, whereas †*Progonomys* would be a

422

stem murine. Nevertheless, the presence of a t1 together with the already loss of the lingual

423

branch of the anterior cingulum on the M1 exhibited by †*Progonomys* (13:3→4), a

424

synapomorphy shared by crown murines, leave still room for doubt concerning the exclusion

425

of this genus from the crown group. The origin of Murini and Praomyni is, according to our

426

results, related to another important fossil taxon †*Mus auctor*. According to Kimura et al. [57]

427

and Flynn et al. [56] the origin of Murini and Arvicanthini would be found in †*Progonomys*

428

and †*Karnimata*, respectively.

429

The inclusion here of a small sample of extinct and extant murine representatives does

430

not allow to fully understand the tempo and mode of evolution of murines, which merits a study

431

on its own. In fact, hundreds of fossil and living species of murine rodents need still to be added

432

in a more comprehensive phylogenetic analysis (in preparation) to finally depict their

433

evolutionary history of what is the most specious subfamily of mammals.

434

435

†*Cricetodontinae*. Our results indicate that Cricetodontinae are not closely related to

436

Cricetidae, Megacricetodontinae and Muridae (Figs. 1-2), so the extinct subfamily
Cricetodontinae should be excluded from all these groups. The subfamily Cricetodontinae diverged from the primitive Cricetopinae approximately 27.24 Ma (Figs 1-2). The earliest deriving clade within the Cricetodontinae (Fig. 2) is represented by two sister species †Cricetodon versteegi and †C. goklerensis from the Early Miocene of Turkey [75-76]. This clade is sister clade to a larger group that includes all remaining species of the subfamily. Its earliest deriving clade has two main branches. The first one includes a sequence of species of †Cricetodon from China giving rise to (†C. wanhei (†C. sonidensis, †Mixocricetodon dehmi, (†C. fengi and †Gobiocricetodon filippovi)) whereas the second branch includes the †C. kasapligili as giving rise to †C. tobieni and †C. aliveriensis as sister species. The split of these two early deriving clades and the clade comprising more derived species of †Cricetodon and the species of †Byzantinia and †Hispanomys is set up at 22.29 Ma. Inside this clade, the earliest deriving lineage is represented by the Turkish species †C. fikreti and †C. trallesensis that diverged from the main clade at approximately 20.48 Ma. This latter clade splits into two main branches. The first one comprises (†C. orientalis (C. aureus, C. meini)) as sister species of most of the Middle Miocene European species of †Cricetodon. The second main lineage comprises three lineages. The first one represented by the Middle Miocene European †C. hungaricus and †Deperetomys hagni. The second one leads to †Hispanomys and includes the late Middle Miocene †Cricetodon from Central Europe †Cricetodon caucasicus, †C. fandli, †C. klariankae and †C. venzecli, which should be considered as †Hispanomys. The third one, from which †Byzantinia originates, is unresolved, and contains the Middle Miocene †Cricetodon pasalarensis, †Cricetodon cariensis and †C. candirensis, which would be early representatives of †Byzantinia. The clade that includes the most derived species of †Cricetodon that lead to all species of †Hispanomys and †Byzantinia share the synapomorphy (78(0→2)) of having three roots with the posterior one divided on the m2 (except for †B. sofcaensis, which is two rooted and the most derived †B. uenayae, which is four rooted, 78(2→3)) (Additional
462

File 1: Fig. S1). Some additional synapomorphies consist in the presence of a long longitudinal or oblique backward paracone spur (15(1→2, 3)) and an anterior spur of the metacone (16(0→1)) on the M1 or having an elongated M2 (34(0→1)) (Additional File 1: Fig. S1).

463

464

465

466

**†Cricetopinae Deperetomys/Meteamys clade.** On the basis of a cladistics analysis [42] coined the new subfamily †Cricetopinae to include the species †*Paracricetops*, †*Cricetops*, †*Deperetomys* (Early Miocene forms), †*Meteamys*, †*Selenomys*, †*Melissiodon*, †*Mirrabella*, †*Enginia*, †*Muhsinia*, and †*Aralocricetodon*. Two rodents from this analysis (†*Deperetomys* and †*Meteamys*) have been included in ours. The origin of †*Deperetomys* and †*Meteamys* has been widely discussed [43, 45, 76-77]. Some authors considered that †*Deperetomys* and †*Meteamys* together with †*Cricetodon* and †*Eumyarion* probably derived from the early stock of cricetodontines [76]. Other authors considered them as belonging to a new subfamily, †*Eumyarioninae* [77]. Our results agree with those of [42] in finding †*Early Deperetomys* and †*Meteamys* as members of a subfamily outside of Cricetodontinae, which they called †*Cricetopinae*. Interestingly, our results indicate that †*Deperetomys hagni* belongs, in fact, to the genus †*Cricetodon*. The similarities between †*Deperetomys hagni* and some species of †*Cricetodon* have been noticed since the discovery of that species. Fahlbusch [78] named this species as †*Cricetodon sansaniensis hagni* and Mein and Freudenthal [43] coined †*Deperetomys* as a subgenus inside †*Cricetodon* based on the type species †*Cricetodon (Deperetomys) hagni*. In the same line of reasoning, the species †*Cricetodon hungaricus* was named as a subspecies of †*Deperetomys hagni*. Therefore, it is not surprisingly that our results evidence that †*Deperetomys hagni* belongs in fact to †*Cricetodon* and should be reallocated to this genus. As †*Deperetomys hagni* is the type species of the genus, it is plausible that after carrying out a comprehensive analysis of the species belonging to these ancient lineages is necessary to coin a new genus to reallocate all species of †*Deperetomys* but †*D. hagni*.

467

468

469

470

471

472

473

474

475

476

477

478

479

480

481

482

483

484

485

486
487

488

†*Notocricetodon pelteri*+*Afrocricetodon songhori*. †*Notocricetodon* and †*Afrocricetodon* are the first fossils belonging to the Muroidea that have been recorded in Africa. They date from the early to middle Miocene and have been included in the fossil subfamily †Afrocricetodontinae by Lavocat [34], who already suspected that they could belong to Nesomyidae. Over the history, various tentatively classifications of Nesomyidae, which were considered with different taxonomic rank (family or subfamily, depending on the authors), have been carried out [79 and references therein] but the high level of dental convergence they show have made very difficult to infer their phylogenetic relationships [80]. Finally, molecular studies have put in evidence that Nesomyinae together with other african groups (Delanymyinae, Mystromyinae, Petromyscinae, Cricetomyinae, Dendromurinae) constitutes the family Nesomyidae, which is basal to the Muridae [23]. However, their relationship with some extinct taxa such as †*Democricetodon* or †*Myocricetodon* is still matter of discussion [81 and references therein].

489

490

491

492

493

494

495

496

497

498

499

500

501

Our results support the monophyly of the sister taxa †*Afrocricetodon* and

502

†*Neocricetodon* and its basal position with regard to †Cricetodontinae, Cricetidae and

503

Muridae, which is in agreement with molecular studies [23]. These two taxa are an archaic

504

African lineage that split from †Cricetopinae and †Cricetodontinae approximately 28.6 Ma.

505

The relationship between these fossil species with extant genera belonging to

506

Nesomyidae are still unknown. In fact, due to dental convergence of the Nesomyidae,

507

*Saccostomus* branches in our analysis inside the clade Deomyinae. So, much more taxa

508

belonging to extinct and extant members of Nesomyidae as well as additional morphological

509

characters that complements the dental ones, particularly in that concerning the skull and

510

muscles, need to be added in future phylogenetic analyses to finally depicted the relationships

511

between extinct and extant members of this African family of rodents.
512

513 **Divergence times**

514

515

516

517

518

519

520

521

Fossil data are fundamental to molecular clock methodology, providing the key means of clock calibration. In order to use fossils as calibration points for molecular clock, we need to know the phylogenetic position of these fossils into a tree and to set up the time, in which the clades to which these fossils belong, originated and diverged. So, one of the most difficult challenge facing any scientist working in phylogenetic inferences using molecular dataset is the phylogenetic position of the fossils in the tree. In fact, early fossils may be representatives of stem lineages rather than crown groups [23] or belong to a different group, for which they have been used as calibration points. In all these cases, the calibrations will be wrong.

