Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T17:05:56.765Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hurdiid radiodontans from the middle Cambrian (Series 3) of Utah

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2017

Stephen Pates ,
Allison C. Daley  and
Bruce S. Lieberman
Stephen Pates
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK 〈stephen.pates@zoo.ox.ac.uk〉
Allison C. Daley
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK 〈stephen.pates@zoo.ox.ac.uk〉 Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Oxford, OX1 3PW, UK Faculty of Geosciences and Environment, University of Lausanne, Sorge Géopolis, CH1015, Lausanne, Switzerland 〈allison.daley@unil.ch〉
Bruce S. Lieberman
Affiliation:
Division of Invertebrate Paleontology, Biodiversity Institute, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045, USA 〈blieber@ku.edu〉 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Radiodontan body elements, some belonging to Peytoia and Hurdia and some unassigned, have been reported from the Langston Formation (Spence Shale Member), Wheeler Formation, and Marjum Formation of the middle Cambrian (Series 3) of Utah. These identifications are reassessed in light of recent work on the morphology of the radiodontan Hurdia. New specimens of Hurdia are identified from the Spence Shale, representing mouthparts (oral cones), cephalic carapace H-elements, frontal appendages, and a single isolated swimming flap. The shape of the H-elements allows H. victoria Walcott, 1912 to be identified from the Spence Shale for the first time. The flap is larger and more complete than any reported from the Burgess Shale and allows for a better understanding of the morphology of Hurdia swimming flaps. A 3D model of a Hurdia frontal appendage indicates that there is only one morph of Hurdia frontal appendage found in both species, and apparent morphological differences between disarticulated appendages reflect a preservational continuum caused by varying oblique angles relative to the seafloor. Peytoia should no longer be reported from the Spence Shale, but its presence is confirmed in the Wheeler and Marjum formations. New mouthparts (oral cones) of Hurdia from the Spence Shale and Peytoia from the Marjum Formation with surface textures of submillimeter-diameter raised nodes are described. These new features have not been observed in material from the Burgess Shale and suggest slight differences in preservation.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 92 , Special Issue 1: Cambrian Explosion , January 2018 , pp. 99 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © 2017, The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aria, C., and Caron, J.B., 2015, Cephalic and limb anatomy of a new isoxyid from the burgess shale and the role of “stem bivalved arthropods” in the disparity of the frontalmost appendage: PloS One, v. 10, p. e0124979.Google Scholar
Babcock, L.E., and Robison, R.A., 1988, Taxonomy and paleobiology of some middle Cambrian Scenella (Cnidaria) and hyolithids (Mollusca) from western North America: University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, v. 121, p. 1–22.Google Scholar
Brett, C.E., Allison, P.A., DeSantis, M.K., Liddell, W.D., and Kramer, A., 2009, Sequence stratigraphy, cyclic facies, and lagerstätten in the middle Cambrian Wheeler and Marjum formations, Great Basin, Utah: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 277, p. 9–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, D.E., and Nedin, C., 1997, The taphonomy and affinities of the problematic fossil Myoscolex from the lower Cambrian Emu Bay Shale of South Australia: Journal of Paleontology, v. 71, p. 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, D.E., and Robison, R.A., 1984, Exceptionally preserved nontrilobite arthropods and Anomalocaris from the middle Cambrian of Utah: University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, v. 111, p. 1–23.Google Scholar
Briggs, D.E., Lieberman, B.S., Halgedahl, S.L., and Jarrard, R.D., 2005, A new metazoan from the middle Cambrian of Utah and the nature of the Vetulicolia: Palaeontology, v. 48, p. 681–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, D.E., Lieberman, B.S., Hendricks, J.R., Halgedahl, S.L., and Jarrard, R.D., 2008, Middle Cambrian arthropods from Utah: Journal of Paleontology, v. 82, p. 238–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, H.K., and Caster, K.E., 1956, Pseudoarctolepis sharpi, n. gen., n. sp. (Phyllocarida), from the Wheeler Shale (middle Cambrian) of Utah: Journal of Paleontology, v. 30, p. 9–14.Google Scholar
