No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Late Cambrian conulariids from Wisconsin and Minnesota
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 May 2016
Abstract
Several localities within the heterolithic facies of the St. Lawrence Formation (Upper Cambrian) of Wisconsin and Minnesota yield specimens with phosphatic exoskeletons, quadrate cross sections composed of four equidimensional faces each bearing a midline, and possible holdfast attachment during life. These specimens are here referred to the order Conulariida, class Scyphozoa. Their fine, tuberculate surface ornament and serially invaginated midline structure serve to define a new genus, Baccaconularia, to which two new species, B. robinsoni and B. meyeri, are assigned. Conularia cambria Walcott 1890, also from the Cambrian of the northern Mississippi Valley and long dismissed as a misidentified trilobite fragment, is illustrated photographically for the first time. This species occurs in rocks stratigraphically beneath the St. Lawrence Formation. Specimens assigned to this species by Walcott are conulariids, but lack features now considered diagnostic of either Conularia or Baccaconularia. Walcott's material is insufficient to permit detailed taxonomic evaluation, and we isolate this name to this material, pending the collection of additional, better preserved specimens. Together, Baccaconularia and Conularia cambria contain the oldest large conulariids, and these narrow a stratigraphic gap between other large conulariids known from the Lower Ordovician onwards, and smaller fossils with conulariid affinities known only from Lower Cambrian rocks.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Paleontological Society
References
Babcock, L. E.
1991. The enigma of conulariid affinities, p. 133–143. In
Simonetta, A. M. and Conway Morris, S. (eds.), The Early Evolution of Metazoa and the Significance of Problematic Taxa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Babcock, L. E. and Feldmann, R. M.
1986a. The phylum Conulariida. p. 135–147. In
Hoffman, A. and Nitecki, M. H. (eds.), Problematic Fossil Taxa. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Babcock, L. E. and Feldmann, R. M.
1986b. Devonian and Mississippian conulariids of North America. Part A. General description and Conularia
. Annals of Carnegie Museum, 55:349–410.Google Scholar
Babcock, L. E. and Feldmann, R. M.
1986c. Devonian and Mississippian conulariids of North America. Part B. Paraconularia, Retculaconularia, new genus, and organisms rejected from Conulariida. Annals of Carnegie Museum, 55:411–479.Google Scholar
Babcock, L. E., Feldmann, R. M., and Wilson, M. T.
1987. Teratology and pathology of some Paleozoic conulariids. Lethaia, 20:93–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrande, J.
1867. Systěme Silurien du centre de la Bohěme, le're partie. Recherches paléontologiques. Classe des Mollusues. Ordre des Ptéropodes. Prague and Paris, 179 p.Google Scholar
Bartels, C., Briggs, D. E. G., and Brassel, G.
1998. The fossils of the Hunsrück Shale—marine life in the Devonian. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 309 p.Google Scholar
Berg, R. R.
1953. Franconian trilobites from Minnesota and Wisconsin. Journal of Paleontology, 27:553–568.Google Scholar
Bergström, J.
1995. Conulariid affinities: a discussion. Geologiska Foreningens i Stockholm Forhandlingar, 117:245.Google Scholar
Bouček, B.
1928. Revise Českych Paleozoických konularii. Palaeontographica Bohemiae, 11:1–108.Google Scholar
Bouček, B.
1939. Conularida. p. A113–A131. In
Schindewolf, O. H. (ed.), Handbuch der Paläozoologie. Verglag von Gebrüder Borntraeger, Berlin.Google Scholar
Briggs, D. E. G., and Fortey, R. A.
1982. The cuticle of the aglaspidid arthropods, a red-herring in the early history of vertebrates. Lethaia, 15:25–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brood, K.
1995a. Morphology, structure, and systematics of the conuarliids. Geologiska Foreningens i Stockholm Forhandlingar, 117:121–137.Google Scholar
Brood, K.
1995b. Conulariid affinities: a reply. Geologiska Foreningens i Stockholm Forhandlingar, 117:246.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S., and Chen, M.
