Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-l69ms Total loading time: 0.446 Render date: 2022-08-08T19:38:00.299Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Paleocommunity composition, relative abundance, and new camerate crinoids from the Brechin Lagerstätte (Upper Ordovician)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2020

Selina R. Cole
Affiliation:
Division of Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, New York10024, USA Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA
David F. Wright
Affiliation:
Division of Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, New York10024, USA Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA
William I. Ausich
Affiliation:
School of Earth Sciences, 125 South Oval Mall, Columbus, Ohio43210, USA
Joseph M. Koniecki
Affiliation:
3529 E. Joy Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan48105

Abstract

The Brechin Lagerstätte of southern Ontario contains an exceptionally diverse and well-preserved Late Ordovician (Katian) crinoid fauna. We describe four genera and eight species of camerate crinoids from the Brechin Lagerstätte, including six new species. Consequently, the total diversity of the fauna now stands at 27 genera and 39 nominal species, thereby making it the most taxonomically diverse Ordovician crinoid fauna known. Taxa described include the diplobathrid Pararchaeocrinus kiddi new species and the monobathrids Glyptocrinus ramulosus Billings, 1856, Periglyptocrinus priscus (Billings, 1857a), Periglyptocrinus astricus new species, Periglyptocrinus kevinbretti new species, Periglyptocrinus mcdonaldi new species, Periglyptocrinus silvosus new species, and Abludoglyptocrinus steinheimerae new species. We summarize the taxonomic composition, diversity, and abundance distribution of all known crinoids from the Brechin Lagerstätte to better characterize the paleoecological structure and complexity of the community. We establish that the fauna is dominated by the subclass Pentacrinoidea, both in terms of abundance and species richness. In addition, we analyze species-level abundance data using Relative Abundance Distribution (RAD) models to evaluate the ecological complexity of the paleocommunity. We found that community structure of the Brechin Lagerstätte is best explained by an ecologically ‘complex’ RAD model, which suggests that species partitioned niches along multiple resource axes and/or the presence of multiple ecological ways of life. These results indicate that the Brechin Lagerstätte is significant not only for being the most taxonomically diverse Katian crinoid assemblage, but also for being an early ecologically complex fauna that developed in the wake of the Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event.

UUID: http://zoobank.org/f86582ed-5db6-469E-befe-34b801f9a113

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 2020, 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

Alroy, J., 2015, The shape of terrestrial abundance distributions: Science Advances, v. 1, no. 8, p. e1500082, doi:10.1126/sciadv.1500082.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armstrong, D.K., 2000, Paleozoic geology of the northern Lake Simcoe area, south-central Ontario: Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 6011, 34 p.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., 1980, A model for niche differentiation in Lower Mississippian crinoid communities: Journal of Paleontology, v. 54, p. 273288.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., 1985, New crinoids and revision of the superfamily Glyptocrinacea (early Silurian, Ohio): Journal of Paleontology, v. 59, p. 793808.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., 1997, Regional encrinites: A vanished lithofacies, in Brett, C. E., and Baird, G.C., eds., Paleontological Events: Stratigraphic, Ecologic, and Evolutionary Implications: New York, Columbia University Press, p. 509519.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., 2016, Fossil species as data: A perspective from echinoderms, in Allmon, W.D., and Yacobucci, M.M., eds., Species and Speciation in the Fossil Record: Chicago, University of Chicago Press, p. 301311.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., Wright, D.F., Cole, S.R., and Koniecki, J.M., 2018, Disparid and hybocrinid crinoids (Echinodermata) from the Upper Ordovician (lower Katian) Brechin Lagerstätte of Ontario: Journal of Paleontology, v. 92, p. 850871, doi:10.1017/jpa.2017.154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldridge, E., Harris, D.J., Xiao, X., and White, E.P., 2016, An extensive comparison of species-abundance distribution models: PeerJ, v. 4, p. e2823, doi:10.7717/peerj.2823.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bassler, R.S., 1915, Bibliographic index of American Ordovician and Silurian fossils: United States National Museum Bulletin, v. 92, 1521 p.Google Scholar
Bassler, R.S., and Moodey, M.W., 1943, Bibliographic and faunal index of Paleozoic pelmatozoan echinoderms: Geological Society of America Special Paper 45, 734 p.Google Scholar
