Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T05:21:45.073Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A theoretical morphologic analysis of convergently evolved erect helical colony form in the Bryozoa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

George R. McGhee Jr.  and
Frank K. McKinney
George R. McGhee Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, Wright-Rieman Laboratories, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903
Frank K. McKinney
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina 28608
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Exploration of the theoretical morphospace of erect helical colony form in Bryozoa, created by McKinney and Raup (1982), reveals that only a small volume of the three-dimensional space of hypothetical form is occupied by actual colonies of the Paleozoic fenestrates (Class Stenolaemata) Archimedes and Helicopora, helical species of the cheilostome (Class Gymnolaemata) Bugula, and the cyclostome (Class Stenolaemata) Crisidmonea archimediformis. Actual helical-colony bryozoans are not found in regions of the morphospace characterized by colony geometries that possess the largest surface areas of filtration sheet. Examination of computer-simulated colonies in the theoretical morphospace reveals that, although possessing high surface areas, colonies in the empty region of high-surface-area morphospace possess other aspects of geometry that are unrealistic as filter-feeding geometries: the filtration-sheet whorls are held at small acute angles to the central colony axis and are deeply nested within one another, both of which are disadvantageous conditions for the system of filter feeding used by the extant cheilostome Bugula, and presumably by extinct helical-colony bryozoans as well.

Even though actual bryozoans are found only in the low to intermediate surface-area regions of the theoretical morphospace, surface area of filtration sheet is a major determinant of form in these helical colonies, as is evidenced by a negative correlation in values of the parameters BWANG and ELEV exhibited by the colony data. Minimum values of BWANG are even further constrained by the apparent need of the Archimedes colonies to maintain filtration-sheet branching densities within the range of 20 to 50.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , Fall 2000 , pp. 556 - 577
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

Best, M. A., and Thorpe, J. P. 1986. Effects of food particle concentration on feeding current velocity in six species of Bryozoa. Marine Biology 93:255–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheetham, A. H., and Hayek, L.-A. C. 1983. Geometric consequences of branching growth in adeoniform Bryozoa. Paleobiology 9:240–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowen, R., and Rider, J. 1972. Functional analysis of fenestellid bryozoan colonies. Lethaia 5:145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gautier, Y. V. 1962. Recherches écologiques sur les bryozoaires cheilostomes en Méditerranée occidentale. Recueil des Travaux Station Marine d'Endoume, fascicule 38, Bulletin 24.Google Scholar
McGhee, G. R. Jr. 1999. Theoretical morphology. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
McKinney, F. K. 1979. Some paleoenvironments of the coiled fenestrate bryozoan Archimedes. Pp. 321–335in Larwood, G. P. and Abbott, M. B., eds. Advances in bryozoology. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
McKinney, F. K. 1986. Evolution of erect marine bryozoan faunas: repeated success of unilaminate species. American Naturalist 128:795–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinney, F. K. 1991. Colonial feeding currents of Exidmonea atlantica (Cyclostomata). Bulletin de la Société des Sciences Naturelles de l'Ouest de la France, Mémoire Hors Série 1:263–270.Google Scholar
McKinney, F. K. 1993. A faster-paced world? Contrasts in biovolume and life-process rates in cyclostome (Class Stenolaemata) and cheilostome (Class Gymnolaemata) bryozoans. Paleobiology 19:335–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinney, F. K., and Jackson, J. B. C. 1989. Bryozoan evolution. Unwin Hyman, Boston.Google Scholar
McKinney, F. K., and Raup, D. M. 1982. A turn in the right direction: simulation of erect spiral growth in the bryozoans Archimedes and Bugula. Paleobiology 8:101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinney, F. K., and Stedman, T. G. 1981. Constancy of characters within helical portions of Archimedes. Pp. 151–157in Larwood, G. P. and Nielson, C., eds. Recent and fossil Bryozoa. Olsen and Olsen, Fredensborg, Denmark.Google Scholar
McKinney, F. K., Listokin, M. R. A., and Phifer, C. D. 1986. Flow and polypide distribution in the cheilostome bryozoan Bugula and their inference in Archimedes. Lethaia 19:81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osburn, R. C. 1950. Bryozoa of the Pacific Coast of America, Part I. Cheilostomata-Anasca. Allan Hancock Pacific Expeditions 14:1–269.Google Scholar
Ryland, J. S. 1960. The British species of Bugula (Polyzoa). Proceedings of the Zoological Society, London 134:65–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryland, J. S., and Hayward, P. J. 1977. British anascan bryozoans. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Starcher, R. W., and McGhee, G. R. Jr. 2000. Fenestrate theoretical morphology: geometric constraints on lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct Bryozoa. Paleobiology 26:116–136.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, P. D., and McKinney, F. K. 1996. An Archimedes-like cyclostome bryozoan from the Eocene of North Carolina. Journal of Paleontology 70:218–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar