Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T06:10:00.585Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Family Naticidae (Gastropoda) from the Upper Jurassic of Kutch, India and a critical reappraisal of taxonomy and time of origination of the family

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2019

Shiladri S. Das
Affiliation:
Geological Studies Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, 203, B.T. Road, Kolkata -700108, India
Subhronil Mondal
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Calcutta, 35, Ballygunge Circular Road, Kolkata -700019, India
Sandip Saha
Affiliation:
Geological Studies Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, 203, B.T. Road, Kolkata -700108, India
Subhendu Bardhan
Affiliation:
Geological Studies Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, 203, B.T. Road, Kolkata -700108, India
Ranita Saha
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Geology, IIT(ISM) Dhanbad, Jharkhand 826004, India

Abstract

Naticid taxonomy is in a state of flux owing to non-descript shell morphology and frequent convergence. Inadequate preservation of naticid body fossils has further complicated the matter in determining the true affinity and the exact time of origin of the clade. As a result, a plethora of classificatory schemes of naticid phylogeny and times of origin has been proposed. In many previous studies, true naticid affinities of fossils have been sought based on single or a few morphological characters, which are susceptible to poor preservation. In the present paper, we have attempted a holistic reappraisal of naticid taxonomy based on an extensive database of shell morphological characters and identified many distinct family- and subfamily-specific characters that survived fossilization. This approach has enabled us to identify three new naticid species from the Late Jurassic horizons of Kutch, India, thus extending back the time of origin of the family Naticidae by 30 Ma.

Analysis of character matrix data reveals that the present species—Gyrodes mahalanobisi new species, Euspira jhuraensis new species, and Euspira lakhaparensis new species—belong to two subfamilies, Gyrodinae and Polinicinae. The occurrence of typical naticid drill holes on various coeval gastropod and bivalve taxa along with these body fossils provides strong supporting evidence for the naticid affinity of these forms.

UUID http://zoobank.org/94188d64-075b-4bd0-8303-1ce9a0d86eb0

Type
Articles
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

Allmon, W.D., 2007, Cretaceous marine nutrients, greenhouse carbonates, and the abundance of turritelline gastropods: Journal of Geology, v. 115, p. 509524.Google Scholar
Aronowsky, A., 2003, Evolutionary biology of naticid gastropods [PhD thesis]: University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, 312 p.Google Scholar
Bandel, Κ., 1992, Über Caenogastropoda der Cassianer Schichten (Obertrias) der Dolomiten (Italien) und ihre taxonomische Bewertung: Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg. v. 73, p. 3797.Google Scholar
Bandel, K., 1996, Some heterostrophic gastropods from Triassic St. Cassian Formation with a discussion on the classification of the Allogastropoda: Paläontologische Zeitschrift, v. 70, p. 325365.Google Scholar
Bandel, K., 1999, On the origin of the carnivorous gastropod group Naticoidea (Mollusca) in the Cretaceous with description of some convergent but unrelated groups: Greifswalder Geowissenschaftliche Beiträge, v. 6, p. 143175.Google Scholar
Bandel, K., 2000a, Speciation among the Melanopsidae (Caenogastropoda). Special emphasis to the Melanopsidae of the Pannonian Lake at Pontian time (Late Miocene) and the Pleistocene and Recent of Jordan: Mitteilungenausdem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg, v. 84, p. 131208.Google Scholar
Bandel, K., 2000b, Some gastropods from the Trichinopoly Group, Tamil Nadu, India and their relation to those from the American Gulf Coast: Memoirs of the Geological Society of India, v. 46, p. 65112.Google Scholar
