Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T21:41:10.769Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth form in Silurian heliolitid corals: the influence of genetics and environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Graham A. Young  and
Colin T. Scrutton
Graham A. Young
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
Colin T. Scrutton
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Colony growth form in some Silurian heliolitid corals is analyzed by the measurement of their shape in profile. Data are presented for seven species, Stelliporella parvistella, Heliolites interstinctus, H. megastoma, H. daintreei, H. spongodes, Propora tubulata, and Plasmopora scita from three localities in Gotland, Sweden, and three localities in England. Intraspecific growth-form variation is presented on triangle diagrams. These plots allow variation to be compared between species present at each locality and between localities for each species. Results indicate that the overall potential for growth-form variation is genetically controlled and that levels of response to environmental stimuli may differ markedly between species. Stelliporella parvistella is a very plastic species, the only one developing branching growth in addition to other growth forms. Heliolites interstinctus is much less variable, dominantly tabular, domal, and low bulbous in form, but demonstrates a similar response. Propora tubulata has a tightly constrained bulbous growth form that shows little variation between localities. The other species are represented by few specimens, most of which parallel H. interstinctus. The likely moderating influences of light levels, substrate type, sedimentation rate, energy levels, and other variables on growth-form variation and species range are considered. The main environmental factor including ecophenotypic response is concluded to be sedimentation rate. A close correlation between this factor and growth form in S. parvistella indicates that form in this species is a particularly sensitive indicator of sedimentation rate and substrate conditions. No simple equations can be made between specific environments and one particular growth form in these corals.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , Fall 1991 , pp. 369 - 387
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

Barnes, D. J. 1973. Growth in colonial scleractinians. Bulletin of Marine Science 23:280–298.Google Scholar
Bassett, M. G. 1974. Review of the stratigraphy of the Wenlock Series in the Welsh Borderland and South Wales. Palaeontology 17:745–777.Google Scholar
Bassett, M. G., Kaljo, D., and Teller, L. 1989. The Baltic region. In Holland, C. H., and Bassett, M. G. (eds.), A Global Standard for the Silurian System. National Museum of Wales, Geological Series 9:158–170.Google Scholar
Best, M. B., Boekschoten, G. J., and Oosterbaan, A. 1984. Species concept and ecomorph variation in living and fossil Scleractinia. Palaeontogrpahica Americana 54:70–79.Google Scholar
Birenheide, R. 1963. Sstandortwechsel von korallen aus dem Eifelmeer (Environment changes in corals from the Eifel Sea). Natur und Museum 93(10):405–409.Google Scholar
Bjerstedt, T. W., and Feldmann, R. M. 1985. Stromatoporoid paleosynecology in the Lucas Dolostone (Middle Devonian) on Kelleys Island, Ohio. Journal of Paleontology 59:1033–1061.Google Scholar
Budd, A. F., Johnson, K. G., and Edwards, J. C. 1989. Miocene coral assemblages in Anguilla, B.W.I., and their implications for the interpretation of vertical succession on fossil reefs. Palaios 4:264–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, A. J. 1939. The stratigraphy of the Wenlock Limestone of Dudley. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 95:37–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherns, L. 1983. The Hemse Eke Boundary: facies relationships in the Ludlow Series of Gotland, Sweden. Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning, Avhandlingar och Uppsatser, Serie C number 800, Årsbok 77, number 2.Google Scholar
Coates, A. G., and Jackson, J.B.C. 1987. Clonal growth, algal symbiosis, and reef formation by corals. Paleobiology 13:363–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockbain, A. E. 1984. Stromatoporoids from the Devonian reef complexes, Canning Basin, Western Australia. Geological Survey of Western Australia, Bulletin 129.Google Scholar
Colter, V. S. 1956. On Heliolites caespitosa Salter. Geological Magazine 93:229–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, J. R., and Stanton, R. J. Jr. 1981. Paleoecology, Concepts and Applications. John Wiley and Sons; New York.Google Scholar
