Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T17:12:33.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comment on: Tang et al. [2019]: A problematic animal fossil from the early Cambrian Hetang Formation, South China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2019

Ben J. Slater Open the ORCID record for Ben J. Slater [Opens in a new window]  and
Graham E. Budd
Ben J. Slater
Affiliation:
Palaeobiology Programme, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavägen 16, SE-75236 Uppsala, Sweden ;
Graham E. Budd
Affiliation:
Palaeobiology Programme, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavägen 16, SE-75236 Uppsala, Sweden ;
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tang et al. (2019) described new specimens of carbonaceous compression fossils from the early Cambrian Hetang Formation in South China, for which they established the new taxon Cambrowania ovata Tang and Xiao in Tang et al., 2019. Tang et al. (2019) interpreted these fossils as the remains of metazoans, representing either the carapaces of bivalve arthropods, or early life-cycle stages of sponges. We contest the animal affinity of these fossils; instead, we propose that the specimens described as Cambrowania ovata are actually large Leiosphaeridia—in other words, collapsed hollow organic spheroidal acritarchs. The features described by Tang et al. (2019) all fall into the morphology of carbonaceous compressions of Leiosphaeridia with pyritized/baritized folds and compaction wrinkles. Such Leiosphaeridia are a common component of Cambrian (and older) siliciclastic deposits, and frequently exhibit such a pattern of pyritization, baritization, and encrustation with other diagenetic minerals.

Type
Comment
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 93 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 1276 - 1278
Copyright
Copyright © 2019, 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

Brotzen, F., 1941, Några bidrag till visingsöformationens stratigrafi och tektonik: Geologiska Föreningens Förhandlingar, v. 63, p. 245–261.Google Scholar
Butterfield, N.J., Knoll, A.H., and Swett, K., 1994, Paleobiology of the Neoproterozoic Svanbergfjellet Formation, Spitsbergen: Fossils & Strata, v. 34, p. 1–84.Google Scholar
Eisenack, A., 1958, Tasmanites Newton 1875 und Leiosphaeridia n.g. als Gattungen der Hystrichosphaeridea: Palaeontographica Abteilug A, v. 110, p. 1–19.Google Scholar
Jankauskas, T.V., 1979, Srednerifeyski microbiota Yuzhnogo Urala i Bashkirskogo Priural'ya [Middle Riphean microbiota of the southern Urals and the Ural region in Bashkiria]: Akademii Nauk SSSR Doklady Proceedings of the USSR Academy of Sciences, v. 248, p. 190–193.Google Scholar
Javaux, E.J., and Knoll, A.H., 2017, Micropaleontology of the lower Mesoproterozoic Roper Group, Australia, and implications for early eukaryotic evolution: Journal of Paleontology, v. 91, p. 199–229.Google Scholar
Jensen, S., Palacios, T., and Mus, M.M., 2007, A brief review of the fossil record of the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition in the area of Montes de Toledo-Guadalupe, Spain: Geological Society, London, Special Publications, v. 286, p. 223–235.Google Scholar
Loron, C., and Moczydłowska, M., 2018, Tonian (Neoproterozoic) eukaryotic and prokaryotic organic-walled microfossils from the upper Visingsö Group, Sweden: Palynology, v. 42, p. 220–254.Google Scholar
Loron, C.C., Rainbird, R.H., Turner, E.C., Greenman, J.W., and Javaux, E.J., 2019, Organic-walled microfossils from the late Mesoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic lower Shaler Supergroup (Arctic Canada): diversity and biostratigraphic significance: Precambrian Research, v. 321, p. 349–374.Google Scholar
Moczydłowska, M., 2010, Life cycle of early Cambrian microalgae from the Skiagia-plexus acritarchs: Journal of Paleontology, v. 84, p. 216–230.Google Scholar
Naumova, S.N., 1949, Spory nizhnego kembriya [spores from the Lower Cambrian]: Izvestiya Akademiy Nauk, v. 4, p. 49–56.Google Scholar
Riedman, L.A., and Porter, S., 2016, Organic-walled microfossils of the mid-Neoproterozoic Alinya Formation, Officer Basin, Australia: Journal of Paleontology, v. 90, p. 854–887.Google Scholar
Samuelsson, J., and Butterfield, N.J., 2001, Neoproterozoic fossils from the Franklin Mountains, northwestern Canada: stratigraphic and palaeobiological implications: Precambrian Research, v. 107, p. 235–251.Google Scholar
Sergeev, V.N., Knoll, A.H., and Vorob'Eva, N.G., 2011, Ediacaran microfossils from the Ura Formation, Baikal-Patom Uplift, Siberia: taxonomy and biostratigraphic significance: Journal of Paleontology, v. 85, p. 987–1011.Google Scholar
Sharma, M., and Shukla, Y., 2016, The palaeobiological remains of the Owk Shale, Kurnool Basin: a discussion of the age of the basin: Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India, v. 61, p. 175–187.Google Scholar
Slater, B.J., and Willman, S., 2019, Early Cambrian small carbonaceous fossils (SCFs) from an impact crater in western Finland: Lethaia, https://doi.org/10.1111/let.12331.Google Scholar
Slater, B.J., Harvey, T.H.P., and Butterfield, N.J., 2018, Small carbonaceous fossils (SCFs) from the Terreneuvian (lower Cambrian) of Baltica: Palaeontology, v. 61, p. 417–439.Google Scholar
Strother, P.K., Battison, L., Brasier, M.D., and Wellman, C.H., 2011, Earth's earliest non-marine eukaryotes: Nature, v. 473, p. 505.Google Scholar
Tang, Q., Pang, K., Yuan, X., Wan, B., and Xiao, S., 2015, Organic-walled microfossils from the Tonian Gouhou Formation, Huaibei region, North China Craton, and their biostratigraphic implications: Precambrian Research, v. 266, p. 296–318.Google Scholar
Tang, Q., Pang, K., Yuan, X., and Xiao, S., 2017, Electron microscopy reveals evidence for simple multicellularity in the Proterozoic fossil Chuaria: Geology, v. 45, p. 75–78.Google Scholar
Tang, Q., Hu, J., Xie, G., Yuan, X., Wan, B., Zhou, C., Dong, X., Cao, G., Lieberman, B.S., Leys, S.P., and Xiao, S., 2019, A problematic animal fossil from the early Cambrian Hetang Formation, South China: Journal of Paleontology, p. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/jpa.2019.26.Google Scholar
Timofeev, B.V., 1966, Mikropaleofitologicheskoe isslodovanie drevnikh svit (Microphytological investigations of ancient formations): Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Nauka, Moscow, 147 p. [in Russian]Google Scholar
Walcott, C. D., 1899, Precambrian fossiliferous formations: Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, v. 10, p. 199–244.Google Scholar