Bandel, K., and Dockery, D.T., III, 2012, Protoconch characters of Late Cretaceous Latrogastropoda (Neogastropoda and Neomesogastropoda) as an aid in the reconstruction of the phylogeny of the Neogastropoda: Freiberger Forschungshefte C, v. 542, p. 93128.Google Scholar
Bandel, K., and Riedel, F., 1994, Classification of fossil and Recent Calyptraeoidea (Caenogastropoda) with a discussion on neomesogastropod phylogeny: Berliner Geowissen schaftliche Abhandlungen (E), v. 13, p. 329367.Google Scholar
Bardhan, S., Shome, S., and Roy, P., 2007, Palaeobiogeography of Kutch ammonites during the Latest Jurassic (Tithonian), in Landman, N. H., Davis, R.A., and Mapes, R.H., eds., Cephalopods Present and Past: New Insight and Fresh Perspectives: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Springer Verlag, p. 375395.Google Scholar
Bardhan, S., Chattopadhyay, D., Mondal, S., Das, S.S., Mallick, S., Roy, A., and Chanda, P., 2012a, Record of intense predatory drilling from Upper Jurassic bivalves of Kutch, India: Implications for the history of biotic interaction: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 317, p. 153161.Google Scholar
Bardhan, S., Das, S.S., Mallick, S., Mondal, S., and Dutta, R., 2012b. The record of oldest naticid gastropod from the Oxfordian (Upper Jurassic) of Kutch, India: palaeoecological implications: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program, v. 44, p. 88.Google Scholar
Biswas, S.K., 1977, Mesozoic rock-stratigraphy of Kutch: The Quarterly Journal of the Geological Mining and Metallurgical Society of India, v. 49, p. 152.Google Scholar
Blake, J.D., and Huddleston, W.H., 1877, The Corallian rocks of England: The Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 13, p. 260405.Google Scholar
Bose, P.K., Ghosh, G., Shome, S., and Bardhan, S., 1988, Evidence of superimposition of storm waves on tidal currents in rocks from the Tithonian-Neocomian Umia Member, Kutch, India: Sedimentary Geology, v. 54, p. 321329.Google Scholar
Bouchet, P., Frýda, J., Hausdorf, B., Ponder, W.F., Valdés, Á., and Warén, A., 2005, Working classification of the Gastropoda, in Bouchet, P., and Rocroi, J.-P., eds., Classification and Nomenclator of Gastropod Families: Malacologia, v. 47, p. 1397.Google Scholar
Bromley, R.G., 1981, Concepts in ichnotaxonomy illustrated by small round holes in shells: Acta Geológica Hispánica, v. 16, p. 5564.Google Scholar
Carriker, M.R., 1981, Shell penetration and feeding by naticacean and muricacean predatory gastropods: a synthesis: Malacologia, v. 20, p. 403422.Google Scholar
Carriker, M.R., and Gruber, G.L., 1999, Uniqueness of the gastropod accessory boring organ (ABO): comparative biology, an update: Journal of Shellfish Research, v. 18, p. 579595.Google Scholar
Carriker, M.R., and Yochelson, E.L., 1968, Recent gastropod boreholes and Ordovician cylindrical borings: US Geological Survey Professional Paper 593-B, 26 p. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp593BGoogle Scholar
Conrad, T.A., 1858, Observations on a group of Cretaceous fossil shells, found in Tippah County, Miss., with descriptions of fifty-six new species: Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, ser. 2, v. 3, p. 323336.Google Scholar
Conrad, T.A., 1860, Descriptions of new species of Cretaceous and Eocene fossils of Mississippi and Alabama: Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, v. 2, p. 275297.Google Scholar
Cox, L.R., 1930, The fossil fauna of the Samana Range and some neighboring areas: Part VIII. The Mollusca of the Hangu shales: Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, Palaeontologia Indica, new ser., v. 15, p. 129222.Google Scholar
Cox, L.R., 1960, Thoughts on the classification of the Gastropoda: Journal of Molluscan Studies, v. 33, p. 239261.Google Scholar
Cuvier, G., 1797, Tableau elementaire de l'histoire naturelle des animaux: Paris, Baudouin, 710 p.Google Scholar