Foster, A. B. 1979. Phenotypic plasticity in the reef corals Montastraea annularia (Ellis & Solander) and Siderastrea siderea (Ellis & Solander). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 39:25–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gattuso, J.-P. 1985. Features of depth effects on Stylophora pistillata, an hermatypic coral in the Gulf of Aqaba (Jordan, Red Sea). Proceedings of the Fifth International Coral Reef Congress, Tahiti 6:95–100.Google Scholar
Gibson, M. A., and Broadhead, T. W. 1989. Species-specific growth responses of favositid corals to soft-bottom substrates. Lethaia 22:287–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goreau, T. F. 1963. Calcium carbonate deposition by coralline algae and corals in relation to their roles as reef builders. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 109:127–167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graus, R. R., and Macintyre, I. G. 1982. Variation in growth forms of the reef coral Montastrea annularis (Ellis and Solander): a quantitative evaluation of growth response to light distribution using computer simulation. Smithsonian Contributions to the Marine Sciences 12:441–464.Google Scholar
Hill, D. 1981. Rugosa and Tabulata. In Teichert, C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part F, Coelenterata, Supplement 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Hubbard, J.A.E.B., and Pocock, Y. P. 1972. Sediment rejection by recent scleractinian corals: a key to palaeo-environmental reconstruction. Geologische Rundschau, Bd. 61:598–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, C. L. 1985. Assessment of clonal diversity and population structure of Porites compressa (Cnidaria, Scleractinia). Proceedings of the Fifth International Coral Reef Congress, Tahiti 6:69–74.Google Scholar
Jackson, J.B.C. 1979. Morphological strategies of sessile animals. Pp. 499–555. In Larwood, G. P., and Rosen, B. R. (eds.), Biology and Systematics of Colonial Organisms. Academic Press; London.Google Scholar
James, N. P. 1979. Reefs. Pp. 121–132. In Walker, R. G. (ed.), Facies Models. Geoscience Canada Reprint Series 1. Geolgoical Association of Canada; Toronto.Google Scholar
James, N. P. 1983. Reef environment. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 33:345–440.Google Scholar
James, N. P. 1984. Reefs. Pp. 229–244. In Walker, R. G. (ed.), Facies Models. Second Edition, Geoscience Canada Reprint Series 1. Geological Association of Canada; Toronto.Google Scholar
Jaubert, J. 1977. Light, metabolism and growth forms of the hermatypic scleractinian coral Synaraea convexa Verrill in the lagoon of Moorea (French Polynesia). Proceedings of the Third International Coral Reef Symposium 1:484–488.Google Scholar
Kershaw, S. 1981. Stromatoporoid growth form and taxonomy in a Silurian biostrome, Gotland. Journal of Paleontology 55:1284–1295.Google Scholar
Kershaw, S. 1984. Patterns of stromatoporoid growth in level-bottom environments. Palaeontology 27:113–130.Google Scholar
Kershaw, S., and Riding, R. 1978. Parametrization of stromatoporoid shape. Lethaia 11:233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kissling, D. L. 1973. Circumrotatory growth form in Recent and Silurian corals. Pp. 43–58. In Boardman, R. S., Cheetham, A. H., and Oliver, W. A. Jr. (eds.), Animal Colonies: Development and Function through Time. Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross; Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Klovan, J. E. 1964. Facies analysis of the Redwater reef complex, Alberta, Canada. Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geologists 12:1–100.Google Scholar
Laufeld, S. 1974. Reference localities for palaeontology and geology in the Silurian of Gotland. Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning. Series C, No. 705.Google Scholar
Lecompte, M. 1970. Die Riffe im Devon der Ardennen und ihre Bildungsbedingungen. Geologica et Palaeontologica 4:25–70.Google Scholar
Leleshus, V. L. 1985. K evolyutsii yestestvennoy prodolzhitel 'nosti zhizni korallovykh polipov v paleozoye Sredney Azii [Evolution of the natural life span of coral polyps during the Paleozoic of central Asia]. Paleontological Journal 1985(2):17–21.Google Scholar
