Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T04:07:38.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth stages of the middle and late Pennsylvanian trilobite Ditomopyge scitula from the North American midcontinent

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Roger K. Pabian ,
James Borovich  and
Royal H. Mapes
Roger K. Pabian
Affiliation:
Conservation and Survey Division, IANR, University of Nebraska, Lincoln 68588-0517
James Borovich
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Nebraska, Lincoln 68588-0340
Royal H. Mapes
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Ohio University, Athens 45701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Larval forms of the middle and late Pennsylvanian trilobite Ditomopyge scitula (Meek and Worthen, 1865) have been collected from seven localities in the Desmoinesian of Oklahoma, Missourian of Oklahoma and Texas, and Virgilian of Nebraska and Texas. These larval trilobites have been interpreted as degree 1 through degree 8 meraspides. Although these larval forms are extremely rare, an essentially complete growth sequence was reconstructed and an ontogeny synthesized. During growth, D. scitula absorbed the brim and posterior spines into the pygidium and developed first the lateral then the median preoccipital glabellar lobes; the anterior cephalic margin is more prominent in juvenile stages, becoming narrower in late mersapide molts and finally overlapped by the glabella in early holaspide stages.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 67 , Issue 2 , March 1993 , pp. 230 - 240
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

Beecher, C. E. 1895. The larval stages of trilobites. American Geologist, 16:166–197.Google Scholar
Borovich, J., Pabian, R. K., and Mapes, R. H. 1987. Larval forms of the middle and late Pennsylvanian trilobite Ditomopyge scitula (Meek and Worthen) from the North American midcontinent. Nebraska Academy of Sciences, Proceedings, 97th Annual Meeting:44.Google Scholar
Cisne, J. L. 1968. Two new Mississippian trilobites of the genus Paladin. Journal of Paleontology, 41:1267–1273.Google Scholar
Hahn, G., and Hahn, R. 1967. Zur Phylogenie der Proetidae (Trilobita) des Karbons und Perms. Zoologische Beitrage, Neue Folge, Band 13, Zweites-Drittes Heft:303–349.Google Scholar
Hahn, G., and Hahn, R. 1970. Trilobitae carbonici et permici II. (Proetidae: Griffithidinae) Fossilium Catalogus I: Animalia, 119:162–331.Google Scholar
Hessler, R. R. 1962. Secondary segmentation in the thorax of trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 36:1305–1312.Google Scholar
Hunt, A. S. 1967. Growth variation and instar development of an agnostid trilobite. Journal of Paleontology, 41:203–208.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1865. Contributions to the paleontology of Illinois and other western states. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Proceedings, 1865:245–273.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D. 1931. New schizophoriidae and a trilobite from the Kansas Pennsylvanian. Journal of Paleontology, 5:260–269.Google Scholar
Pabian, R. K. 1970a. Late Paleozoic trilobites from southeastern Nebraska. Unpubl. , University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 170 p.Google Scholar
Pabian, R. K. 1970b. A theoretical ontogeny of the Pennsylvanian trilobite Ditomopyge scitula (Meek and Worthen). Nebraska Academy of Sciences, Proceedings, 80:36.Google Scholar
Pabian, R. K., and Fagerstrom, J. A. 1968. A biometrical study of the growth and development of the Carboniferous trilobite Ameura sangamonensis from Nebraska. University Nebraska State Museum Bulletin, 8:188–207.Google Scholar
Pabian, R. K., and Fagerstrom, J. A. 1972. Late Paleozoic trilobites from southeastern Nebraska. Journal of Paleontology, 41:789–816.Google Scholar
Robison, R. R. 1967. Ontogeny of Bathyuriscus fimbriatus and its bearing on affinities of corynexochid trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 41:213–221.Google Scholar
Shaw, A. B. 1957. Quantitative trilobite studies II. Measurement of the dorsal shell of non-agnostiedan trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 31:193–207.Google Scholar
Tucker, J. K., and Mapes, R. H. 1978. Coiled nautiloid cephalopods from the Wolf Mountain Shale (Pennsylvanian), north-central Texas. Journal of Paleontology, 52:596–604.Google Scholar
Weller, J. M. 1935. Adolescent development of Ditomopyge . Journal of Paleontology, 9:503–513.Google Scholar
Weller, J. M. 1936. Carboniferous trilobite genera. Journal of Paleontology, 10:704–714.Google Scholar
Weller, J. M. 1937. Evolutionary tendencies among American Carboniferous trilobite genera. Journal of Paleontology, 11:337–346.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1954. Two silicified trilobites from west Texas. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 122(10), 15 p.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1957. The ontogeny of trilobites. Biological Reviews, 32:421–469.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1959. Ontogeny of trilobita, p. O127–O144. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O, Arthropoda 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar