Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T02:40:17.893Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diversity and evolutionary rates of Cambro-Ordovician nautiloids

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Rex E. Crick
Rex E. Crick*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Texas, Arlington, Texas 76019
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The history of diversity, origination and extinction of Cambro-Ordovician nautiloid cephalopods is explored to determine if differences in evolutionary rates between nautiloid orders are sufficient to document significantly high or low rates of evolutionary turnover (taxotely of Raup and Marshall 1980). The stratigraphic ranges of 425 nautiloid genera are analyzed for this purpose.

Evolutionary rates for five of the seven time intervals analyzed fall within frequency distributions of rates which are thought to be characteristic for a given time interval (horotelic distribution of Simpson 1944). Sufficient heterogeneity is present among extinction rates of Arenigian orders and origination rates of Caradocian orders to reject the null hypotheses of horotely in favor of taxotely. The orders Ellesmerocerida and Tarphycerida, each with a significantly high rate of extinction (P ≥ 0.99), and the Actinocerida, with a significantly low rate of extinction (P ≥ 0.99), were responsible for taxotely during the Arenigian. The Oncocerida and Discosorida, each with a significantly high rate of origination (P ≥ 0.99), were responsible for taxotely during the Caradocian. In each case, taxotely is attributable to the influence of North American endemics. This effect is believed to be more the result of real biological aspects of nautiloid evolution than an artifact of the fossil record.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , Spring 1981 , pp. 216 - 229
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