Das, S.S., Saha, S., Bardhan, S., Mallick, S., and Allmon, W.D., 2018, Record of the oldest turritelline gastropods: from the Oxfordian (Upper Jurassic) of Kutch, India: Journal of Paleontology, v. 92, p. 373387.Google Scholar
Dell, R.K., 1990, Antarctic Mollusca with special reference to the fauna of the Ross Sea: Bulletin of the Royal Society of New Zealand, v. 27, p. 1311.Google Scholar
De Koninck, L.L., 1881, Neue Reaction auf Kali: Zeitschrift für analytische Chemie, v. 20, p. 390391.Google Scholar
Deshayes, G.P., 1832, Zoologie, Mollusques, in Bélanger, C., Voyage aux Indes-Orientales pendant les années 1825–1829: Paris, A. Bernard, p. 401440.Google Scholar
d'Orbigny, A., 1849, Coursé lémentaire de paleontologie et de géologie stratigraphiques: Paris, Victor Masson, 847 p.Google Scholar
Férussac, A.E. de, 1822. Tableaux systematicques des Animaux Mollusques classes en familles naturelles, dans lesquels on aétabli la concordance de tous les systèmes; suivis d'un prodrome général pour tous les mollusques terrestres ou fluviatiles, vivants ou fossiles: Paris, Bertrand, 110 p.Google Scholar
Finlay, H.J., and Marwick, J., 1937, The Wangaloan and Associated Molluscan Faunas of Kaitangata-Green Island Subdivision: New Zealand Geological Survey Branch, Palaeontological Bulletin No. 15, Wellington, 53 p.Google Scholar
Foote, M., and Miller, A.I., 2007, Principles of Paleontology: New York, W.H. Freeman, 354 p.Google Scholar
Forbes, E., 1838, A Catalogue of the Mollusca Inhabiting the Isle of Man and the Neighbouring Sea: Edinburgh, John Carfrae and Son, 63 p.Google Scholar
Fürsich, F.T., and Jablonski, D., 1984, Late Triassic naticid drill holes: carnivorous gastropods gain a major adaptation but fail to radiate: Science, v. 224, p. 7880.Google Scholar
Fürsich, F.T., and Pandey, D.K., 2003, Sequence stratigraphic significance of sedimentary cycles and shell concentrations in the Upper Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous of Kutch, Western India: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 193, p. 285309.Google Scholar
Fürsich, F.T., Oschmann, W., Singh, I.B., and Jaitly, A.K., 1992, Hardgrounds, reworked concretion levels and condensed horizons in the Jurassic of Western India: their significance for basin analysis: Journal of the Geological Society, v. 149, p. 313331.Google Scholar
Gardner, J.A., 1916, Systematic paleontology, Mollusca, in Clark, W.B., Goldman, M.I., Berry, E.W., Gardner, J.A., Pilsbry, H.A., Bassler, R.S., and Stephenson, L.W., Upper Cretaceous: Maryland Geological Survey, v. 6, p. 371733.Google Scholar
Golikov, A.N., and Starobogatov, Y.I., 1975. Systematics of prosobranch gastropods: Malacologia, v. 15, p. 185232.Google Scholar
Guilding, L., 1834, V. Observations on Naticina and Dentalium, two genera of Molluscous Animals: Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, v. 17, p. 2935.Google Scholar
Harper, E.M., and Wharton, D.S., 2000, Boring predation and Mesozoic articulate brachiopods: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 158, p. 1524.Google Scholar
Harper, E.M., Forsythe, G.T., and Palmer, T., 1998, Taphonomy and the Mesozoic marine revolution; preservation state masks the importance of boring predators: Palaios, v. 13, p. 352360.Google Scholar
Hausmann, I.M., and Nützel, A., 2015, Diversity and palaeoecology of a highly diverse Late Triassic marine biota from the Cassian Formation of north Italy: Lethaia, v. 48, p. 235255.Google Scholar
Huelsken, T., Marek, C., Schreiber, S., Schmidt, I., and Hollmann, M., 2008, The Naticidae (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of Giglio Island (Tuscany, Italy): shell characters, live animals, and a molecular analysis of egg masses: Zootaxa, v. 1770, p. 140.Google Scholar
Jana, S. K., Bardhan, S., and Halder, K., 2005, Eucycloceratin ammonites from the Callovian Chari Formation, Kutch, India: Palaeontology, v. 48, p. 883924.Google Scholar