522

523

524

525

526

527

528

Our analyses herein infer with strong support the placement of several fossil groups never previously tested using Bayesian tip dating approaches. Importantly, we find a strong convergence of divergence time estimates for nearly all nodes within Eumuroida using multiple relaxed clock models— even when using models (i.e., WN) strongly rejected by our Bayes factors comparisons (Fig. 3, Table 1). This demonstrates that our inferred divergence times are robust to model violation and provide a precise (narrow highest posterior density intervals) timeline of muroid evolution.

529
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** Density tree contrasting divergence times under distinct clock models. Each tree represents the maximum compatibility tree and median divergence times obtained from each model. Gray bars at nodes indicate range between maximum and minimum divergence times for each model and node values represent the midpoint between these respective maximum and minimum divergence times. Abbreviations: IGR, independent gamma rates uncorrelated clock; ILN, independent lognormal relaxed clock; TK02, continuous autocorrelated clock; WN, white noise uncorrelated clock.</figcaption></figure>

530

531

532

533

534

535

536

537
538

We find the origin of the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of Eumuroida (sensu [22]) at ~32.45 Ma (median age; 95% highest posterior density [HPD]: 30.38-34.45 Ma). This implies that the origin of this large clade (inclusive of all muroids except for Platacanthomyidae and Spalacidae) predates the age inferred by molecular clock studies using only node calibrations by at least 7 Ma Schenk et al. [21] and by more than 12 Ma as estimated by Steppan and Schenk [23] and inferred 22% and 37.5% underestimate for the total age of Eumuroida, respectively.

539

540

541

542

543

544

545

The topology of our summary tree suggests that neither †Cricetopinae nor †Cricetodontinae are a part of Cricetidae. The split between †Cricetopinae and †Cricetodontinae took place at ~27.2 Ma (median age; 95% highest posterior density (HPD): 26.1, 28.5 Ma). The origin of the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of †Cricetodontinae is at ~25.43 Ma (median age; 95% highest posterior density (HPD): 24.1, 26.8 Ma) and that of the †Cricetopinae is ~25.8 Ma. The divergence between Cricetidae and the clade Muridae+†Megacricetodontinae is at ~28Ma and the origin of the MRCA of Cricetidae, around 25.8 Ma. Hedges and Kumar [82], based on the supertree they built, estimated a much older age (40.2 Ma) for the origin of Cricetidae whereas [21] and [23] a much younger one (17.7 Ma and 14.6 Ma, respectively). According to these latter authors, Cricetidae would have originated after the Muridae. However, our results agree with the fossil record that evidences without any doubt that the origin of cricetids took place much earlier than that of murids.

546

547

548

549

550

551

552

553

554

555

556

557

The inclusion in our analysis of murid fossils now recognized as stem Muridae (†Zramyinae, †Mellalomyinae, †Dakkamyoidinae) evidence the existence of Muridae at least since 21.89 Ma. So, our estimate predates the age inferred by molecular clock studies given by Aghová et al. [52] (20.1 Ma), [21] (20.7 Ma) and [23] (17.4 Ma).

558

559

560

561

We find the origin of the MRCA of murines at ~15 Ma, one million years older to that obtained for the origin of this group by Schenk et al. [21] (14.2 Ma) and Rowe et al. [83] (14

562
Ma) but somewhat younger than the age estimated by Aghová et al. [52] (15.9 Ma). The divergence age between †*Progonomys* and the crown group of murines is here set up in circa 13.1 Ma and the origin of the MRCA of the crown murines that leads to all known extant species of murines in 10.7 Ma. The oldest fossil occurrences of †*Antemus* (†*A. mancharensis*), †*Progonomys* (†*P. morganae*) and †*Karnimata* (†*K. fejfari*) fall within the time ranges we have estimated by our divergence dates. If we consider †*K. darwini* as the most basal representative of Apodemini, this tribe would have originated around 9.8 Ma, which is consistent with molecular studies [74]. However, the origin of the crown group of this tribe is considerably younger (4.4-5.9 Ma). Our estimates for the timing of the origin of Praomyini and Murini lineages is 1.9-5.1 Ma and that for the origin of the tribes Rattini and Arvicanthini 5.5-7.8 Ma. Our presented divergence time estimates for extant tribes are younger than that inferred by other studies [74, 84] who inferred for instance an approximately age of 8 Ma and 8.4 Ma for the origin of Arvicanthini and circa 8 Ma and 7.6 Ma for the Praomyini. Despite the fact that fossils representatives of modern genera among murines are not reported with certainty before 5-7 Mya [53] and therefore their evolutionary time frame should not be much older than that, we remain caution concerning the origin and divergence ages of the most derived clades inside murines until the completion of a more comprehensive analysis.

According to our results, Deomyinae originated at ~10.47 Ma, approximately 2 Myrs before the age estimated by Schenk et al. [21], and 2 and 3 Myrs after that estimated by Steppan and Schenk [23] and Aghová et al. [52], respectively. The earliest fossil Deomyinae showing a modern deomyine dental pattern (†*Preacomys*) has been recovered from Ethiopia and Namibia around 11-9.5 Ma [73,85].

Gerbillinae are here considered to be the clade (†Dakkamyini (†Paradakkamyini + †Gerbillini)). The origin of its MRCA is at ~18.92 Ma and that of its crown-group (†*Abudhabia radinski*+more derived gerbils) at ~8.13 Ma. Previous molecular clock hypotheses have placed
588

589

590

591

592

593

594

595

596

597

the origin of the Gerbillinae either earlier, around 23.7-23.6 Ma [86:SA1,56] or later, approximately, 10.2 Ma [23]. One of the possible reasons for such disparity could be the inherent problems due to the use of the origin of clades as age constraints. A usual error is to neglect the extinct lineages belonging to these clades, and therefore, considering them younger than what they probably are. For instance, according to the topology of our tree we could have considered Gerbillinae as the clade including †*Abudhabia radinski* plus more derived gerbils (origin at ~8.13 Ma), or †*Myocricetodon parvus*+more derived gerbils (origin at ~13.29 Ma), or (†Paradakkamyini + (†*Myocricetodon parvus*+more derived gerbils)) (origin ~15.21 Ma) or (†Dakkamyini+(†Paradakkamyini+(†*Myocricetodon parvus*+more derived gerbils))), whose origin is at ~18.92 Ma.

598

599

600

Each of these clades have different origin-time estimates and the results of molecular clock analyses will be impacted depending on which one is taken as calibration point. The accurate choice of these calibration points requires deep palaeontological knowledge.

601

602

**Historical biogeography**

603

604

605

606

607

Fossil data are vital to infer the biogeographical history of a given group [87]. The results of the dispersal-extinction-eXtended cladogenesis (DECX) analysis suggest that the origin of the extinct subfamilies †Cricetopinae and †Cricetodontinae is estimated in Anatolia, whereas that of Cricetidae, †Megacricetodontinae and Muridae includes several regions (Fig. 4).

608

609

610

611

612

†*Cricetodontinae*. Our results show some inter and intra-continental exchanges since their origin in Anatolia some 25.5 Ma. The first dispersal from Anatolia towards Central Asia occurred circa 19.32Ma. This event could have promoted the diversification of Chinese plesiomorphic species of †‘*Cricetodon*’. The first migration of †*Cricetodon* from Turkey
613

towards Greece took place in the early Miocene (ca. 19.3 Ma). Most European cricetodontines come from an independent Anatolian lineage that dispersed into the central and south-western part of the continent between 16.74 and 17.89 Ma. Another dispersal event towards western China is inferred between 14.93 Ma and 13.5 Ma. A subsequent dispersal event of †Cricetodon from Anatolia to Central and SW Europe (ca. 15.96 Ma) would have led to the origin of the genus †Hispanomys but continued evolving in Anatolia as the genus †Byzantinia, whose origin has been estimated approximately 15.97 Ma. According to our results, the Late Miocene cricetodontines are not closely related to the middle Miocene European ones. In fact, they evolved from an Anatolian ancestor that dispersed in South western Europe between 17.89 and 16.74 Ma.