Baumiller, T.K., and Gahn, F.J., 2002, Fossil record of parasitism on marine invertebrates with special emphasis on the platyceratid-crinoid interaction: Paleontological Society Papers, v. 8, p. 195210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennington, J.B., and Bambach, R.K., 1996, Statistical testing for paleocommunity recurrence: Are similar fossil assemblages ever the same?: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 127, p. 107133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bigsby, J.J., 1868, Thesaurus Siluricus: The Flora and Fauna of the Silurian Period; with Addenda (from Recent Acquisitions): London, J. Van Hoorst, 214 p.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1856, Report of Progress: Canadian Naturalist and Geologist, v. 1, p. 54.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1857a, New species of fossils from Silurian rocks of Canada: Canada Geological Survey, Report of Progress 1853–1856, Report for the year 1856, p. 247–345.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1857b, On the Crinoidea or stone lilies of the Trenton Limestone, with a description of a new species: Canadian Naturalist and Geologist, ser. 1, v. 1, p. 4857.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1858, New genera and species of fossils from the Silurian and Devonian formations of Canada: Canadian Naturalist and Geologist, v. 101, p. 419444.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1859, On the Crinoideae of the Lower Silurian rocks of Canada: Canadian Geological Survey, Figures and Descriptions of Canadian Organic Remains, Decade 4, p. 7–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, C.E., and Brookfield, M.E., 1984, Morphology, faunas and genesis of Ordovician hardgrounds from southern Ontario, Canada: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 46, p. 233290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, C.E., and Liddell, W.D., 1978, Preservation and paleoecology of a Middle Ordovician hardground community: Paleobiology, v. 4, p. 329348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, C.E., and Taylor, W.L., 1999, Middle Ordovician of the Lake Simcoe area of Ontario, Canada, in Hess, H., Ausich, W.I., Brett, C.E., and Simms, M.H., eds., Fossil Crinoids: Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, p. 6874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, C.E., Moffat, H.A., and Taylor, W.L., 1997, Echinoderm taphonomy, taphofacies, and Lagerstätten: Paleontological Society Papers, v. 3, p. 147190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brower, J.C., 1974, Ontogeny of camerate crinoids: The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Paper 72, p. 1–53.Google Scholar
Brower, J.C., 2007, The application of filtration theory to food gathering in Ordovician crinoids: Journal of Paleontology, v. 81, p. 12843000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brower, J.C., and Veinus, J., 1974, Middle Ordovician crinoids from southwestern Virginia and eastern Tennessee: Bulletins of American Paleontology, v. 66, p. 1125.Google Scholar
Brower, J.C., and Veinus, J., 1978, Middle Ordovician crinoids from the Twin Cities area of Minnesota: Bulletins of American Paleontology, v. 74, p. 371506.Google Scholar
Burnham, K., and Anderson, D., 2002, Model Selection and Multi-model Inference (second edition): New York, Springer, 488 p.Google Scholar
Cole, S.R., 2017, Phylogeny and morphologic evolution of the Ordovician Camerata (class Crinoidea, phylum Echinodermata): Journal of Paleontology, v. 91, p. 815828, doi:10.1017/jpa.2016.137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, S.R., 2018, Phylogeny and evolutionary history of diplobathrid crinoids (Echinodermata): Palaeontology, v. 62, p. 357373, doi:10.1111/pala.12401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, S.R., Ausich, W.I., Colmenar, J., and Zamora, S., 2017, Filling the Gondwanan gap: Diverse crinoids from the Castillejo and Fombuena formations (Middle and Upper Ordovician, Iberian Chains, Spain): Journal of Paleontology, v. 91, p. 715734, doi:10.1017/jpa.2016.135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, S.R., Ausich, W.I., Wright, D.F., and Koniecki, J.M., 2018, An echinoderm Lagerstätte from the Upper Ordovician (Katian), Ontario: Taxonomic re-evaluation and description of new dicyclic camerate crinoids: Journal of Paleontology, v. 92, p. 488505, doi:10.1017/jpa.2017.151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, S.R., Wright, D.F., and Ausich, W.I., 2019, Phylogenetic community paleoecology of one of the earliest complex crinoid faunas (Brechin Lagerstätte, Ordovician): Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 521, p. 8298, doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.02.