Kabat, A.R., 1991, The classification of the Naticidae (Mollusca: Gastropoda): review and analysis of the supra specific taxa: Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, v. 152, p. 417449.Google Scholar
Kabat, A.R., 1996, Biogeography of the genera of Naticidae (Gastropoda) in the Indo-Pacific: American Malacological Bulletin, v. 12, p. 2935.Google Scholar
Kiel, S., and Bandel, K., 2003, New taxonomic data for the gastropod fauna of the Umzamba Formation (Santonian–Campanian, South Africa) based on newly collected material: Cretaceous Research, v. 24, p. 449475.Google Scholar
Kilburn, R.N., 1976, A revision of the Naticidae of Southern Africa and Moçambique (Mollusca): Annals of the Natal Museum, v. 22, p. 829884.Google Scholar
Klompmaker, A.A., Nützel, A., and Kaim, A., 2016, Drill hole convergence and a quantitative analysis of drill holes in mollusks and brachiopods from the Triassic of Italy and Poland: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 457, p. 342359.Google Scholar
Koken, E., 1892, Ueber die Gastropoden der rothen Schlernschichten nebst Bemerkungen über Verbreitung und Herkunft einiger triassischer Gattungen: Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie, v. 2, p. 2536.Google Scholar
Kollmann, H.A., 1982, Gastropoden-Faunen aus der höheren Unterkreide nordwestdeutschlands: Geologische Jahrbücher, (A), v. 65, p. 517551.Google Scholar
Kowalewski, M., Dulai, A., and Fürsich, F.T., 1998, A fossil record full of holes: the Phanerozoic history of drilling predation: Geology, v. 26, p. 10911094.Google Scholar
Kowalke, T., and Bandel, K., 1996, Systematik und Paläoökologie der Küstenschnecken der nordalpinen Brandenberg-Gosau (Oberconiac/Untersanton) miteinem Vergleichzur Gastropoden fauna des Maastrichts des Trempbeckens (Südpyrenäen, Spanien): Mitteilungen der Bayerischen Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und historische Geologie, Munich, v. 36, p. 1571.Google Scholar
Lamarck, J.B.M., 1799, Prodrome d'une nouvelle classification des coquilles, comprenant une rédaction appropriée des caractères géneriques, et l'établissement d'un grand nombre de genres nouveaux: Mémoires de la Société d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris, v. 1., p. 6391.Google Scholar
Laube, G.C., 1868, Die Fauna der Schichten von St. Cassian. III. Abtheilung. Gastropoden. I. Hälfte. Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften: Mathematisch Naturwissenschaftliche Classe, v. 28, p. 2994.Google Scholar
Majima, R., 1989, Cenozoic fossil Naticidae (Mollusca: Gastropoda) in Japan: Bulletins of American Paleontology, v. 96, p. 1159.Google Scholar
Marincovich, L. Jr., 1977, Cenozoic Naticidae (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of the northeastern Pacific: Bulletins of American Paleontology, v. 70, p. 169494.Google Scholar
McLean, J.H., 1996, The Prosobranchia, in Scott, P.H.; Blake, J.A., and Lissner, A., eds., Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel, 9 (The Mollusca pt. 2): Los Angeles, Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, 160 p.Google Scholar
M'Coy, F., 1844, A Synopsis of the Characters of the Carboniferous Limestone Fossils of Ireland: Dublin, M. H. Gill, 207 p.Google Scholar
Mitra, K.C., and Ghosh, D.N., 1979, Jurassic turritellas from Kutch, Gujarat: Quarterly Journal of the Geological Mining and Metallurgical Society of India, v. 51, p. 119122.Google Scholar
Mondal, S., Goswami, P., and Bardhan, S., 2017, Naticid confamilial drilling predation through time: Palaios, v. 32, p. 278287.Google Scholar
Münster, G., 1841, Beschreibung und Abbildung der in den Kalkmergelschichten von St. Cassian gefundenen Versteinerungen, in H. L. Wissman, H.L., and G. Münster, G., unter Mitwirkung des Dr. Braun, Beiträge sur Geognosie und Petrefaktenkunde des Südöstlichen Tirol's vorzüglich der Schichten von St. Cassian: Beiträge zur Geognosie und Petrefaktenkunde, v. 4, p. 1154.Google Scholar
Nützel, A., 2005, A new Early Triassic gastropod genus and the recovery of gastropods from the Permian-Triassic extinction: Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, v. 50, p. 1924.Google Scholar