614

615

616

617

618

619

620

621

622

623

624

625

626

627

628

629

630

631

632

633

634

**Cricetidae.** According to our results, extant cricetines evolved from some lineages belonging to Democricetodontinae as already suspected [88]. So, we here consider democricetodontines as Cricetidae *sensu stricto* and inferred their ancestral origins to be in South Central Asia (Fig. 3) from where they rapidly dispersed into West Central Asia and Anatolia. The DECX analysis indicates a dynamic biogeographical history for cricetids with speciation mainly occurring by dispersal. The first entrance of these rodents from Anatolia into Greece and Central and Southwestern Europe is estimated between 19 and 16.7 Ma. The delayed entrance of this group into Europe could have been the result of geographical isolation of the Dinarian-Anatolian Island [89]. Later on, these rodents dispersed eastwards from Europe towards South and East Central Asia (17.58-15.28 Ma) but continued evolving in Europe from where extant cricetines are supposed to have originated and then dispersed into Asia and the Middle East.

635

636

However, as our sample only includes a limited sample of extinct and extant cricetids, the biogeographical inferences concerning this group should be taken with caution.
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** Historical biogeography of Muroidea. The schematic map shows the 13 biogeographical areas for the DECX analysis. Colored squares on the map correspond to colored squares for each node, representing inferred ancestral range(s) with the DECX model. Colored circles at tips correspond to present-day distributions.</figcaption></figure>
642

643

†*Megacricetodontinae*. The ancestral area of this subfamily, which is recovered as the sister
group of Muridae, comprises a range including the regions of Anatolia and South Central Asia.

644

645

Its biogeographical history is characterized by no vicariance but some dispersal events. Early
Miocene dispersals took place from South Central Asia to West Central Asia (22.4-20.4 Ma)

646

647

and from there to Greece (20.4 and 17.64 Ma). The first entrance of the genus †*Megacricetodon*
into Greece is estimated between 18.17 and 17.31 Ma. Two additional dispersal events in

648

649

Europe for early species of †*Megacricetodon* have been identified: the first from Asia to Central
Europe (20.18-18.37 Ma), and the second from Anatolia to Southwestern Europe (ca. 16.2

650

651

Ma). These results are in agreement with a recent study [51], who inferred at least three
migration events in Europe for early †*Megacricetodon* forms. As with cricetids, our study only

652

653

includes a partial representation of megacricetodontines, and the results should be interpreted
with caution as well.

654

655

656

*Muridae*. The most likely ancestral geographic origin at the root of Muridae covers South
Central Asia, Arabia, and North Africa (ca. 21.9 Ma). Our results also point to a dynamic
biogeographical history, in which vicariance events (n=4) were less numerous than dispersal
(n=11). The fact that North Africa may have been an important ancestral area for the historical
biogeography of Muridae was expected. In fact, after the collision of the Afro-Arabian plate
with Eurasia [90], the subsequent closure of the Tethys Sea and the emergence of a land-bridge
between these continents have facilitated dispersals from Asia towards Africa and *vice versa*.

657

658

659

660

661

662

663

Even though the fossil record brings to light the beginning of a foremost faunal interchange *ca.*
20-19 Ma, there is evidence that indicates intermittent trans-Thetyan dispersals before this time
[91] and references therein). So, it is plausible that ancestral murids had already spread from
Asia and Arabia into North Africa shortly before 22 Ma. The analysis of the three main

664

665

666
subfamilies within Muridae (Gerbillinae, Murinae and Deomyinae) together with the three extinct murid subfamilies (†Zramyinae, †Mellalomyinae, †Dakkamyoidinae), evidence that some subfamilies such as the †Mellalomyinae (18.5 Ma), †Zramyinae (16.8 Ma), Gerbillinae (18.9 Ma) and Deomyinae (10.5 Ma) mostly or completely diversified into Africa. In fact, early murid clades are of African origin. So, †Zramyinae are endemic from Africa where they originated some 16.85 Ma and then diversified. The ancestral origin of the †Mellalomyinae (18.53 Ma) is also estimated in Africa. However, this extinct lineage seems to have dispersed into Arabia and South Asia between this time and 2 My after and later dispersed into East Asia (16.3-13.4 Ma) where *Mellalomys gansus* has been found. The ancestral area of the †Dakkamyoidinae is recovered in South Central Asia where they evolved and diversified before become extinct in this region. The most likely ancestral geographic origin for the crown group of Muridae is similar with that evidenced for the root of all murids.

The origin of Gerbillinae, which includes the two extinct tribes †Dakkamyini and †Paradakkamyini as well as the tribe Gerbillini, is also inferred in South Central Asia, Arabia and North Africa as all early-diverged murids and the tribe †Dakkamyini. DECX analysis points out to a North African origin for all gerbillines, except for †Dakkamyini that had a broader ancestral range, from where they dispersed to Anatolia (15.2-12.0 Ma), and to Arabia and South Central Asia (12.0-8.13 Ma) to give rise to the Gerbillini.

The analysis recovers an ancestral area for †*Potwarmus* that includes South Central Asia, Arabia, and North Africa. The oldest record of this taxon comes from Pakistan (locality 592) from where it is known since 16 Ma [56]. †*Potwarmus* dispersed eastwards about 15.7 Ma and enter into South Central Asia where it has been recorded in Thailand [92]. At the same time, this taxon dispersed westwards through Arabia entering into North Africa. In fact, remains of †*Potwarmus* have been found in early Middle Miocene deposits at Al-Jadidah, Arabia (12-14Ma; [64]) and Jebel Zelten, Libya (14-15 Ma; [61]).
692

Deomyinae, mostly endemic from Africa, are supposed to have lived and diversified in this continent. A dispersal event from North Africa towards its South and East parts took place between 15.57 and 10.47 Ma.

693

694

695

Murinae, also known as "true murids" originated in South Central Asia ca. 15.6 Ma.

696

The oldest known murine rodents have been recorded in the Potwar Plateau (Pakistan) where they had a remarkable diversity through time [56]. Primitive murine rodents seem to have endemically evolved at least during 2 Ma in the Indian subcontinent, which was rather isolated by high mountains to the north, large rivers on the east and desertic areas on the west [56]. The exodus of †*Progonomys* out of South Central Asia could have been bolstered by the sea level drop that took place some 11.6 Ma [93]. †*Progonomys*, dispersed out of Pakistan between 13.1 Ma and 10.5 Ma, date in which this taxon is already recorded in Turkey and Lebanon [94]. In fact, the arrival of *Progonomys* into the Arabian Peninsula is possibly related with the final closure of the eastern Tethys and the end of marine connection between the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean along northern Arabia [95] and see discussion in López-Antoñanzas et al. [94].

697

698

699

700

701

702

703

704

705

706

707

Our results indicate an important wave of dispersal for Muridae that seems to have been at the origin and diversification of all important subfamilies. In fact, early Miocene ancestors of murids entered in Africa, colonizing a new environment. Interestingly, all early diverging lineages that gave rise to the main murid clades share a common biogeographical range that covers North Africa, Arabia, and South Central Asia. So, the collision between Afro-Arabia and Eurasia likely played an important role in the origin and diversification of murids, the largest family of mammals.

708

709

710

711

712

713

714

During the Miocene (23.03-5.3 Ma), plate tectonics drove sea level changes and orogeny, all of which significantly altered the climate and marked the start of the late Cenozoic cold house mode and the establishment of modern terrestrial biomes [96-98]. Until the

715

716
717 beginning of the mid-Miocene Climatic Optimum (17-15 Ma), eustatic sea-level changes
718 indicate the presence of a moderate to large ice sheet in Antarctica [99]. The existing land-
719 bridge between Africa and Eurasia together with some periods of sea-level drop could have
720 favored the entrance of the murid ancestors from South Asia into North Africa through the
721 Levant. During the mid-Miocene Climatic Transition (~15-13 Ma), three events of cooling and
722 sea-level fall have also been recorded at 14.8 (Mi2a), 13.8 (Mi3) and 12.8 Ma (Mi4) that
723 culminated with the establishment of the permanent East Antarctic ice sheet [99]. These sea-
724 level low-stand periods could have opened terrestrial routes that could have allowed the
725 migration of the ancestors of †*Hispanomys* from Anatolia into Europe (Mi2a) and the eastwards
726 dispersals (approximately 14-13.5 Ma) of some species of †*Mellalomys*, †*Democricetodon*, and
727 †“*Cricetodon*” into East Central Asia (Mi3). These dispersals could have been triggered by the
728 well-documented [99] contraction of the tropics in East Asia due to an increase in monsoon
729 seasonality, coincident with the establishment of a quasi-permanent East Antarctic ice sheet [99].
730 The entrance of the ancestors of Gerbillini from North Africa to Arabia and from there to South
731 Central Asia (c. 8.1 Ma) could have also been triggered by the global drying and cooling climate
732 occurring at this time [97-100]. Likewise, the origin and diversification of the African
733 subfamily Deomyinae is linked to a dispersal event from South Central Asia that took place in
734 the Late Miocene *ca.* 10.5 Ma. The exodus of the ancestor of this subfamily out of Asia could
735 have been favored by the Serravallian-Tortonian sea-level fall that has been documented
736 worldwide [101].

737

738 **Conclusions**

739 Our results evidence that neither †Cricetopinae nor †Cricetodontinae can be considered as
740 belonging to the Cricetidae, the latter being in fact related to Democricetodontinae. The split
741 between these two extinct clades took place approximately 27.2 Ma. In this work we provide
742 unprecedented agreement between morphological and molecular data concerning the
743 monophyly of the Deomyinae and Gerbillinae as distinct clades within Murinae. For the first
744 time, relaxed clock approaches using tip-dating (which can account for uncertainty in the
745 placement of fossil taxa) were used to estimate divergence times for the major groups of
746 muroids. Even under strong violations of the best fitting clock model, we find low levels of
747 uncertainty for divergence times, thus providing an accurate timeline for muroid evolution. The
748 origin of the Muridae (~21.9 Ma) is estimated with greater precision thanks to the inclusion of
749 fossils now recognized as stem Muridae (†Zramyinae, †Mellalomyinae, †Dakkamyoidinae).
750 Early diverging murid lineages originated during the Early Miocene in low latitudes (North
751 Africa, Arabia and South Central Asia). The ancestor of murids dispersed from South Central
752 Asia to North Africa before 21.9 Ma. The collision between these two continents seems to have
753 played an important role in the origin and diversification of this family of rodents. The origin
754 of the clade that will led to all extant murids is estimated at ~19.8 Ma and that of murines at
755 ~15 Ma. Our results show a dynamic biogeographical history for Muroidea, in which dispersal
756 events seem to have been more numerous than vicariance. Eastwards early Middle Miocene
757 long distance dispersals towards East Asia could have been favored by the increase in
758 seasonality during the Middle Miocene Climatic Transition (MMCT) that resulted in a
759 contraction of the tropics in this part of the continent.
760

761 **Methods**

762 **Material**

763 The systematic study presented below is based on the examination of original specimens and
764 casts and data from the literature listed in Additional file 1: Table S1. First, second and third
lower molars are designated as m1, m2 and m3, respectively and first, second and third upper molars as M1, M2 and M3, respectively.

767

768 **Morphological dataset**

The dataset presented here represents a major expansion of the morphological data matrix for cricetodontines [16]. The inclusion of Muridae has required the addition of new characters and state of characters. It has been expanded from 77 to 166 taxa and from 82 to 108 morphological characters, thus representing an increase to more than double in taxonomic sampling and coverage across all major lineages of Muroidea. The data matrix (Additional file 1: File S1) has been built using Mesquite 3.0 [102] and the morphological characters are listed in it.

775

776 **Character evolution model**

We used the Markov model Mk(v) of character evolution [103] for morphological characters, implementing assortment bias correction for the inclusion of variable characters only. We allowed for among character rate variation by using a gamma distribution with four rate categories and with shape (alpha) sampled from an exponential distribution with mean =1.0.

781

782 **Clock models**

We assessed the fit of various clock models to our data, including a new suit of clock models available in the developer's version of MrBayes (future MrBayes 3.2.8 release) [10]. compiled from source code available at (https://github.com/NBISweden/MrBayes). These models include the continuous autocorrelated clock model (TK02) [104] and three uncorrelated clock models: the white noise model (former IGR model in previous versions of MrBayes) [105], and the new independent gamma rate (IGR) and independent lognormal clock (ILN) models [106] (Additional File 2: files S1-S8). These different models represent radically different
interpretations of how and where in the tree evolution rates are allowed to change across lineages, which can substantially impact divergence time estimates using morphological and/or molecular data [13,106].

We tested model fit using the stepping-stone sampling strategy to assess the marginal model likelihoods [107] and calculated Bayes Factors (BF)—30 steps (+5 as burn in) between for 250 million generations. Using standard significance thresholds [108], we found a strong support (BF > 5) for the autocorrelated clock model (TK02) relative to the IGR and ILN models (BFs ≈ 8), and a very strong preference for the TK02 model relative to the WN model (BF= 44.8) (Table 1).

The mean and standard deviation for the probability distribution defining the prior on the clock rate were given informative values based on previous non-clock analysis, following Ronquist et al. [109] and subsequent studies [11, 13, 110]—the median value for tree height in substitutions from posterior trees divided by the age of the tree based on the median of the distribution for the root prior (16.6429/37.6=0.4426). The mean of the lognormal distribution was given the value based on the non-clock tree estimate in natural log scale: ln(0.4426) = -0.8150. Finally, we chose a broad standard deviation around the mean (σ.= 1.5).

<caption>**Table 1.** Results of model fitting analyses using the steppingstone algorithm for Bayes factors. BF, Bayes factor relative to best fit model; Abbreviations: mLnL, marginal natural log likelihood.</caption>

### Tree model and age calibrations
812

The age of the root has been set with a soft lower bound. The minimum age of the root corresponds to the oldest age for the oldest fossil belonging to *Eucricetodon* (34 Ma) and the maximum root has been estimated at 41.2 Ma (Middle/Late Eocene boundary), which is the maximum soft age for the *Eucricetodontinae* clade. We used an offset exponential distribution for the prior on root age, which gives a higher sampling probability for values closer to the minimum age and a relatively low (but non-zero) probability of age values higher than 41.2 Ma.

813

814

815

816

817

818

819

All fossil calibrations (apart from the root node) were based on tip-dates only, which account for the uncertainty in the placement of fossil taxa and avoids the issue of assigning maximum age constraints that are necessary for node-based age calibrations [109]. Additionally, we avoided recently detected strong biases that can be introduced by point age calibrations on the age of the fossils [111] by using a uniform prior distribution on the age range of the stratigraphic occurrence of the oldest fossils for each species (Additional File 2). We implemented the FBD process for the tree model with a flat prior (uniform distribution: samples $\in U[0,1]$) on the parameters of relative extinction (= turnover) and probability of sampling fossils, whereas the net diversification rate was sampled from an exponential distribution with mean = 1.0.

820

821

822

823

824

825

826

827

828

829

Further, we performed a dense taxonomic sampling of closely related fossil lineages within a relatively short geological time span, which meets the conditions in which inferring direct ancestor-descendent relationships should be expected, and so we modelled our tree prior accordingly by allowing fossils to be either fully extinct tips or sampled ancestors [112,113].

830

831

832

833

834

## MCMC and Diagnostic parameters

835

All analyses were conducted using the developer's version of MrBayes [10] available at (https://github.com/NBISweden/MrBayes) using the Della computer cluster at Princeton

836
University. Convergence of independent runs was assessed using: average standard deviation of split frequencies (ASDSF ≈ 0.01), potential scale reduction factors [PSRF ≈ 1 for all parameters], and effective sample size (ESS) for each parameter greater than 200, and analyzed using Tracer 1.7.1 [114] and the R package RWTY (R We There Yet) [115] (see Additional File 3: Fig. S1)

842

843 **Stochastic character mapping**

Stochastic character mapping was performed using the Stochastic character mapping of discrete traits on phylogenies (SIMMAP) approach [116] as implemented in the *make.simap* function of the R package phytools 2.1.1 [117]. The R script is provided in Additional File 3:File S1. For each character, three different models were tested, concerning the rate of changes between states, estimated by Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC): equal-rates model (ER, in which all rates are equal), symmetrical model (SYM where rates for symmetrical transition are the same) or the all-rates-different model (ARD, in which each rate can take on a potentially different value) [118]. The best-fit model was then chosen based on the Akaike information criterion and used for the stochastic character mapping. The resulting posterior probabilities of each state are represented at the nodes of the trees. Most the synapomorphies mentioned in the text does not show a large amount of uncertainty in their probability of having a given character state. However, for the few ones, which show a fair amount of uncertainty, we have taken a threshold value of 50%, above which, we consider that the node has a given character state. For some characters (marked as ER) symmetrical rate changes were favored but resulted in misbehaving analyses. In these cases, the equal rates option was chosen instead (Additional File 3: Table S1).

