Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T16:49:04.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Occurrence of a squaloid shark (Chondrichthyes: Squaliformes) with the pinniped Allodesmus from the upper Miocene of Washington

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Phillip K. Bigelow*
Affiliation:
916½ Mason, Bellingham, Washington 98225

Extract

During preparation of a new species of Allodesmus from the Montesano Formation (UWBM 75640; presently being described by the writer) at the University of Washington Burke Memorial Museum in 1984, preparator Bev Witte found 14 monospecific elasmobranch teeth (UWBM 75641) in the matrix encasing the specimen. Most of the teeth were found in the matrix surrounding the cervical vertebrae; a few teeth were found near the skull (Figure 1). Unfortunately, the precise location of each tooth in relation to the pinniped skeleton was not recorded during their air-abrasive removal from the indurated matrix. It is known that the teeth were deposited no more than one or two centimeters from the skeleton. One of the matrix blocks freed from the pinniped still contains two teeth that line the inner surface of a mold of an unidentified Allodesmus bone. This is the first published occurrence of a shark from the Montesano Formation. The occurrence extends the range of Squalus occidentalis northward along the northeastern Pacific margin into Washington State, and it is also one of the highest biostratigraphic occurrences for this species. The discovery is additionally noteworthy because of the depositional relationship of the Allodesmus and Squalus, and because tooth marks occur on the Allodesmus skull. The occurrence therefore has taphonomic and paleoecological implications.

Type
Paleontological Notes
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Addicott, W. O. 1976. Neogene molluscan stages of Oregon and Washington, p. 95115. In Fritsche, A. E., Terbest, H., and Wornardt, W. W. (eds.), Neogene Symposium. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Pacific section, San Francisco, California, April, 1976.Google Scholar
Agassiz, L. 1856. Notice of the fossil fishes found in California by W. P. Blake, p. 272275. In Blake, W. P. (ed.), Descriptions of the fossils and shells collected in California. American Journal of Science, Series 2, Volume 21.Google Scholar
Allison, P. A., Smith, C. R., Kukert, H., Deming, J. W., and Bennett, B. A. 1991. Deep-water taphonomy of vertebrate carcasses: a whale skeleton in the bathyal Santa Catalina Basin. Paleobiolgy, 17:7889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bigelow, P. K. 1987. The petrology, stratigraphy and basin history of the Montesano Formation, southwestern Washington and southern Olympic Peninsula. Unpubl. , , Bellingham, 263 p.Google Scholar
de Blainville, H. M. D. 1816. Prodrome d'une nouvelle distribution systematique du regne animal. Bulletin de la Societe Philomatique, Paris, 1816:105124.Google Scholar
Cappetta, H. 1987. Handbook of Paleoichthyology: Chondrichthyes II, Mesozoic and Cenozoic Elasmobranchii. Gustav Fischer Verlag, New York, 193 p.Google Scholar
Clark, E., and Kristof, E. 1990. Deep-sea elasmobranchs observed from submersibles off Bermuda, Grand Cayman, and Freeport, Bahamas, p. 269284. In Pratt, H. L., Gruber, S. H., and Taniuchi, T. (eds.), Elasmobranchs as Living Resources: Advances in the Biology, Ecology, Systematics, and the Status of the Fisheries. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 90.Google Scholar
Clark, M. R., and Merrett, N. 1972. The significance of squid, whale and other remains from the stomachs of bottom-living deep-sea fish. Journal of the Marine Biological Association (United Kingdom), 52:599603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Compagno, L. J. V. 1973. Interrelationships of living elasmobranchs, p. 1561. In Greenwood, P. H., Miles, R. S., and Patterson, C. (eds.), Interrelationships of Fishes. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 53 (Supplement 1), Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Compagno, L. J. V. 1984. Sharks of the World: An Annotated and Illustrated Catalogue of Shark Species Known to Date, Hexanchiformes to Lamniformes. FAO Fisheries Synopsis No. 125, Volume 4, Part 1, 249 p.Google Scholar
Deméré, T. A., and Cerutti, R. A. 1982. A Pliocene shark attack on a cethotheriid whale. Journal of Paleontology, 56:14801482.Google Scholar
Jordon, D. S., and Hannibal, H. 1923. Fossil sharks and rays of the Pacific Slope of North America. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Science, 22:2768.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae, 10th edition, Volume 1, 824 p.Google Scholar
Long, D. J. 1992. Sharks from the La Meseta Formation (Eocene), Seymour Island, Antarctic Peninsula. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 12:1132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfield, A. W. 1967. Seals of the Arctic and eastern Canada. Bulletin of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 137, 35 p.Google Scholar
Nomura, M., Hatanaka, O., Nishimoto, H., Karasawa, H., and Nojiriko Group, N. 1991. Megasqualus serriculus Jordan and Hannibal (Squalidae: Squaliformes: Elasmobranchii) from the middle Miocene Nanao Calcareous Sandstone, Nanao City, Noto Peninsula, central Japan. Bulletin of the Mizunami Fossil Museum, 18:3345.Google Scholar
Rau, W. W. 1967. Geology of the Wynoochee Valley quadrangle, Grays Harbor County, Washington. Washington Department of Natural Resources Bulletin, 56, 51 p.Google Scholar
Spalding, D. J. 1964. Comparative feeding habits of the fur seal, sea lion, and harbor seal on the British Columbian coast. Bulletin of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 146:152.Google Scholar
Welton, B. J. 1979. Late Cretaceous and Cenozoic Squalomorphii of the Northwest Pacific Ocean. Unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 553 p.Google Scholar