Lowenstam, H. A. 1957. Niagaran reefs in the Great Lakes area. Geological Society of America, Memoir 67:215–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manten, A. A. 1961. Korallengestalten als Kennzeichen des Milieus. Geologische Rundschau 51:663–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manten, A. A. 1971. Silurian Reefs of Gotland. Developments in Sedimentology, 13. Elsevier; Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Oschmann, W. 1989. Growth and environmental hazards of the Upper Jurassic colonial coral Actinastrea matheyi (Koby) from Portugal. Paläontologische Zeitschrift 63:193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandolfi, J. M. 1984. Environmental influence on growth form in some massive tabulate corals from the Hamilton Group (Middle Devonian) of New York State. Palaeontographica Americana 54:538–542.Google Scholar
Pandolfi, J. M., and Burke, C. D. 1989a. Environmental distribution of colony growth form in the favositid Pleurodictyum americanum. Lethaia 22:69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandolfi, J. M., and Burke, C. D. 1989b. Shape analysis of two sympatric coral species: implications for taxonomy and evolution. Lethaia 22:183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philcox, M. E. 1971. Growth forms and role of colonial coelenterates in reefs of the Gower Formation (Silurian), Iowa. Journal of Paleontology 45:338–346.Google Scholar
Powell, J. H. 1980. Paleoecology and taxonomy of some Wenlock tabulate corals and stromatoporoids. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, England.Google Scholar
Preobrazhensky, B. V. 1980. Morphogenesis in corals: methodological aspect. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 25(3-4):473–476.Google Scholar
Ratcliffe, K. T. 1988. Oncoids as environmental indicators in the Much Wenlock Limestone Formation of the English Midlands. Journal of the Geological Society, London 145:117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riding, R. 1983. Composition, structure and environmental setting of Silurian bioherms and biostromes in Northern Europe. Pp. 41–83. In Toomey, D. F. (ed.), European Fossil Reef Models. Special Publication 30. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists; Tulsa, Oklahoma.Google Scholar
Schuhmacher, H., and Zibrowius, H. 1985. What is hermatypic? A redefinition of ecological groups in corals and other organisms. Coral Reefs 4:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scoffin, T. P. 1971. The conditions of growth of the Wenlock reefs of Shropshire. Sedimentology 17:173–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scrutton, C. T. 1989. Intracolonial and intraspecific variation in tabulate corals. Association of Australasian Palaeontologists, Memoir 8:33–43.Google Scholar
Shergold, J. H., and Bassett, M. G. 1970. Facies and faunas at the Wenlock/Ludlow boundary of Wenlock Edge, Shropshire. Lethaia 3:113–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stearn, C. W. 1982. The shapes of Paleozoic and modern reef-builders: a critical review. Paleobiology 8:228–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stearn, C. W. 1984. Growth forms and macrostructural elements of the coralline sponges. Palaeontographica Americana 54:315–325.Google Scholar
Stearn, C. W., and Riding, R. 1973. Forms of the hydrozoan Millepora on a Recent coral reef. Lethaia 6:187–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stel, J. H. 1978. Environment and quantitative morphology of some Silurian tabulates from Gotland. Scripta Geologica 47.Google Scholar
Struve, W. 1961. Das Eifeler Korallen-Meer. Der Aufschluß Sonderheit 10 (Die nördlicher Eifel):81–107.Google Scholar
Tsien, H. H. 1971. The Middle and Upper Devonian reef-complexes of Belgium. Petroleum Geology of Taiwan 8:119–173.Google Scholar
Tsien, H. H. 1981. Ancient reefs and reef carbonates. Proceedings of the Fourth International Coral Reef Symposium, Manila 1:601–609.Google Scholar
Veron, J.E.N., and Pichon, M. 1976. Scleractinia of eastern Australia, part 1: Families Thamnasteriidae, Astrocoeniidae, Pocilloporidae. Volume 1. Monograph Series. Australian Institute of Marine Science; Townsville, Australia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veron, J.E.N., and Pichon, M. 1982. Scleractinia of eastern Australia, part 4: Family Poritidae. Volume 5. Monograph Series. Australian Institute of Marine Science; Townsville, Australia.Google Scholar
Willis, B. L., and Ayre, D. J. 1985. Asexual reproduction and genetic determination of growth form in the coral Pavona cactus: biochemical, genetic and immunogenic evidence. Oecologia 65:516–556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, G. A. 1988. Paleoecology, biostratigraphy, and systematics of Silurian tabulate corals from the Chaleur Bay region, eastern Canada. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Brunswick. Fredericton, Canada.Google Scholar