860

861 **Inference of historical biogeography**
We estimated the ancestral ranges of origin and geographic range evolution for muroids using the maximum likelihood (ML) approach of dispersal-extinction- cladogenesis model (DEC [119]) as implemented in the *DEC eXtended* model (DECX, [120]). DECX can infer the ancestral ranges using the geographic ranges of the sampled species taking into account non-ultrametric trees that include fossils as species, by modelling anagenetic events, classical vicariance, and cladogenetic events [119]. The most likely ancestral states at each node and the geographic range evolution of Muroidea have been estimated using a time-calibrated tree, a species distribution matrix, and connectivity matrices, representing the palaeogeographic history. As the input data, we have used our resulting time-calibrated Bayesian majority-rule consensus tree, the distribution of each species for a set of geographic areas, and a geographic model that is represented by connectivity and dispersal scalar matrices spanning the evolutionary history of the group. The geographic distribution of the muroid species included in our study has been categorized by coding the presence or the absence of each species in 13 areas as follows: (1) South Western Europe (SWE); (2) Central Europe (CE); (3) Greece (GR); (4) Anatolia Caucasus (AC); (5) West Central Asia (WCA); (6) Arabia (AR); (7) South Central Asia (SCA); (8) East Central Asia (ECA); (9) North Africa (NA); (10) East Africa (EA); (11) South Africa (SA); (12) Russia (RU); and (13) South East Asia (SEA). The geographic model has been built using connectivity matrices [118] that take into account palaeogeography and the possibility for a species to colonize a new area, with disconnection between areas coded as 0 and connection between areas coded as 1 (Additional File 3: Table S2).

## Supplementary Information

The online version contains all supplementary material available at https://doi.org/XXXX and all supplementary figures, data, and files, including input and output files for all analyses conducted, are available on Harvard Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/WTAG21
887 Additional file 1. Figure S1, stochastic mapping of all synapomorphies. Pie charts at nodes indicate the relative Bayesian posterior probability of each character state. Duplicated characters are those for which the mapping with the equal rates (ER) model was added as well. Characters missing are those that presented some non applicable states, for which the analysis did not work. File S1 Morphological data matrix in Nexus format used in this study.
888
889
890
891
892 File S2, list of morphological characters used in the analyses. Table S1 Table with full taxonomic sampling, including specimen accession numbers and ages.
893

894
895 Additional file 2. Files S1-S8 All input (S1-S4) and output (S5-S8) files from relaxed clock
896 Bayesian inference analyses, including all necessary code to reproduce the results.
897

898 Additional file 3. Figure S2, convergence diagnostics from Bayesian inferences using the R package RWTY [115]. Script S1, R Script used in this work to carry out the stochastic character mapping performed using the SIMMAP approach [116] as implemented in the *make.simmmap* function of the R package phytools 2.1.1 [117]. Table S2, table showing the characters for which the equal rate model has been chosen despite not being the best fitting model. Table S3, geographic distribution of the muroid species included in this study and categorized by coding the presence or the absence of each species in 13 areas. The geographic model has been built using connectivity matrices [118].

906

907

908 **Abbreviations**

909 ARD. All-rates-different model

910 ASDSF. Average standard deviation of split frequencies

911 BF. Bayes Factors
912 DEC. Dispersal-extinction-cladogenesis

913 DECX. Dispersal-extinction-eXtended cladogenesis

914 ESS. Effective sample size

915 ER. Equal-rates model

916 IGR New independent gamma rate uncorrelated clock model

917 ILN. Independent lognormal uncorrelated clock model

918 m1, m2, m3. First, second and third lower molars

919 M1, M2, M3. First, second and third upper molars

920 MCMC. Markov chain Monte Carlo

921 MK (v) Markov model that conditions on variable characters

922 ML. Maximum likelihood

923 MMCT. Middle Miocene Climatic Transition

924 PSRF. Potential scale reduction factors

925 RWTY. R We There Yet

926 SIMMAP. Stochastic character mapping of discrete traits on phylogenies

927 SYM. Symmetrical model

928 TK02. Continuous autocorrelated clock model

929 WN white noise uncorrelated clock model

931 Declarations

932 Acknowledgements

933 R. Portela (The Natural History Museum, London) kindly made available for examination the

934 extant Murinae specimens, currently housed in his institution. We also thank C. Sesé and F.

935 Knoll (Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales-CSIC, Madrid) for kindly making some photos

936 of the specimens that have been used in this study. J. Mitchell (West Virginia University,
937 USA) helped us with the R scripts. Further thanks for helpful comments and constructive

938 criticism are given to four anonymous reviewers as well as the chief editor G. Bell.

939

940 Consent for publication

941 Not applicable.

942

943 Funding

944 This research received support from the national French research project (ANR-22-CE02) and

945 the Spanish research project (PID2023-151089NB-I00) funded by MCIU /AEI

946 /10.13039/501100011033 / FEDER, UE and the SYNTHESYS+ project

947 (http://www.synthesys.info), which is financed by the European Commission.

948

949 Availability of data and materials

950 The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the

951 article and its Additional Files.

952

953 Authors contributions

954 Conceptualization: RLA, PPC. Methodology: RLA, PPC, TRS, FC.

955 Formal analysis: RLA, PPC, TRS, FC, MD. Investigation: RLA, PPC. Visualization: RLA,

956 PPC, TRS.

957 Writing original draft: RLA. Writing review and editing: all authors. All authors read and

958 approved the final manuscript.

959

960 Competing interests

961 The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
962 **Ethics approval and consent to participate**

963 Not applicable.

964

965 **Author details**

966 <sup>1</sup>Institut des Sciences de l'Évolution de Montpellier (CNRS/UM/IRD/EPHE), Université de

967 Montpellier, 34095 Montpellier, France. <sup>2</sup>Departamento de Palaeobiología, Museo Nacional de

968 Ciencias Naturales-CSIC, Madrid, Spain. <sup>3</sup>Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology,

969 Princeton University, Princeton-NJ, 08544, USA.

970

971
972 References

973 1. Ronquist F, Sanmartín, I. Phylogenetic methods in biogeography. Annu Rev Ecol Evol
974 Syst 2011;42:441–464.

975 2. Morlon H. Phylogenetic approaches for studying diversification. Ecol. Lett. 2014;17:508–525.

977 3. Parham JF, Donoghue PCJ, Bell CJ, Calway TD, Head JJ, Holroyd PA, Inoue JG, Irmis RB,  
978 Joyce WG, Ksepka DT, Patané JSL, Smith ND, Tarver JE, van Tuinen M, Yang Z,  
979 Angielczyk KD, Greenwood JM, Hipsley CA, Jacobs L, Makovicky PJ, Müller J, Smith KT,  
980 Theodor JM, Warnock RCM, Benton MJ. Best practices for justifying fossil calibrations.  
981 Sys Biol. 2012;61:346–359.

982 4. Turner AH, Pritchard AC, Matzke NJ. Empirical and Bayesian approaches to fossil-only divergence times: A study across three reptile clades. PLoS One 2017;12: e0169885.

984 5. Donoghue PC, Benton MJ. Rocks and clocks: calibrating the Tree of Life using fossils and molecules. Trends Ecol Evol. 2007;22:424-31.

986 6. Peterson KJ, Cotton JA, Gehling JG, Pisani D. The Ediacaran emergence of bilaterians: congruence between the genetic and the geological fossil records. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008; 27:1435–43.

989 7. Benton, MJ, Donoghue, PCJ. Palaeontological Evidence to Date the Tree of Life. Mol Biol Evol. 2007;24:26–53.

991 8. Lee MSY, Cau A, Naish D, Dyke GJ. Morphological Clocks in Palaeontology, and a Mid-
992 Cretaceous Origin of Crown Aves. Syst Biol. 2014;63:442–449.

993 9. Pyron RA.. Divergence time estimation using fossils as terminal taxa and the origins of Lissamphibia. Syst Biol. 2011;60:466-481.
995

996

997

10. Ronquist F, Teslenko M, van der Mark P, Ayres DL, Darling A, Höhna S, Larget B, Liu L, Suchard MA, Huelsenbeck JP. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst Biol. 2012a;61:539–542.

998

999

1000

11. Simões TR, Caldwell MW, Tałanda M, Bernardi M, Palci A, Vernygora O, Bernardini F, Mancini L, Nydam, RL. The origin of squamates revealed by a Middle Triassic lizard from the Italian Alps. Nature. 2018;557:706–709.