Pastorino, G., 2005, Recent Naticidae (Mollusca: Gastropoda) from the Patagonian coast: The Veliger, v. 47, p. 225258.Google Scholar
Perrilliat, M.D.C., Vega, F.J., and Corona, R., 2000, Early Maastrichtian mollusca from the Mexcala Formation of the State of Guerrero, southern Mexico: Journal of Paleontology, v. 74, p. 724.Google Scholar
Plotnick, R.E., and Wagner, P.J., 2006, Round up the usual suspects: common genera in the fossil record and the nature of wastebasket taxa: Paleobiology, v. 32, p. 126146.Google Scholar
Popenoe, W.P., Saul, L.R., and Susuki, T., 1987, Gyrodiform gastropods from the Pacific coast Cretaceous and Paleocene: Journal of Paleontology, v. 61, p. 70100.Google Scholar
Powell, A.W.B., 1933, Notes on the taxonomy of the Recent Cymatiidae and Naticidae of New Zealand: Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, v. 63, p. 154170.Google Scholar
Raup, D.M., and Stanley, S.M., 1978, Principles of Paleontology, 2nd ed: New York, W.H. Freeman, 481 p.Google Scholar
Roy, A., Bardhan, S., Das, S., Mondal, S., and Mallick, S., 2012, Systematic revision and palaeobiogeography of Perisphinctes Waagen (Ammonoidea) from the Oxfordian of Kutch, India: stratigraphic and evolutionary implications: Palaeoworld, v. 2, p. 167192.Google Scholar
Scopoli, G. A., 1777, Introductio ad historiam naturalem sistens genera lapidum, plantarum et animalium: hactenus detecta, caracteribus essentialibus donata, in tribus divisa, subinde ad leges naturae: Prague, Apud Wolfgangum Gerle, 506 p.Google Scholar
Shome, S., and Bardhan, S., 2009, A new Late Tithonian ammonite assemblage from Kutch, western India: Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India, v. 54, p. 118.Google Scholar
Singh, I.B., 1989, Dhosa Oolite—a transgressive condensation horizon of Oxfordian age in Kachchh, Western India: Journal of the Geological Society of India, v. 34, p. 152160.Google Scholar
Sowerby, J., 1812, The Mineral Conchology of Great Britain; or coloured figures and descriptions of those remains of testaceous animals or shells, which have been preserved at various times and depths in the earth: London, Benjamin Meredith, Silver Street, Wood Street, Cheapside, v. 1, 234 p.Google Scholar
Sowerby, J.D., 1837, Mineral-Conchologie Grossbrittaniens, von James Sowerby; deutsche Bearbeitung, herausgegeben von Hercules Nicolet, durchgesehen von Dr. Agassiz: Neuchâtel, H. Nicolet, 52 p.Google Scholar
Swainson, W., 1840, A Treatise on Malacology: Or, Shells and Shell Fish: London, Longman, Orme, Brown, Green and Longmans, 419 pGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J.D., and Taylor, C.N., 1977, Latitudinal distribution of predatory gastropods on the eastern Atlantic shelf: Journal of Biogeography, v. 4, p. 7381.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.D., Cleevely, R.J., and Morris, N.J., 1983, Predatory gastropods and their activities in the Black down Greensand (Albian) of England: Palaeontology, v. 26, p. 521533.Google Scholar
Thiele, J., 1925, Prosobranchia, in Kükenthal, W., and Krumbach, T., eds., Handbuch der Zoologie 5, Berlin, Walter de Gruyter & Co., p. 4094.Google Scholar
Tracey, S., Todd, J.A., and Erwin, D.H., 1993, Mollusca: Gastropoda, in Benton, M.J., ed., The Fossil Record 2: London, Chapman and Hall, p. 137167.Google Scholar
Waring, C.A., 1917, Stratigraphic and faunal relations of the Martinez to the Chico and Tejon of Southern California: California Academy of Sciences, Proceedings, v. 4, p. 41124.Google Scholar
Wenz, W., 1938–1944, Gastropoda, 1, in Schindewolf, O.H., ed., Handbuch der Paläozoologie, 6: Berlin, Verlag Gebrüder Bornträger, p. 11639.Google Scholar
Woodring, W.P., 1928, Miocene mollusks from Bowden, Jamaica: pelecypods and scaphopods: Publications of the Carnegie Institution, Washington, D.C., v. 366, p. 1222.Google Scholar
Zardini, E.M., 1985, Revisión del género Noticastrum (Compositae-Astereae): Revista del Museo de La Plata, v. 13, p. 313424.Google Scholar