Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:44:15.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phylogenetic and biogeographic analysis of deiphonine trilobites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Curtis R. Congreve  and
Bruce S. Lieberman
Curtis R. Congreve
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Natural History Museum/Biodiversity Research Center, University of Kansas, 1475 Jayhawk Blvd., 120 Lindley Hall, Lawrence 66045
Bruce S. Lieberman
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Natural History Museum/Biodiversity Research Center, University of Kansas, 1475 Jayhawk Blvd., 120 Lindley Hall, Lawrence 66045
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cladistic parsimony analysis of the subfamily Deiphoninae Raymond, 1913 was conducted to produce a hypothesis of relationship for the group. The genera Deiphon Barrande, 1850 and Onycopyge Woodward, 1880 are found to be monophyletic, while the genus Sphaerocoryphe Angelin, 1854, as it was previously defined, is paraphyletic. A modified Brooks Parsimony Analysis using the phylogenetic hypothesis reveals patterns of biogeography, in particular, vicariance and geodispersal, during the Ordovician-Silurian. The analysis yields three major conclusions about deiphonine biogeography: Eastern Laurentia and Baltica were close enough during the late Ordovician to exchange taxa via sea level rise and fall; chance dispersal occurred between Northwestern Laurentia and Australia; and deiphonine trilobites likely originated in Baltica or Eastern Laurentia.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 84 , Issue 1 , January 2010 , pp. 128 - 136
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

Adrain, J. M. 1998. Systematics of the Acanthoparyphinae (Trilobita), with species from the Silurian of arctic Canada. Journal of Paleontology, 72:698–718.Google Scholar
Angelin, N. P. 1854. Palaeontologia Scandinavica 1: Crustacea formationis transitionis, 2:21–92.Google Scholar
Armstrong, H. A. and Owen, A. W. 2001. Terrane evolution of the paratectonic Caledonides of Northern Britain. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 158:475–486.Google Scholar
Barrande, J. 1850. Versuch einer Klassification der Trilobiten. Sitzungberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften Wien, 5:304–324.Google Scholar
Bradley, J. H. 1930. Fauna of the Kimmswick Limestone of Missouri and Illinois. Contributions from the Walker Museum. 2(6):219–290.Google Scholar
Bremer, K. 1994. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics, 10:295–304.Google Scholar
Brooks, D. R. 1985. Historical ecology: a new approach to studying the evolution of ecological associations. Annals of the Mississippi Botanical Garden, 72:660–680.Google Scholar
Brooks, D. R., Thorson, T. B., and Mayes, M. A. 1981. Freshwater stingrays (Potamotrygonidae) and their helminth parasites: testing hypotheses of evolution and coevolution, p. 147–175. In Funk, V.A. and Brooks, D. R. (eds.). Advances in Cladistics: Proceedings of the First Meeting of the Willi Hennig Society. New York Botanical Garden, Bronx.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E. 1980. Ontogenetic studies of Middle Ordovician trilobites from Esbataottine Formation, Mackenzie Mountains, Canada. Palaeontographica, Abteilung A. 171:1–73.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E. and Perry, D. G. 1984. Silurian trilobites from the Mackenzie Mountains northwestern Canada. Palaeontographica, Abteilung A, 184:1–78.Google Scholar
Fitch, W.M. 1971. Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific taxa topology. Systematic Zoology, 20:406–416.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1894. Fossils of the Clinton Group in Ohio and Indiana. Geological Survey of Ohio, 7(2):516–601.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A. and Cocks, L. R. M. 1992. The early Palaeozoic of the North Atlantic region as a test case for the use of fossils in continental reconstruction. Tectonophysics, 206:147–158.Google Scholar
Goloboff, P., Farris, J., and Nixon, K. 2003. T.N.T.: Tree Analysis Using New Technology. Program and documentation, available from the authors, and at www.zmuc.dk/public/phylogeny.Google Scholar
Harper, D. A. T. 1992. Ordovician provincial signals from Appalachian-Caledonian terranes. Terra Nova, 4:204–209.Google Scholar
Hawle, I. and Corda, A. J. C. 1847. Prodom einer Monographie der böhmischen Trilobiten. Prague, 177 p.Google Scholar