1001

1002

12. Simões TR, Vernygora O, Caldwell MW, Pierce SE. Megaevolutionary dynamics and the timing of evolutionary innovation in reptiles. Nat Commun. 2020a;11:3322.

1003

1004

1005

13. Simões TR, Caldwell MW, Pierce SE. Sphenodontian phylogeny and the impact of model choice in Bayesian morphological clock estimates of divergence times and evolutionary rates. BMC Biology. 2020b;18:191.

1006

1007

14. Lee MS, Palci A. Morphological phylogenetics in the genomic age. Curr Biol. 2015;25:R922–929.

1008

1009

15. Wright DF. Bayesian estimation of fossil phylogenies and the evolution of early to middle Palaeozoic crinoids (Echinodermata). J Palaeontol. 2017;91:799–814.

1010

1011

1012

16. López-Antoñanzas R, Peláez-Campomanes P. Bayesian morphological clock versus Parsimony: an insight into the relationships and dispersal events of postvacuum Cricetidae (Rodentia, Mammalia). Syst Biol. 2022;71:512–525.

1013

1014

17. López-Antoñanzas, Sen S, Mein P. Systematics and phylogeny of the cane rats (Rodentia: Thryonomyidae). Zool J Linn Soc. 2004;142:423–444.

1015

1016

1017

18. López-Antoñanzas R, Flynn L, Knoll F. A comprehensive phylogeny of extinct and extant Rhizomyinae (Rodentia): evidence for multiple intercontinental dispersals. Cladistics 2013; 29:247–273.

1018

1019

19. López-Antoñanzas R, Knoll, F. A comprehensive phylogeny of the gundis (Ctenodactylinae, Ctenodactylidae, Rodentia). J Syst Pal. 2011;9:379–398.
1020 20.Michaux J, Reyes A, Catzeflis F. Evolutionary history of the most speciose mammals: molecular phylogeny of muroid rodents. .. 2001;18:2017-2031.

1022 21.Schenk, JJ, Rowe, KC, Steppan, SJ. Ecological opportunity and incumbency in the diversification of repeated continental colonizations by muroid rodents. Syst Biol. 2013; 2013;62:837-864.

1025 22.Steppan SJ, Adkins, RM, Anderson, J. Phylogeny and divergence-date estimates of rapid radiations in muroid rodents based on multiple nuclear genes. Syst Biol. 2004;53:533-553.

1027 23.Steppan SJ, Schenk JJ. Muroid rodent phylogenetics: 900-species tree reveals increasing diversification rates. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0183070.

1029 24.Fabre P-H, Hautier L, Dimitrov D, Douzery EJP. A glimpse on the pattern of rodent diversification: a phylogenetic approach. BMC Evol Biol. 2012;12:88.

1031 25.Michaux J, Reyes A, Catzeflis F. Evolutionary history of the most speciose mammals: molecular phylogeny of muroid rodents. Mol Biol Evol. 2001;18:2017-31.

1033 26.Fejfar O. Subfamily Platacanthomyinae. In: Rössner GE, Heissig K, editors. The Miocene Land Mammals of Europe. München: Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil; 1999. p. 389-94.

1035 27.Fejfar O, Kalthoff DC. Aberrant cricetids (Platacanthomyines, Rodentia, Mammalia) from the Miocene of Eurasia. Berliner geowiss Abh. 1999;30:191-206.

1037 28.López-Antoñanzas R, Flynn LJ, Knoll F. A comprehensive phylogeny of extinct and extant Rhizomyinae (Rodentia): evidence for multiple intercontinental dispersals. Cladistics. 2013;29:24773.

1040 29.López-Antoñanzas et al., 2012, 2015a

1041 30.de Bruijn H, Bosma AA, Wessels W. Are the Rhizomyinae and the Spalacinae closely related? Contradistinctive conclusions between genetics and palaeontology. Palaeobiodiversity and Palaeoenvironments. 2015;95:257-69.

1044 31. Agustí J, Casanovas-Vilar I. Neogene gerbils from Europe. Deinsea. 2003;10:13-21.
1045 32. Wessels W. Family Gerbillidae. In: Rössner GE, Heissig K, editors. The Miocene Land Mammals of Europe. München: Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil; 1999. p. 395–400.

1047 33. Ellerman JR. The families and genera of living rodents. London: British Museum (Natural History); 1941.

1049 34. Jansa SA, Weksler M. Phylogeny of muroid rodents: relationships within and among major lineages as determined by IRBP gene sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2004;31:256–76.

1051 35. Lavocat R. Les Rongeurs du Miocène d'Afrique orientale. I. Miocene inférieur. Montpellier: Institut de Montpellier de l'Ecole Pratique Hautes Etudes; 1973.

1053 36. Burgin CJ, Colella JP, Kahn PL, Upham NS. How many species of mammals are there? J Mammal. 2018;99:1–14.

1055 37. Simpson GG. The principles of classification and a classification of mammals. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist. 1945;85:1–350.

1057 38. Chaline J, Mein P, Petter F. Les grandes lignes d'une classification évolutive des Muroidea. Mammalia. 1977;41:245–52.

1059 39. Lavocat R. Rodentia and Lagomorpha. In: Maglio VJ, Cooke HBS, editors. Evolution of African mammals. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1978. p. 68–89.

1061 40. Carleton MD, Musser GG. Muroid rodents. In: Anderson S, Jones JK Jr, editors. Orders and families of recent mammals of the world. New York: Wiley; 1984. p. 289–379.

1063 41. Musser GG, Carleton MD. Superfamily Muroidea. In: Wilson DE, Reeder DM, editors. Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. third. Baltimore: JHU Press; 2005. p. 894–1531.

1066 42. Montgelard C, Forty E, Arnal V, Matthee CA. Suprafamilial relationships among Rodentia and the phylogenetic effect of removing fast-evolving nucleotides in mitochondrial, exon and intron fragments. BMC Evol Biol. 2008;8:321.
1069 43. Maridet O, Ni X. A New Cricetid Rodent from the Early Oligocene of Yunnan, China, and Its Evolutionary Implications for Early Eurasian Cricetids. J Vert Paleontol. 2013;33:185-94.

1072 44. Mein P, Freudenthal M. Une nouvelle classification des Cricetidae (Mammalia, Rodentia) du Tertiaire de l'Europe. Scr Geol. 1971;2:1-37.

1074 45. Flynn LJ. Chapter 4. The antiquity of *Rhizomys* and independent acquisition of fossorial traits in subterranean muroids. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist. 2009;331:128-56.

1076 46. Maridet O, Wu W, Ye J, Bi S, Meng J. Earliest occurence of *Democricetodon* in China, in the Early Miocene of the Junggar Basin (Xinjiang) and comparison with the genus *Spanocricetodon*. Vertebrata PalAsiatica. 2011;49:393-405.

1079 47. Lindsay EH. Fossil record of Asian Cricetidae with emphasis on Siwalik cricetids. In: Tomida Y, Li CK, Setoguchi T, editors. Rodent and Lagomorph Families of Asian Origins and Diversification. Nat Sci Mus Monogr. 1994;8:131-147.

1082 48. Wessels W. Miocene rodent evolution and migration: Muroidea from Pakistan, Turkey and Northern Africa. Geol Ultraiectina. 2009;307:1-290.

1084 49. Lindsay EH. Cricetid rodents from Siwalik deposits near Chinji Village, part 1: Megacricetodontinae, Myocridetontinae and Dendromurinae. Palaeovertebrata. 1988;18:95-154.

1087 50. Oliver A, Peláez-Campomanes P. Evolutionary patterns of early and middle Aragonian (Miocene) of *Megacricetodon* (Rodentia, Mammalia) from Spain. Palaeontographica. A. 2014;303:85-135.

1090 51. Oliver A, Peláez-Campomanes P. *Megacricetodon vandermeuleni* sp. nov. (Rodentia, Mammalia), from the Spanish Miocene: a new evolutionary framework for *Megacricetodon*. J Ver. Palaeonto. 2013;33:943-955.
1093 52. Oliver A, Peláez-Campomanes P. Early Miocene evolution of the rodent *Megacricetodon* in Europe and its palaeobiogeographical implications. *Acta Palaeontol Pol.* 2016;61:211–219.