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darroch, S.A., Laflamme, M., and Wagner, P.J., 2018, High ecological complexity in benthic Ediacaran communities: Nature Ecology & Evolution, v. 2, p. 15411547, doi:10.1038/s41559-018-0663-7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deline, B., Ausich, W.I., and Brett, C.E., 2012, Comparing taxonomic and geographic scales in the morphological disparity of Ordovician through Early Silurian Laurentian crinoids: Paleobiology, v. 38, p. 538553, doi:10.2307/41684299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erwin, D.H., 2008, Macroevolution of ecosystem engineering, niche construction and diversity: Trends in Ecology & Evolution, v. 23, p. 304310, doi:10.1016/j.tree.2008.01.013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foote, M., 1994, Morphological disparity in Ordovician–Devonian crinoids and the early saturation of morphological space: Paleobiology, v. 20, p. 320344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorzelak, P., Salamon, M.A., and Baumiller, T.K., 2012, Predator-induced macroevolutionary trends in Mesozoic crinoids: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 109, p. 70047007, doi:10.1073/pnas.1201573109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grabau, A.W. and Shimer, H.W., 1910, North American Index Fossils: Invertebrates, Volume 2: New York, A.G. Seiler & Company, 909 p.Google Scholar
Gray, J.S., 1987, Species-abundance patterns, in Gee, J.H.R., and Giller, P.S., eds., Organization of Communities: Past and Present: Oxford, UK, Blackwell Scientific Publications, p. 5367.Google Scholar
Guensburg, T.E., 1984, Echinodermata of the Middle Ordovician Lebanon Limestone, central Tennessee: Bulletins of American Paleontology, v. 86, 100 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J., 1847, Palaeontology of New York, Volume I, Containing Descriptions of the Organic Remains of the Lower Division of the New-York System (Equivalent of the Lower Silurian Rocks of Europe): New York Geological Survey, Natural History of New York, Paleontology, v. 6, 338 p.Google Scholar
Holterhoff, P.F., 1997a, Paleocommunity and evolutionary ecology of Paleozoic crinoids: The Paleontological Society Papers, v. 3, p. 69106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holterhoff, P.F., 1997b, Filtration models, guilds, and biofacies: Crinoid paleoecology of the Stanton Formation (Upper Pennsylvanian), midcontinent, North America: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 130, p. 177208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallmeyer, J.W., and Ausich, W.I., 2015, Deepwater occurrence of a new Glyptocrinus (Crinoidea, Camerata) from the Late Ordovician of southwestern Ohio and northern Kentucky: Revision of crinoid paleocommunity composition: Journal of Paleontology, v. 89, p. 10681075, doi:10.1017/jpa.2015.72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T.W., 1985, Aerosol filtration theory applied to Mississippian deltaic crinoids: Journal of Paleontology, v. 59, p. 551560.Google Scholar
Kass, R.E., and Raftery, A.E., 1995, Bayes factors: Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 90, p. 773795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, S.M., and Pope, J.K., 1979, A new camerate crinoid from the Upper Ordovician of Indiana: Journal of Paleontology, v. 53, p. 416420.Google Scholar
Kidwell, S.M., 2001, Preservation of species abundance in marine death assemblages: Science, v. 294, p. 10911094, doi:10.1126/science.1064539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidwell, S.M., and Jablonski, D., 1983, Taphonomic feedback ecological consequences of shell accumulation, in Tevesz, M.J.S., and McCall, P.L., eds., Biotic Interactions in Recent and Fossil Benthic Communities: Boston, Springer, p. 195248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitazawa, K., and Oji, T., 2010, Particle selection by the sea lily Metacrinus rotundus Carpenter 1884 (Echinodermata, Crinoidea): Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, v. 395, p. 8084, doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2010.08.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitazawa, K., Oji, T., and Sunamura, M., 2007, Food composition of crinoids (Crinoidea: Echinodermata) in relation to stalk length and fan density: Their paleoecological implications: Marine Biology, v. 152, p. 959968, doi:10.1007/s00227-007-0746-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolata, D.R., 1975, Middle Ordovician echinoderms from northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin: Journal of Paleontology, Memoir 7, v. 49, 74 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolata, D.R., 1982, Camerates, in Sprinkle, J., ed., Echinoderm Faunas from the Bromide Formation (Middle Ordovician) of Oklahoma: The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Monograph 1, p. 170205.Google Scholar
Liberty, B.A., 1969, Palaeozoic geology of the Lake Simcoe area, Ontario: Geological Survey of Canada, Memoir 355, 201 p.Google Scholar
Magurran, A.E., 2004, Measuring Biological Diversity: Malden, Blackwell Publishing, 256 p.Google Scholar