1992. Carinachitiids, hexangulaconulariids, and Punctatus: problematic metazoans from the Early Cambrian of South China. Journal of Paleontology, 66:384–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldmann, R. M., and Babcock, L. E.
1986. Exceptionally preserved conulariids from Ohio—reinterpretation of their anatomy. National Geographic Research, 2:464–472.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Theron, J. N.
1994. A new Ordovician arthropod, Soomaspis, and the agnostoid problem. Palaeontology, 37:841–861.Google Scholar
Hatschek, B.
1888. Lehrbuch der Zoologie, eine morphologische Ubersicht des Thierreiches zur Einfuhrung in das Studium dieser Wissenschaft. Gustav Fischer, Jena, 432 p.Google Scholar
Hesselbo, S. P.
1992. Aglaspidida (Arthropoda) from the upper Cambrian of Wisconsin. Journal of Paleontology, 66:885–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hessland, I.
1949. A Lower Ordovician Pseudoconularia from the Siljan District. Bulletin of the Geological Institutes of the University of Uppsala, 33:429–436.Google Scholar
Hughes, N. C.
1993. Distribution, taphonomy and functional morphology of the Upper Cambrian trilobite Dikelocephalus
. Milwaukee Public Museum Contributions in Biology and Geology, 84:1–49.Google Scholar
Hughes, N. C., and Cooper, D. L.
1999. Paleobiologic and taphonomic aspects of the “granulosa” trilobite assemblage, Kope Formation (Upper Ordovician, Cincinnati region), Journal of Paleontology, 73:306–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, N. C., and Hesselbo, S. P.
1997. Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the St. Lawrence Formation, Upper Cambrian of the northern Mississippi Valley. Milwaukee Public Museum Contributions in Biology and Geology, 91:1–50.Google Scholar
Götte, A.
1887. Entwicklungsgeschichte derAurelia aurita und Cotylorhiza tuberculta. Abhandlungen zur Entwickelungsgeschichte der Tiere. Viertes Heft. Verlag von Leopold Voss. Hamburg und Leipzig, 79 p.Google Scholar
Jerre, F.
1994. Anatomy and phylogenetic significance of Eoconularia loculata, a conulariid from the Silurian of Gotland. Lethaia, 27:97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludvigsen, R., and Westrop, S. R.
1985. Three new Upper Cambrian stages for North America. Geology, 13:139–143.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, H.-L, Jiang, Z.-W., and Tang, L.-D.
1994. Stratotype section for Lower Cambrian stages in China. Yunnan Science and Technology Press, Kunming, 183 p. [In Chinese with English summary]Google Scholar
McKinney, F. K., Delvolvé, J.-J., and Sobieraj, J.
1995.
Conularia sp. from the Pyrénées: further support for scyphozoan affinities of the Conularida. Lethaia, 28:229–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, S. A., and Gurley, W. F. E.
1896. New species of Paleozoic invertebrates from Illinois and other states. Illinois State Museum of Natural History, Bulletin, 11:1–50.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., and Harrington, H. J.
1956. Conulata. p. F54–F66. In
Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology: Part F: Coelenterata. Geological Society of American and University of Kansas, New York and Lawrence.Google Scholar
Ostrom, M. E.
1978. Stratigraphic relations of Lower Paleozoic rocks of Wisconsin, p. 3–22. In
Odom, I. E. (ed.), Lithostratigraphy, petrology, and sedimentology of Late Cambrian—Early Ordovician rocks near Madison, Wisconsin. Field trip Guidebook number 3, University of Wisconsin Extension, Geological and Natural History Survey, Madison.Google Scholar
Raasch, G. O.
1939. Cambrian Merostomata. Geological Society of America Special Papers, 19:1–146.Google Scholar
Raasch, G. O.
1951. Revision of the Croixan dikelocephalids. Transactions of the Illinois Academy of Science, 44:137–151.Google Scholar
Runkel, A. C.
1994. Deposition of the uppermost Cambrian (Croixan) Jordan sandstone, and the nature of the Cambrian-Ordovician boundary in the Upper Mississippi Valley. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 106:492–506.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sibley, D. F., and Gregg, J. M.
1987. Classification of dolomite rock textures. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 57:967–975.Google Scholar
Sinclair, G. W.
1940. A discussion of the genus Metaconularia with descriptions of new species. Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, 34:101–121.Google Scholar
Sinclair, G. W.
1941. Notes on Pseudoconularia and P. magnifica (Spencer). Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, 35:125–129.Google Scholar
Sinclair, G. W.
1948. The Biology of the Conularida. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. McGill University, Montreal. 442 p.Google Scholar
Sinclair, G. W.
1952. A classification of the Conularida. Fieldiana Geology, 10:135–145.Google Scholar
Stitt, J. H.
1971. Late Cambrian and earliest Ordovician trilobites, Timbered Hills and Lower Arbuckle Groups, Western Arbuckle Mountains, Murray County, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin, 110:1–80.Google Scholar
Stitt, J. H.
1977. Late Cambrian and earliest Ordovician trilobites, Wichita Mountains area, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin, 124:1–75.Google Scholar
Steul, H.
1984. Die systematische Stellung der Conularien. Giessener Geologische Schriften, 37:1–117.Google Scholar
Van Iten, H.
1991a. Anatomy, pattern of occurrence, and nature of the conulariid schott. Palaeontology, 34:939–954.Google Scholar
Van Iten, H.
1991b. Evolutionary affinities of conulariids. p. 145–155. In
Simonetta, A. M. and Conway Morris, S. (eds.), The Early Evolution of Metazoa and the Significance of Problematic Taxa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Van Iten, H.
1992a. Microstructure and growth of the conulariid test: implications for conulariid affinities. Palaeontology, 35:359–372.Google Scholar
Van Iten, H.
1992b. Morphology and phylogenetic significance of the corners and midlines of the conulariid test. Palaeontology, 35:335–358.Google Scholar
Van Iten, H.
1994. Redescription of Glyptoconularia gracilis (Hall), an Ordovician conulariid from North America. p. 363–366. In
Landing, E. (ed.), Studies in stratigraphy and paleontology in honor of Donald W. Fisher. Bulletin—New York State Museum 481. Albany.Google Scholar
Van Iten, H., and Cox, R. S.
1992. Evidence of clonal budding in a radial cluster of Paraconularia crusula (White) (Pennsylvanian:? Cnidaria). Lethaia, 25:421–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Iten, H., Fitzke, J. A., and Cox, R. S.
1996. Problematical fossil cnidarians from the Upper Ordovician of the north-central USA. Palaeontology, 39:1037–1064.Google Scholar
Walcott, C. D.
1886. Second Contribution to the studies on the Cambrian faunas of North America. Bulletin of the United States Geological Survey, 30:1–369.Google Scholar
Walcott, C. D.
1890. Description of new forms of Upper Cambrian fossils. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 13:266–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, B.
1971.
Stephanoscyphus eumedusoides n. spec, ein neuer Scyphopolyp mit einen neuen Entwicklungsmodus. Helgoländer Wissenschaftliche Meeresuntersuchungen, 22:120–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, B.
1979. Coloniality in the Schyphozoa: Cnidaria. p. 81–104. In
Larwood, G. P. and Rosen, B. R. (eds.) Biology and Systematics of Colonial Organisms. Special Publication of the Systematics Association
11.Google Scholar
Wurm, A.
1925. Ueber ein Vorkommen von Mirttelcambrium (Paradoxidesschichten) in bayrischen Frankenwald bei Wildenstein südlich Presseck. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie, 52:71–93.Google Scholar
Yue, Z., and Bengtson, S.
1999. Embryonic and post-embryonic development of the Early Cambrian Olivooides
. Lethaia, 32:181–195.Google Scholar