Calibration points used for divergence time analyses.

*This date differs from Wiens [22] use of 144 mya because he attributes the fossil to Tithonian rather than Kimmeridgian.
**Whereas Roček and Rage [109] retained the identification by Antunes and Russell [106] of anurans from the lower Eocene of Silveirinha, Portugal as Eopelobates, Rage and Augé [107] have cast some doubt over this identification in stating that “identification of Eopelobates should rest on cranial bones” (p. 105). As our calibration age for Pelobatoidea, we have used 48.6 mya corresponding to the end of the Ypresian in the Early Eocene. However, if the slightly younger age for a Middle Eocene Eopelobates locality is used, or even if the younger age for Elkobatrachus[108] was used, we expect that our results would be comparable; this is supported by analyses in which this calibration point is removed from divergence time analyses.