1095 53. Aghova T, Kimura Y, Bryja, J, Dobigny G, Granjon L, Kergoat GJ. Fossils know it best: using a new set of fossil calibrations to improve the temporal phylogenetic framework of murid rodents (Rodentia: Muridae). *Mol Phylogenet Evol.* 2018;128:98–111.

1098 54. Denys C, Winkler A. Advances in integrative taxonomy and evolution of African murid rodents: how morphological trees hide the molecular forest. In: Cox PG, Hautier L, editors. *Evolution of the Rodents: Advances in Phylogeny, Functional Morphology and Development*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2015. p. 186–220.

1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115

55. Jacobs LL. Fossil rodents (Rhizomyidae and Muridae) from Neogene Siwalik Deposits, Pakistan. *Museum North Arizona Press Bull Ser.* 1978;52:1–103.

56. Kimura Y, Hawkins MTR, McDonough MM, Jacobs LL, Flynn LJ. Corrected placement of *Mus-Rattus* fossil calibration forces precision in the molecular tree of rodents. *Sci Rep.* 2015;5:14444.

57. Flynn LJ, Kimura Y, Jacobs LL. The Murine Cradle. In: Prasad GVR, Patnaik R, editors. *Biological Consequences of Plate Tectonics: New Perspectives on Post-Gondwana Break-up–A Tribute to Ashok Sahni*. Cham: Springer Nature; 2020. p. 347–62.

58. Kimura Y, Flynn LJ and Jacobs LL. Tempo and Mode: Evidence on a Protracted Split from a Dense Fossil Record. *Front Ecol Evol.* 2021;9:642814.

59. Jaeger JJ, Michaux J, David, B. Biochronologie du Miocene moyen et superieur continental du Maghreb. C R Acad Sci Paris Ser D. 1973;277:24772480

60. Jaeger JJ 1977. Les rongeurs du Miocene Moyen et Superieur du Maghreb. *Palaeovertebrata*. 8:1–166.
1116 61.Coiffait-Martin B. Contribution des rongeurs du néogène d'Algérie à la biochronologie mammalienne d'Afrique nord-occidentale. Doctoral Dissertation. Universite de Nancy I. 1991 ;pp. 389.

1119 62.Wessels W, Fejfar O, Peláez-Campomanes P, Bruijn H de. Miocene small mammals from Jebel Zelten, Lybia. Col Pal. 2003; Volumen Extraordinario:699-715.

1121 63.Wessels W. Myocricetodontinae from the Miocene of Pakistan. Proc Kon Nederl Akad Wetensch B. 1996; 99:253-312.

1123 64.Tong H, Jaeger JJ. Muroid rodents from the Midle Miocene Fort Ternan locality (Kenya) and their contribution to the phylogeny of Muroids. Palaeontographica A. 1993; 229 51-73.

1125 65.López-Antoñanzas R. First *Potwarmus* from the Miocene of Saudi Arabia and the early phylogeny of murines (Rodentia: Muroidea). Zool J Linn Soc. 2009;156:664-679.

1127 66.Tong H. The Gerbillinae (Rodentia) from Tighennif (Pleistocene of Algeria) and their significance. Modern Geol. 1986;10:197-214.

1129 67.Benammi M. Découverte de deux nouvelles espèces du genre Myocricetodon dans le Miocène supérieur du bassin d'Aït Kandoula (Maroc). C R Acad Sci Ser II A. 2001 ;333, 187-193.

1132 68.Alhajeri, B.H., Hunt, O.J. and Steppan, S.J. (2015), Molecular systematics of gerbils and deomyines (Rodentia: Gerbillinae, Deomyinae) and a test of desert adaptation in the tympanic bulla. J Zoolog Syst Evol Res, 53: 312-330.

1135 69.Denys C, Matthews T. A new *Desmodillus* (Gerbillinae, Rodentia) species from the early Pliocene site of Langebaanweg (South-western Cape, South Africa). Palaeovertebrata. 2017;41:1-15.

1138 70.Alhajeri BH, Hunt OJ, Steppan SJ. Molecular systematics of gerbils and deomyines (Rodentia: Gerbillinae, Deomyinae) and a test of desert adaptation in the tympanic bulla. J Zoolog Syst Evol Res. 2015;53:312-30.
1141 71.Jacobs LL, Flynn LJ. in InOf mice...again : The Siwalik rodent record Murinae distribution,
1142 and molecular clocks. In : Lieberman DE, Smith RJ, Keller J. editors. Interpreting the Past:
1143 Essays on Human, Primate, and Mammal Evolution in Honor of David Pilbeam Brill
1144 Academic Publishers ; 2005. pp. 63–80.

1145 72.Mein P, Pickford M. Vallesian rodents from Sheikh Abdallah, Western Desert, Egypt. Hist
1146 Biol. 2010;22:224–259.

1147 73.Wessels W, Bruijn H de, Hussain ST, Leinders J. Fossil rodents from the Chinji Formation,
1148 Banda Daud Shah, Kohat, Pakistan. Proc Kon Nederl Akad Wetensch B. 1982;85:337–364.

1149 74.Mein P, Pickford M, Senut B. Late Miocene micromammals from the Harasib karst deposits,
1150 Namibia. Part 2b. Cricetomyidae, Dendromuridae and Muridae, with an addendum on the
1151 Myocricetodontinae. Communs Geol Surv Namibia. 2004;13:43–61.

1152 75.Lecompte E, Aplin K, Denys C, Catzeflis F, Chades M, Chevret P. Phylogeny and
1153 biogeography of African Muridae based on mitochondrial and nuclear gene sequences, with
1154 a new tribal classification of the subfamily. BMC Evol Biol. 2008; 8:199.

1155 76.Joniak P, Peláez-Campomanes P, van den Hoek Ostende LW, Rojay B. Early Miocene
1156 rodents of Gökler (Kazan Basin, Central Anatolia, Turkey). Hist Biol. 2017;31:982–1007.

1157 77.De Bruijn H., Fahlbusch V., Saraç G., Ünay E. Early Miocene rodent faunas from the eastern
1158 Mediterranean areas. III: the genera *Deperetomys* and *Cricetodon* with a discussion of the
1159 evolutionary history of the Cricetodontini. Proc Kon Nederl Akad Wetensch B.
1160 1993 ;96:151–216.

1161 78.Ünay E. Rodents from the Middle Oligocene of Turkish Thrace. Utrecht Micropalaeontol
1162 Bull Special Publication. 1989.;5:1–119.

1163 79.Fahlbusch V. Die Cricetiden der Oberen Süßwassermolasse Bayerns. Bayer Akad Wiss
1164 Math-Natwiss Kl Abh. 1964;118:1–136.
1165 80. Carleton, Michael D. 1980. "Phylogenetic Relationships in Neotomine-Peromyscine Rodents (Muroidea) and a Reappraisal of the Dichotomy within New World Cricetinae." Miscellaneous Publications Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 157 1-146.

1169 81. Goodman SM, Monadjem A. Family Nesomyidae (pouched rats, climbing mice and fat mice). In: Wilson DE, Lacher TE Jr, Mittermeier RA, editors. Handbook of the mammals of the world, Vol. 7. Rodents II. Barcelona (Spain): Lynx Edicions; 2017.p. 155-203.

1172 82. Monadjem A, Taylor P, Denys C, Cotterill F.. Rodents of sub-Saharan Africa. A biogeographic and taxonomic synthesis. De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston;2015. p. 1092.

1174 83. Hedges SB, Kumar S. The Timetree of Life. New York. Oxford University Press, pp. 572.

1175 84. Rowe, KC, Achmadi, AS, Esselstyn, JA. Repeated evolution of carnivory among Indo-Australian rodents. Evol. 2016b;70:653-665.

1177 85. Ducroz JF, Volobouev V, Granjon L. An Assessment of the Systematics of Arvicanthine Rodents Using Mitochondrial DNA Sequences: Evolutionary and Biogeographical Implications. J Mammal Evol. 2001; 8:173-206.

1180 86. Geraads D., 2001 - Rongeurs du Miocène supérieur de Ch'orora, Ethiopie: Murinae, Dendromurinae et conclusions. Palaeovertebrata, 30: 89-109.

1182 87. Fritz, SA, Bininda-Emonds, ORP and Purvis, A. Geographical variation in predictors of mammalian extinction risk: big is bad, but only in the tropics. Ecol Lett. 2009; 12:538-549.

1184 88. Coiro M, Allio R, Mazet N, Seyfullah LJ, Condamine, FL. Reconciling fossils with phylogenies reveals the origin and macroevolutionary processes explaining the global cycad biodiversity. New Phytol. 2023; 240:1616-1635.

1187 89. Fejfar O, Wolf-Dieter H, Kordos L, Maul LC. Microtoid cricetids and the early history of arvicolids (Mammalia, Rodentia). Palaeontol Electron. 2011;14, 27A.
1189 90. Neubauer TA, Harzhauser M, Kroh A, Georgopoulou E, Mandic O. A gastropod-based biogeographic scheme for the European Neogene freshwater systems. Earth Sci Rev.
1190
2015;143:98-116.
1191

1192 91. Akıncı AC, Robertson AHF, Ünlugenç, UC. Late Cretaceous-Cenozoic subduction-collision history of the southern Neotethys: New evidence from the Caglayancerit area, SE Turkey,
1193
Int. J Earth Sci. 2016;105:315-337.
1194

1195 92. Antoine PO, Welcomme, JL, Marivaux L, Baloch I, Benammi M, Tassy P. First record of Palaeogene Elephantoidea (Mammalia, Proboscidea) From the Bugti Hills of Pakistan. J
1196
Vert Palaeonto. 2003 ;23, 977-980.
1197

1198 93. Mein P, Ginsburg L. Les mammiferes du gisement miocene inferieure de Li Mae Long, Thailande; Systematique biostratigraphie et paleoenvironment. Geodiversitas.
1199
1200 1997 ;19:783-844.
1201

1201 94. Cooke PJ, Nelson CS, Crundwell MP. Miocene isotope zones, paleotemperatures, and carbon maxima events at intermediate water-depth, Site 593, Southwest Pacific, New Zealand. J. Geol Geophys. 2008;51:1-22.
1202
1203

1204 95. López-Antoñanzas R, Renaud S, Peláez-Campomanes P, Azar D, Kachacha G, Knoll F. First levantine fossil murines shed new light on the earliest intercontinental dispersal of mice. 2019 ; Sci Rep 9 :11874.
1205
1206

1207 96. Hüsing SK, Zachariasse W-J, van Hinsbergen D, Krijgsman W, Inceöz M, Harzhauser M, Mandic O, Kroh A. Oligocene Miocene basin evolution in SE Anatolia, Turkey: constraints on the closure of the eastern Tethys Gateway. Geol. Soc. London Spec. Publi.
1208
1209
2009; 311: 107-132.
1210

1211 97. Kürschner, W, Kvacek, Z, Dilcher, D. The impact of Miocene atmospheric carbon dioxide fluctuations on climate and the evolution of terrestrial ecosystems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:449-53.
1212
1213
1214 98. Steinthorsdottir M, Coxall HK, de Boer AM, Huber M, Barbolini N, Bradshaw CD, et al. The Miocene: The future of the past. Palaeoceanogr Palaeoclimatol. 2021.36. e2020PA004037.

1217 99. Westerhold T, Marwan N, Drury AJ, Liebrand D, Agnini C, Anagnostou E, Barnet JSK, Bohaty SM, De Vleeschouwer D, Florindo F, Frederichs T, Hodell DA, Holbourn AF, Kroon D, Lauretano V, Littler K, Lourens LJ, Lyle M, Pälike H, Röhl U, Tian J, Wilkens RH, Wilson PA, Zachos JC. An astronomically dated record of Earth's climate and its predictability over the last 66 million years. Science. 2020;369:1383-1387.

1222 100. Miller KG, Browning JV, Schmelz WJ, Kopp RE, Mountain GS, Wright JD. Cenozoic sea-level and cryospheric evolution from deep-sea geochemical and continental margin records. Sci Adv. 2020;6:eaaz1346.

1225 101. Holbourn A, Kuhnt W, Clemens SC, Heslop D. A ~12 Myr Miocene record of East Asian Monsoon variability from the South China Sea. Palaeoceanogr Palaeoclimatol. 2021;36:e2021PA004267.

1228 102. Bradshaw CD, Lunt DJ, Flecker R, Salzmann U, Pound MJ, Haywood AM, Eronen JT. The relative roles of CO₂ and palaeogeography in determining late Miocene climate: results from a terrestrial model-data comparison. Clim Past. 2012;8: 1257-1285.

1231 103. Maddison WP, Maddison DR. Mesquite: A Modular System for Evolutionary Analysis, ver. 2.6. Mesquite Project, Vancouver. 2009.

1233 104. Lewis PO. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Syst Biol. 2001;50:913-925.

1235 105. Thorne JL, Kishino H. Divergence time and evolutionary rate estimation with multilocus data. Syst Biol. 2002;51:689-702.

1237 106. Lepage T, Bryant D, Philippe H, and Lartillot N. A general comparison of relaxed molecular clock models. Mol Biol Evol. 2007; 24:2669-2680.
1239 107. Zhang C. Selecting and averaging relaxed clock models in Bayesian tip dating of
1240 Mesozoic birds. Palaeobiology.2021; 48:340-352.

1241 108. Xie W, Lewis PO, Fan Y, Kuo L, and Chen M-H. Improving marginal likelihood
1242 estimation for Bayesian phylogenetic model selection. Syst Biol. 2011;60:150-160.

1243 109. Kass RE, and Raftery AE. Bayes factors. JASA. 1995; 90:773-795.

1244 110. Ronquist F, Klopfstein S, Vilhelmsen L, Schulmeister S, Murray DL, and Rasnitsyn
1245 AP. A total-evidence approach to dating with fossils, applied to the early radiation of the
1246 Hymenoptera. Syst Biol. 2012b; 61:973-999.

1247 111. Pyron RA. Novel approaches for phylogenetic inference from morphological data and
total-evidence dating in squamate reptiles (lizards, snakes, and amphisbaenians). Sys Biol.
1248 2017; 66:38-56.
1249
1250

1251 112. Barido-Sottani J, Aguirre-Fernández G, Hopkins MJ, Stadler T, Warnock R. Ignoring
1252 stratigraphic age uncertainty leads to erroneous estimates of species divergence times under
1253 the fossilized birth–death process. Proc R Soc B. 2019;286:2019068520190685

1254 113. Gavryushkina A, Welch D, Stadler T, Drummond AJ. Bayesian inference of sampled
1255 ancestor trees for epidemiology and fossil calibration. PLOS Comput
1256 Biol. 2014;10:e1003919.

1257 114. Zhang C, Stadler T, Klopfstein, S, Heath, TA, Ronquist, F. Total evidence dating under
1258 the fossilized birth–death process. Syst Biol. 2016;65:228–249.

1259 115. Rambaut A, Suchard MA, Xie D, Drummond AJ. Tracer v1.7. Available at
1260 http://beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/Tracer. 2018.

1261 116. Warren DL, Geneva AJ, Lanfear R. RWTY (R We There Yet): An R Package for
1262 Examining Convergence of Bayesian Phylogenetic Analyses. Mol Biol Evol. 2017;
1263 34:1016-1020.
1264
1265 117. Bollback, JP. SIMMAP: Stochastic character mapping of discrete traits on phylogenies.
1266 BMC Bioinformatics 2006. 7:88.

1267 118. Revell LJ. phytools 2.0: an updated R ecosystem for phylogenetic comparative methods
1268 (and other things). PeerJ. 2024;12:e16505.

1269 119. Bianchini G, Hagemann M, Sánchez-Baracaldo P. Stochastic Character Mapping,
1270 Bayesian Model Selection, and Biosynthetic Pathways Shed New Light on the Evolution of
1271 Habitat Preference in Cyanobacteria, Sys Biol. 2024;
1272 syae025, https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syae025

1273 120. Ree R, Smith SA. Maximum likelihood inference of geographic range evolution by
dispersal, local extinction, and cladogenesis. Syst Biol. 2008;57:4–14.

1275 121. Condamine FL, Allio R, Reboud EL, Dupuis JR, Toussaint EF, Mazet N, Hu SJ, Lewis
1276 DS, Kunte K, Cotton AM, Sperling FA. A comprehensive phylogeny and revised taxonomy
1277 illuminate the origin and diversification of the global radiation of *Papilio* (Lepidoptera:
1278 Papilionidae). Evol Mol Phylogen. 2023;107758.