Hembree, D. I. 2006. Amphisbaenian paleobiogeography: evidence of vicariance and geodispersal patterns. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 235:334–348.Google Scholar
Hillis, D. M. 1991. Discriminating Between Phylogenetic Signal and Random Noise in DNA Sequences, p. 278–294. In Miyamoto, M. M. and Cracraft, J. (eds.). Phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences. Oxford University Press, USA.Google Scholar
Holloway, D. J. and Campbell, K. S. W. 1974. The Silurian trilobite Onycopyge Wood ward. Palaeontology, 17:409–421.Google Scholar
Ingham, J. K. 1974. The Upper Ordovician trilobites from the Cautley and Dent districts of Westmorland and Yorkshire Part 2. The Palaeontographical Society, London, p. 59–87.Google Scholar
Kruger, H. H. 1994. Uber die mittelordovizische Trilobitengattung Hemisphaerocoryphe . Archiv fu”r Geschiebekunde (Hamburg). 1:469–484.Google Scholar
Kutorga, S. 1854. Einige Sphaerexochus und Cheirurus aus den siluischen Kalksteinschichten des Gouvernement St. Petersburg. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlichen mineralogischen Gesellschaft zu St. Petersburg Jahr 1853.Google Scholar
Lane, P. D. 1971. British Cheiruridae (Trilobita). Palaeontographical Society, London, 95 p.Google Scholar
Lee, S.-B., Lee, D.-C., and Chol, D. K. 2008. Cambrian-Ordovician trilobite family Missisquoiidae Hupé, 1955: Systematic revision and palaeogeographical considerations based on cladistic analysis. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 260:315–341.Google Scholar
Lieberman, B. S. 2000. Paleobiogeography: Using Fossils to Study Global Change, Plate Tectonics, and Evolution. Plenum/Kluwer Academic, New York, 208 p.Google Scholar
Lieberman, B. S. 2003. Biogeography of the Trilobita during the Cambrian radiation; deducing geological processes from trilobite evolution, p. 59–72. In Lane, P. D., Siveter, D. J., and Fortey, R. A. (eds.) Trilobites and their relatives. Special Papers in Palaeontology 70.Google Scholar
Lieberman, B. S. and Eldredge, N. 1996. Trilobite biogeography in the Middle Devonian: geological processes and analytical methods. Paleobiology, 22:66–79.Google Scholar
Lu, Y. 1975. Ordovician trilobite faunas of central and southwestern China. Palaeontologia Sinica, New Series B, 11:1–484.Google Scholar
Maddison, W. P. and Maddison, D. R. 2007. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 2.0. http://mesquiteproject.org.Google Scholar
Männil, R. M. 1958. Trilobity semeystvo Cheiruridae i Encrinuridae iz Estonii. Eesti NSV teaduste akadeemia geoloogia Instituuti Uurimused, 3:165–212.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. 1959. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology; Arthropoda O(1). The University of Kansas Press and the Geological Society of America, Lawrence, KS.Google Scholar
Öpik, A. A. 1937. Trilobiten aus Estland. Acta et Commentationes Universitatis Tartuensis (Dorpatensis) A, 32(3):1–163.Google Scholar
Owen, A. W., Tripp, R. P., and Morris, S. F. 1986. The trilobite fauna of the Raheen Formation (upper Caradoc), County Waterford, Ireland. Bulletin of the British Museum Natural History (Geology Series), 40:91–122.Google Scholar
Portlock, J. E. 1843. Report on the geology of the County of Londonderry and parts of Tyrone and Fermanagh. Andrew Milliken, Dublin and London.Google Scholar
Rambout, A. 2008. FigTree v.1.1.2. http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/.Google Scholar
Ramsköld, L. 1983. Silurian cheirurid trilobites from Gotland. Palaeontology, 26:175–210.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1905. Trilobites of the Chazy limestone. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 3(2):271–306 Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E., 1913. Subclass Trilobita, p. 692–729. In Eastman, C. R. (ed.), Textbook of Palaeontology 2nd Ed. The MacMillan Company, New York.Google Scholar
Reed, F. R. C. 1896. The fauna of the Keisley Limestone, Part. I. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 55:718–772.Google Scholar
Rode, A. L. and Lieberman, B. S. 2005. S. Paleobiogeographic patterns in the Middle and Late Devonian emphasizing Laurentia. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 222:272–284.Google Scholar
Scotese, C. R. 2007. PaleoGIS. http://www.scotese.com/software.htm.Google Scholar
Scotese, C. R. and McKerrow, W. S. 1991. Ordovician plate tectonic reconstructions, p. 271–282. In Barnes, C. R. and Williams, S. H. (eds.). Geological Survey of Canada Paper 90–9.Google Scholar
Shaw, F. C. 1968. Early Middle Ordovician Chazy trilobites of New York. New York State Museum and Science Service Memoir 17, University of the State of New York, Albany, 163 p.Google Scholar