Bruton, D.L., 1981, The arthropod Sidneyia inexpectans, middle Cambrian, Burgess Shale, British Columbia: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, v. 295, p. 619–653.Google Scholar
Budd, G.E., 1998, Stem group arthropods from the lower Cambrian Sirius Passet fauna of north Greenland, in Fortey, R. A., and Thomas, R. H., eds., Arthropod Relationships: Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands, p. 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caron, J.B., Gaines, R.R., Mángano, M.G., Streng, M., and Daley, A.C., 2010, A new Burgess Shale–type assemblage from the “thin” Stephen Formation of the southern Canadian Rockies: Geology, v. 38, p. 811–814.Google Scholar
Chen, J.Y., Ramsköld, L., and Zhou, G.Q., 1994, Evidence for monophyly and arthropod affinity of Cambrian giant predators: Science, v. 264, p. 1304–1308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chlupáč, I., and Kordule, V., 2002, Arthropods of Burgess Shale type from the middle Cambrian of Bohemia (Czech Republic): Bulletin of the Czech Geological Survey, v. 77, p. 167–182.Google Scholar
Cong, P., Ma, X., Hou, X., Edgecombe, G.D., and Strausfeld, N.J., 2014, Brain structure resolves the segmental affinity of anomalocaridid appendages: Nature, v. 513, p. 538–542.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S., and Robison, R.A., 1982, The enigmatic medusoid Peytoia and a comparison of some Cambrian biotas: Journal of Paleontology, v. 56, p. 116–122.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S., and Robison, R.A., 1986, Middle Cambrian priapulids and other soft-bodied fossils from Utah and Spain: University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, v. 117, p. 1–22.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S., and Robison, R.A., 1988, More soft-bodied animals and algae from the middle Cambrian of Utah and British Columbia: University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, v. 122, p. 1–48.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S., Selden, P.A., Gunther, G., Jamison, P.G., and Robison, R.A., 2015, New records of Burgess Shale-type taxa from the middle Cambrian of Utah: Journal of Paleontology, v. 89, p. 411–423.Google Scholar
Cui, Z., and Huo, S., 1990, New discoveries of lower Cambrian crustacean fossils from Western Hubei: Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, v. 29, p. 321–330.Google Scholar
Daley, A.C., and Bergström, J., 2012, The oral cone of Anomalocaris is not a classic “Peytoia” : Naturwissenschaften, v. 99, p. 501–504.Google Scholar
Daley, A.C., and Budd, G.E., 2010, New anomalocaridid appendages from the Burgess Shale, Canada: Palaeontology, v. 53, p. 721–738.Google Scholar
Daley, A.C., and Edgecombe, G.D., 2014, Morphology of Anomalocaris canadensis from the Burgess Shale: Journal of Paleontology, v. 88, p. 68–91.Google Scholar
Daley, A.C., and Legg, D.A., 2015, A morphological and taxonomic appraisal of the oldest anomalocaridid from the lower Cambrian of Poland: Geological Magazine, v. 152, p. 949–955.Google Scholar
Daley, A.C., Budd, G.E., Caron, J.B., Edgecombe, G.D., and Collins, D., 2009, The Burgess Shale anomalocaridid Hurdia and its significance for early euarthropod evolution: Science, v. 323, p. 1597–1600.Google Scholar
Daley, A.C., Budd, G.E., and Caron, J.B., 2013a, Morphology and systematics of the anomalocaridid arthropod Hurdia from the middle Cambrian of British Columbia and Utah: Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, v. 11, p. 743–787.Google Scholar
Daley, A.C., Paterson, J.R., Edgecombe, G.D., García‐Bellido, D.C., and Jago, J.B., 2013b, New anatomical information on Anomalocaris from the Cambrian Emu Bay Shale of South Australia and a reassessment of its inferred predatory habits: Palaeontology, v. 56, p. 971–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elrick, M., and Snider, A.C., 2002, Deep-water stratigraphic cyclicity and carbonate mud mound development in the middle Cambrian Marjum Formation, House Range, Utah, USA: Sedimentology, v. 49, p. 1021–1047.Google Scholar
Gaines, R.R., 2014, Burgess Shale-type preservation and its distribution in space and time. Reading and Writing of the Fossil Record: Preservational Pathways to Exceptional Fossilization: Paleontological Society Papers, v. 20, p. 123–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaines, R.R., and Droser, M.L., 2003, Paleoecology of the familiar trilobite Elrathia kingii: An early exaerobic zone inhabitant: Geology, v. 31, p. 941–944.Google Scholar
Gaines, R.R., and Droser, M.L., 2005, New approaches to understanding the mechanics of Burgess Shale-type deposits: From the micron scale to the global picture: Sedimentary Record, v. 3, p. 4–8.Google Scholar
Gaines, R.R., and Droser, M.L., 2010, The paleoredox setting of Burgess Shale-type deposits: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 297, p. 649–661.Google Scholar
Gaines, R.R., Briggs, D.E., and Yuanlong, Z., 2008, Cambrian Burgess Shale–type deposits share a common mode of fossilization: Geology, v. 36, p. 755–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaines, R.R., Hammarlund, E.U., Hou, X., Qi, C., Gabbott, S.E., Zhao, Y., Peng, J., and Canfield, D.E., 2012, Mechanism for Burgess Shale-type preservation: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 109, p. 5180–5184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garson, D.E., Gaines, R.R., Droser, M.L., Liddell, W.D., and Sappenfield, A., 2012, Dynamic palaeoredox and exceptional preservation in the Cambrian Spence Shale of Utah: Lethaia, v. 45, p. 164–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goloboff, P., and Catalano, S., 2016, TNT version 1.5, including a full implementation of phylogenetic morphometrics: Cladistics, v. 32, p. 221–238.Google Scholar
Gunther, L.F., and Gunther, V.G., 1981, Some middle Cambrian fossils of Utah: Brigham Young University Geology Studies, v. 28, p. 1–81.Google Scholar
Halgedahl, S.L., Jarrard, R.D., Brett, C.E., and Allison, P.A., 2009, Geophysical and geological signatures of relative sea level change in the upper Wheeler Formation, Drum Mountains, West-Central Utah: A perspective into exceptional preservation of fossils: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 277, p. 34–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendricks, J.R., 2013, Global distributional dynamics of Cambrian clades as revealed by Burgess Shale-type deposits: Geological Society, London, Memoirs, v. 38, p. 35–43.Google Scholar
Hendricks, J.R., and Lieberman, B.S., 2008, New phylogenetic insights into the Cambrian radiation of arachnomorph arthropods: Journal of Paleontology, v. 82, p. 585–594.Google Scholar
Hendricks, J.R., Lieberman, B.S., and Stigall, A.L., 2008, Using GIS to study palaeobiogeographic and macroevolutionary patterns in soft-bodied Cambrian arthropods: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 264, p. 163–175.Google Scholar
Hou, X., Bergström, J., and Ahlberg, P., 1995, Anomalocaris and other large animals in the lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna of southwest China: GFF, v. 117, p. 163–183.Google Scholar
Kloss, T.J., Dornbos, S.Q., Chen, J.Y., McHenry, L.J., and Marenco, P.J., 2015, High-resolution geochemical evidence for oxic bottom waters in three Cambrian Burgess Shale-type deposits: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 440, p. 90–95.Google Scholar
Lerosey-Aubril, R., Hegna, T.A., Kier, C., Bonino, E., Habersetzer, J., and Carré, M., 2012, Controls on gut phosphatisation: The trilobites from the Weeks Formation Lagerstätte (Cambrian; Utah): PLoS One, v. 7, p. e32934.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lerosey-Aubril, R., Hegna, T.A., Babcock, L.E., Bonino, E., and Kier, C., 2014, Arthropod appendages from the Weeks Formation Konservat-Lagerstätte: New occurrences of anomalocaridids in the Cambrian of Utah, USA: Bulletin of Geosciences, v. 89, p. 269–282.Google Scholar
Liddell, W.D., Wright, S.W., and Brett, C.E., 1997, Sequence stratigraphy and paleoecology of the middle Cambrian Spence Shale in northern Utah and southern Idaho: Brigham Young University Geology Studies, v. 42, p. 59–78.Google Scholar
LoDuca, S.T., Caron, J.B., Schiffbauer, J.D., Xiao, S., and Kramer, A., 2015, A reexamination of Yuknessia from the Cambrian of British Columbia and Utah: Journal of Paleontology, v. 89, p. 82–95.Google Scholar
Liu, Q., 2013, The first discovery of anomalocaridid appendages from the Balang Formation (Cambrian Series 2) in Hunan, China: Alcheringa, v. 37, p. 1–6.Google Scholar
Maddison, W.P., and Maddison, D.R., 2017, Mesquite: A modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 3.2: http://mesquiteproject.org.Google Scholar
Moore, R.A., and Lieberman, B.S., 2009, Preservation of early and middle Cambrian soft-bodied arthropods from the Pioche Shale, Nevada, USA: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 277, p. 57–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olcott Marshall, A., Wehrbein, R.L., Lieberman, B.S., and Marshall, C.P., 2012, Raman spectroscopic investigations of Burgess Shale–type preservation: A new way forward: Palaios, v. 27, p. 288–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rees, M.N., 1986, A fault-controlled trough through a carbonate platform: The middle Cambrian House Range embayment: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 97, p. 1054–1069.Google Scholar
Resser, C.E., 1939, The Spence shale and its fauna (with six plates): Smithsonian Institution Miscellaneous Collections, v. 97, p. 1–29.Google Scholar
Robison, R.A., 1964, Late middle Cambrian faunas from western Utah: Journal of Paleontology, v. 38, p. 510–566.Google Scholar
Robison, R.A., 1965, Middle Cambrian eocrinoids from western North America: Journal of Paleontology, v. 39, p. 355–364.Google Scholar
Robison, R.A., 1991, Middle Cambrian biotic diversity: Examples from four Utah Lagerstätten, in Simonetta, A., and Conway Morris, S., eds., The Early Evolution of Metazoa and the Significance of Problematic Taxa: Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 77–98.Google Scholar
Robison, R.A., and Babcock, L.E., 2011, Systematics, paleobiology, and taphonomy of some exceptionally preserved trilobites from Cambrian Lagerstätten of Utah: Paleontological contributions, v. 5, p. 1–47.Google Scholar
Robison, R.A., and Richards, B.C., 1981, Larger bivalve arthropods from the middle Cambrian of Utah: University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, v. 106, p. 1–28.Google Scholar
Robison, R.A., and Wiley, E.O., 1995, A new arthropod, Meristosoma: More fallout from the Cambrian explosion: Journal of Paleontology, v. 69, p. 447–459.Google Scholar
Robison, R.A., Babcock, L.E., and Gunther, V.G., 2015, Exceptional Cambrian fossils from Utah: A window into the Age of Trilobites: Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publications, v. 15, p. 1–97.Google Scholar
Rogers, J.C., 1984, Depositional environments and paleoecology of two quarry sites in the middle Cambrian Marjum and Wheeler Formations, House Range, Utah: Brigham Young University Geology Studies, v. 31, p. 97–115.Google Scholar
Stein, M., 2013, Cephalic and appendage morphology of the Cambrian arthropod Sidneyia inexpectans : Zoologischer Anzeiger–A Journal of Comparative Zoology, v. 253, p. 164–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, M., Church, S.B., and Robison, R.A., 2011, A new Cambrian arthropod, Emeraldella brutoni, from Utah: Paleontological Contributions, v. 3, p. 1–9.Google Scholar
Van Roy, P., and Briggs, D.E., 2011, A giant Ordovician anomalocaridid: Nature, v. 473, p. 510–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Roy, P., Daley, A.C., and Briggs, D.E.G., 2015, Anomalocaridid trunk limb homology revealed by a giant filter-feeder with paired flaps: Nature, v. 522, p. 77–80.Google Scholar
Vinther, J., Stein, M., Longrich, N.R., and Harper, D.A., 2014, A suspension-feeding anomalocarid from the early Cambrian: Nature, v. 507, p. 496–499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walcott, C.D., 1911, Middle Cambrian holothurians and medusae: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, v. 57, p. 41–68.Google Scholar
Walcott, C.D., 1912, Middle Cambrian Brachiopoda, Malacostraca, Trilobita and Merostomata: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, v. 57, p. 145–288.Google Scholar
Whiteaves, J.F., 1892, Description of a new genus and species of phyllocarid Crustacea from the middle Cambrian of Mount Stephen, B.C.: Canadian Record of Science, v. 5, p. 205–208.Google Scholar
Whittington, H.B., and Briggs, D.E., 1985, The largest Cambrian animal, Anomalocaris, Burgess Shale, British Columbia: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, v. 309, p. 569–609.Google Scholar