McGill, B.J., Etienne, R.S., Gray, J.S., Alonso, D., Anderson, M.J., Benecha, H.K., Dornelas, M., Enquist, B.J., Green, J.L., He, F., and Hurlbert, A.H., 2007, Species abundance distributions: Moving beyond single prediction theories to integration within an ecological framework: Ecology Letters, v. 10, p. 9951015, doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01094.x.Google ScholarPubMed
Meyer, D.L., and Ausich, W.I., 1983, Biotic interactions among Recent and among fossil crinoids, in Tevesz, M.J.S., and McCall, P.L., eds., Biotic Interactions in Recent and Fossil Benthic Communities: Boston, Springer, p. 377427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, D.L., and Ausich, W.I., 2019, Ecological and taphonomic fidelity in fossil crinoid accumulations: Palaios, v. 34, p. 575583, doi:10.2110/palo.2019.032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, J.S., 1821, A Natural History of the Crinoidea, or Lily-shaped Animals; with Observations on the Genera, Asteria, Euryale, Comatula and Marsupites: Bristol, Bryan & Company, 150 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., 1874, Glyptocrinus fornshelli: Cincinnati Quarterly Journal of Science, v. 1, p. 348351.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., 1889, North American Geology and Paleontology: Cincinnati, Ohio, Western Methodist Book Concern, 664 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., 1897, Second appendix to North American Geology and Palaeontology: Cincinnati, Ohio, Western Methodist Book Concern, p. 719793.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., and Gurley, W.F.E., 1894, New genera and species of Echinodermata: Illinois State Museum, Bulletin 5, p. 153.Google Scholar
Moore, R.C., 1952, Evolution rates among crinoids: Journal of Paleontology, v. 26, p. 338352.Google Scholar
Moore, R.C., and Laudon, L.R., 1943, Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids: Geological Society of America Special Paper, v. 46, p. 1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, R.C., and Teichert, C., eds., 1978, Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2: Boulder, Colorado, and Lawrence, Kansas, Geological Society of America (and University of Kansas Press), 1027 p.Google Scholar
Muscente, A.D., Prabhu, A., Zhong, H., Eleish, A., Meyer, M.B., Fox, P., Hazen, R.M., and Knoll, A.H., 2018, Quantifying ecological impacts of mass extinctions with network analysis of fossil communities: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 115, p. 52175222, doi:10.1073/pnas.1719976115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oksanen, J., Blanchet, F.G., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., O'Hara, R.B., Simpson, G.L., Solymos, P., Stevens, M.H.H., and Wagner, H., 2010, Vegan: Community ecology package, R package ver. 1.17-4, http://cran.r-project.org.Google Scholar
Parks, W.A., and Alcock, F.J., 1912, On two new crinoids from the Trenton Formation of Ontario: Ottawa Naturalist, v. 26, p. 4145.Google Scholar
Paton, T.R., and Brett, C.E., 2019, Revised stratigraphy of the middle Simcoe Group (Ordovician, upper Sandbian-Katian) in its type area: An integrated approach: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 57, no. 1, p. 184198, doi:10.1139/cjes-2018-0023.Google Scholar
Paton, T.R., Brett, C.E., and Kampouris, G.E., 2019, Genesis, modification, and preservation of complex Upper Ordovician hardgrounds: Implications for sequence stratigraphy and the Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 526, p. 5371, doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.04.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patzkowsky, M.E., and Holland, S.M., 2003, Lack of community saturation at the beginning of the Paleozoic plateau: The dominance of regional over local processes: Paleobiology, v. 29, p. 545560, doi:10.1666/0094-8373(2003)029<20090545.LOCSAT>2.0.CO;2.Google Scholar
Perera, S.N., and Stigall, A.L., 2018, Identifying hierarchical spatial patterns within paleocommunities: An example from the Upper Pennsylvanian Ames Limestone of the Appalachian Basin: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 506, p. 111, doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2018.05.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, S.E., and Ausich, W.I., 2008, A sample-adjusted macroevolutionary history for Ordovician-Silurian crinoids: Paleobiology, v. 34, p. 104116, doi:10.1666/07035.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pruss, S.B., Finnegan, S., Fischer, W.W., and Knoll, A.H., 2010, Carbonates in skeleton-poor seas: New insights from Cambrian and Ordovician strata of Laurentia: Palaios, v. 25, p. 7384, doi:10.2110/palo.2009.p09-101r.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, C.F., 1854–1855, Erst Periode, Kohlen-Gebirge, in Brown, H.G., ed., Lethaea Geognostica (third edition), Volume 2E: Stuttgart, Schweizerbart, 788 p.Google Scholar
Shumard, B.F., 1868, A catalogue of the Palaeozoic fossils of North America, Part I, Paleozoic Echinodermata: Transactions of the Saint Louis Academy of Science (1866), v. 2, p. 334407.Google Scholar