Slocom, A. W. 1913. New trilobites from the Maquoketa beds of Fayette County, Iowa. Publications of the Field Museum (Geology), p. 43–83.Google Scholar
Snajdr, M. 1980. New Silurian trilobites from the Barrandian area (Czechoslovakia). Vestnik Ustredniho Ustavu Geologickeho Prague, 55:105–110.Google Scholar
Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. 1995. The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research (third ed.), W.H. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
Speyer, S. E. and Chatterton, B. D. E. 1989. Trilobite larvae and larval ecology. Historical Biology, 3:27–60.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. 1998. PAUP v.4.0. http://PAUP.csit.fsu.edu/.Google Scholar
Tait, J., Bachtadse, V., and Soffel, H. C. 1995. Upper Ordovician palaeogeography of the Bohemian Massif: implications for Armorica. Geophysical Journal International, 122:211–218.Google Scholar
Torsvik, T. H., Tait, J., Moralev, V. M., McKerrow, W. S., Sturt, B. A., and Roberts, B. A. 1995. Ordovician palaeogeography of Siberia and adjacent continents. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 152:279–287.Google Scholar
Torskvik, T. H., Smethurst, M. A., Meert, J. G., van der Voo, R., McKerrow, W. S., Brasier, M. D., Sturt, B. A., and Walderhaug, H. J. 1996. Continental break-up and collision in the Neoproterozoic and Palaeozoic—A tale of Baltica and Laurentia. Earth-Science Reviews, 40:229–258.Google Scholar
Trench, A. and Torsvik, T. H. 1992. The closure of the Iapetus Ocean and Tornquist Sea: new palaeomagnetic constraints. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 149:867–870.Google Scholar
Tripp, R. P. 1954. Caradocian trilobites from mudstones at Craighead Quarry, near Girvan, Ayrshire. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 62:655–689.Google Scholar
Tripp, R. P. 1962. Trilobites from the “Confinis” Flags (Ordovician) of the Girvan district, Ayrshire. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 65:1–40.Google Scholar
Tripp, R. P., Rudkin, D. M., and Evitt, W. R. 1997. Silicified trilobites of the genus Sphaerocoryphe from the Middle Ordovician of Virginia. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 34:770–788.Google Scholar
Warburg, E. 1925. The trilobites of the Leptaena Limestone in Dalarne. Bulletin of the Geological Institution of the University of Upsala, 17(4):1–446, pls. 1–11.Google Scholar
Walter, O. T. 1924. Trilobites of Iowa and some related Paleozoic forms. Iowa Geological Survey, 31:1–256.Google Scholar
Webby, B. D. 1974. Upper Ordovician trilobites from Central New South Wales. Palaeontology, 17:203–252 Google Scholar
Weller, S. 1907. The palaeontology of the Niagaran Limestone in the Chicago area. The Trilobita. Bulletin of the Chicago Academy of Science, 4(2):163–281.Google Scholar
Whittard, W. F. 1934. A revision of the trilobite genera Deiphon and Onycopyge . Journal of Natural History, 14:505–533.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1968. The Ordovician trilobites of the Bala area, Merioneth. Part 4. Palaeontographical Society Monography, p. 33–62.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B., Chatterton, B. D. E., Speyer, S. E., Fortey, R. A., Owens, R. M., Chang, W. T., Dean, W. T., Jell, P. A., Laurie, J. R., Palmer, A. R., Repina, L. N., Rushton, A. W. A., Shergold, J. H., Clarkson, E. N. K., Wilmot, N. V., and Kelly, S. R. A. 1997. Part O; Arthropoda 1; Trilobita, revised; Volume 1, Introduction, order Agnostida, order Redlichiida. In Kaesler, R. L. (ed.). Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. The University of Kansas Press and the Geological Society of America, Lawrence, KS.Google Scholar
Wiley, E. O. 1979. An annotated Linnean hierarchy, with comments on natural taxa and competing systems. Systematic Zoology, 28:308–337.Google Scholar
Wiley, E. O. 1988. Parsimony analysis and vicariance biogeography. Systematic Zoology, 37:271–290.Google Scholar
Woodward, H. 1880. A new genus of trilobites Onycopyge liversidgei from New South Wales. Geological Magazine, new series, 2nd decade, 7:97–99.Google Scholar
Zhou, Z., Dean, W. T., Yuan, W., and Zhou, T. 1998. Ordovician trilobites from the Dawangou Formation, Kalpin, Xinjiang, north-west China. Palaeontology, 41(4):693–735.Google Scholar
Zhou, Z. Y. and Zhen, Y. Y. 2008. Trilobite-constrained Ordovician biogeography of China with reference to faunal connections to Australia. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales, 129:183–195.Google Scholar