Literature Cited

Balashov, Z. G. 1968. Ordovician Endoceratoidea of the U.S.S.R. Leningradskogo Universiteta, Leningrad, 170 pp. [in Russian].Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S. 1972. Late Ordovician and Silurian cephalopod molluscs of Kazakhstan and Middle Asia. Akademiya Nauk U.S.S.R., Moskva, 109 pp. [in Russian].Google Scholar
Cecioni, Giovanni. 1965. Contribución al conocimiento de los Nautilodeos eo-paleozoicos Argentinos. Parte II: Robsonoceratidae, Ellesmeroceratidae, Proterocameroceratidae, Baltoceratidae. Boletin del Museo Nacional de Historia Natural. 29:1–24.Google Scholar
Jun-Yuan, Chen, Xi-ping, Zou, Ting-en, Chen, and Dunluan, Qi. 1979a. Late Cambrian cephalopods of north China—Plectronocerida, Protactinocerida (ord. nov.) and Yanhecerida (ord. nov.). Acta Palaeontol. Sinica. 18:1–24. [Chinese with English summary].Google Scholar
Jun-Yuan, Chen, Xi-ping, Zou, Ting-en, Chen, and Dunluan, Qi. 1979b. Late Cambrian Ellesmerocerida (Cephalopoda) of North China. Acta Palaeontol. Sinica. 18:103–124. [Chinese with English summary].Google Scholar
Cowrie, J. W., Rushton, A. W. A., and Stubblefield, C. J. 1972. A correlation of the Cambrian rocks of the British Isles. Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Rep. 2:1–42.Google Scholar
Crick, R. E. 1980. Integration of paleobiogeography and paleogeography: evidence from Arenigian nautiloid biogeography. J. Paleontol. 54:1218–1236.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1964a. The nautiloid order Ellesmeroceratida (Cephalopoda). N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 12:1–234.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1964b. Nautiloid shell morphology. N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 13:1–79.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1968a. The first great expansion of the actinoceroids. N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 19:1–16.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1968b. Some additional Whiterock cephalopods. N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 19:17–55.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1968c. Botryceras, a remarkable nautiloid from the Second Value of New Mexico. N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 21:1–5.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1968d. Endoceroids from the Canadian of Alaska. N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 21:11–17.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1968e. Silurian cephalopods of James Bay Lowland, with a revision of the Nartheoceratidae. Canada Geol. Surv. Bull. 164, 88 pp.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1971. Cephalopods of the Whiterock stage. pp. 101–111. In: Dutro, J. T. Jr., ed. Paleozoic Perspectives, a Paleontological Tribute to G. Arthur Cooper. Smithsonian Contrib. Paleobiol. 3.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1976a. Ordovician cephalopod faunas and their role in correlation. pp. 523–552. In: Bassett, M. G., ed. The Ordovician System: Proceedings of a Palaeontological Association Symposium, Birmingham, September, 1974. Univ. Wales Press and Natl. Mus. Wales; Cardiff.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1976b. Some Whiterock and Chazy endoceroids. N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 28:13–39.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. and Teichert, Curt. 1957. The cephalopod order Discosorida. Univ. Kans. Paleontol. Contrib., Mollusca, Art. 6, 144 pp.Google Scholar
Furnish, W. M. and Glenister, B. F. 1964. Paleoecology. Pp. K114–K127. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology K, Mollusca 3. Geol. Soc. Am. and Univ. Kans. Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Hook, S. C. and Flower, R. H. 1976. Tajaroceras and the origin of the Troedssonellidae. J. Paleontol. 50:293–300.Google Scholar
Hook, S. C. and Flower, R. H. 1977. Late Canadian (Zones J,K) cephalopod faunas from southwestern United States. N. Mex. Inst. Min. and Tech., State Bur. Mines and Mineral Res. Mem. 32.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, Teiichi. 1969. The Cambro-Ordovician formations and faunas of South Korea. Pt. X. Stratigraphy of the Chosen group in Korea and Manchuria, and its relationship to Cambro-Ordovician formations of other areas. Sec. D. The Ordovician of eastern Asia and other parts of the Continent. Tokyo Imp. Univ., Fac. Sci. J., Sec. 2 (part 2), 17:163–316.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, Teiichi. 1977. An occurrence of Ordosoceras in Jehol, northeast China, and a note on the Polydesmiidae. Trans. Proc. Palaeontol. Soc. Japan, N. S. 107:125–134.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, Teiichi and Burton, C. K. 1971. Discovery of ellesmeroceroid cephalopods in West-Irian, New Guinea. Proc. Jap. Acad. 47:625–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, S. J. 1963. Ordovician paleontology of the Northern Hudson Bay Lowland. Geol. Soc. Am. Mem. 90, 152 pp.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. and Marshall, L. G. 1980. Variation between groups in evolutionary rates: a statistical test of significance. Paleobiology. 6:9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scotese, C. R., Bambach, R. K., Barton, C., Van der Voo, R., and Ziegler, A. M. 1979. Paleozoic base maps. J. Geol. 87:217–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1944. Tempo and Mode in Evolution. 237 pp. Columbia Univ. Press; New York.Google Scholar
Stumbur, K. A. 1962. Distribution of nautiloids in the Ordovician of Estonia with a description of some new genera. Geol. Inst. Uurimused. 10:131–148. [Estonian with English summary.]Google Scholar
Sweet, W. C. 1964. Nautiloidea—Oncocerida. Pp. K277–K319. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. K, Mollusca 3. Geol. Soc. Am. and Univ. Kans. Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Sweet, W. C., Teichert, C., and Kummel, B. 1964. Phylogeny and evolution. Pp. K106–K114. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. K, Mollusca 3. Geol. Soc. Am. and Univ. Kans. Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1933. Der Bau der actinoceroiden Cephalopoden. Palaeontographica, Abt. A. 78:111–230.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1964. Nautiloidea—Discosorida. Pp. K320–K342. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. K, Mollusca 3. Geol. Soc. Am. and Univ. Kans. Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1967. Major features of cephalopod evolution. pp. 164–210. In: Teichert, C. and Yochelson, E. L., eds. Essays on Paleontology and Stratigraphy. Univ. Kans. Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. et al. 1964. Cephalopoda—General features—Endoceratoidea—Actinoceratoidea—Nautiloidea—Bactritoidea. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. K, Mollusca 3. 519 pp. Geol. Soc. Am. and Univ. Kans. Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Wade, Mary. 1977. Georginidae, new family of actinoceratoid cephalopods, Middle Ordovician, Australia. Mem. Queensland Mus. 18:1–15.Google Scholar
Webb, S. D. 1969. Extinction-origination equilibria in Late Cenozoic land mammals of North American. Evolution. 23:688–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Alwyn, Strachan, Isles, Bassett, D. A., Dean, W. I., Ingham, J. K., Wright, A. D., and Whittington, H. B. 1972. A correlation of Ordovician rocks in the British Isles. Geol. Soc. Lond., Spec. Rep. 3, 73 pp.Google Scholar