Springer, F., 1911, On a Trenton echinoderm fauna at Kirkfield, Ontario: Canada Department Mines, Memoir 15-P, p. 1–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprinkle, J., 1982, Echinoderm faunas from the Bromide Formation (Middle Ordovician) of Oklahoma: The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Monograph 1, 369 p.Google Scholar
Sproat, C.D., Jin, J., Zhan, R.B., and Rudkin, D.M., 2015, Morphological variability and paleoecology of the Late Ordovician Parastrophina from eastern Canada and the Tarim Basin, Northwest China: Palaeoworld, v. 24, p. 160175, doi:10.1016/j.palwor.2014.11.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strimple, H.L., and Watkins, W.T., 1955, New Ordovician echinoderms: Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, v. 45, p. 347353.Google Scholar
Swisher, R.E., Westrop, S.R., and Amati, L., 2015, The Upper Ordovician trilobite Raymondites Sinclair, 1944 in North America: Journal of Paleontology, v. 89, p. 110134, doi:10.1017/jpa.2014.10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ubaghs, G., 1978a, General morphology, in Moore, R.C., and Teichert, C., eds., Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2: Boulder and Lawrence, Geological Society of America (and University of Kansas Press), p. T58T216.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G., 1978b, Camerates, in Moore, R.C., and Teichert, C., eds., Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2: Boulder, Colorado, and Lawrence, Kansas, Geological Society of America (and University of Kansas Press), p. T409T519.Google Scholar
Uyeno, T.T., 1974, Conodonts of the Hull Formation: Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 248, 31 p.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F., 1880–1886, Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea, Part 2, Family Sphaeroidocrinidae, with the sub-families Platycrinidae, Rhodocrinidae, and Actinocrinidae; Paet 3, Section 1, Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusions of the generic descriptions: Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1881, p. 177411 (Part 2); 1885, p. 225–364 (Part 3).Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F., 1897, The North American Crinoidea Camerata: Harvard College Museum of Comparative Zoology, Memoirs 20 and 21, 897 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, P.J., Kosnik, M.A., and Lidgard, S., 2006, Abundance distributions imply elevated complexity of post-Paleozoic marine ecosystems: Science, v. 314, p. 12891292, doi:10.1126/science.1133795.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webby, B.D., Paris, F., Droser, M.L., and Percival, I.G., eds., 2004, The Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event: New York, Columbia University Press, 484 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, G.D., 1973, Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids, 1942–1968: Geological Society of America, Memoir 137, 341 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G.D., 1974, Crinoid pluricolumnal noditaxis patterns: Journal of Paleontology, v. 48, p. 12831288.Google Scholar
Webster, G.D., and Webster, D.W., 2014, Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids, coronates, and hemistreptocrinoids, 1758–2012: http://crinoids.azurewebsites.net/ (accessed 25 January 2017).Google Scholar
Wilson, A.E., 1946, Echinodermata of the Ottawa Formation of the Ottawa-St. Lawrence lowland: Canada Geological Survey, Bulletin, v. 4, p. 161.Google Scholar
Wright, D.F., and Toom, U., 2017, New crinoids from the Baltic region (Estonia): Fossil tip-dating phylogenetics constrains the origin and Ordovician–Silurian diversification of the Flexibilia (Echinodermata): Palaeontology, v. 60, p. 893910, doi:10.1111/pala.12324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, D.F., Ausich, W.I., Cole, S.R., Rhenberg, E.C., and Peter, M.E., 2017, Phylogenetic taxonomy and classification of the Crinoidea (Echinodermata): Journal of Paleontology, v. 91, p. 829846, doi:10.1017/jpa.2016.142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, D.F., Cole, S.R., and Ausich, W.I., 2019, Biodiversity, systematics, and new taxa of cladid crinoids from the Ordovician Brechin Lagerstätte: Journal of Paleontology, v. 94, p. 334357, doi:10.1017/jpa.2019.81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zittel, K.A. von, 1879, Handbuch der Palaeontologie, Volume 1, Palaeozoologie: Munich, R. Oldenbourg, p. 308560.Google Scholar
2
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Paleocommunity composition, relative abundance, and new camerate crinoids from the Brechin Lagerstätte (Upper Ordovician)
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Paleocommunity composition, relative abundance, and new camerate crinoids from the Brechin Lagerstätte (Upper Ordovician)
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Paleocommunity composition, relative abundance, and new camerate crinoids from the Brechin Lagerstätte (Upper Ordovician)
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *