Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T14:34:42.165Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A revision of the rare genus Cyclolampas (Echinoidea) using morphometrics with description of a new species from the upper Callovian of Burgundy (France)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Thomas Saucede ,
Alain Bonnot ,
Didier Marchand  and
Philippe Courville
Thomas Saucede
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 6282, Biogéosciences, Université de Bourgogne, 6 boulevard Gabriel F-21000 Dijon, France, ; ;
Alain Bonnot
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 6282, Biogéosciences, Université de Bourgogne, 6 boulevard Gabriel F-21000 Dijon, France, ; ;
Didier Marchand
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 6282, Biogéosciences, Université de Bourgogne, 6 boulevard Gabriel F-21000 Dijon, France, ; ;
Philippe Courville
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 6118, Géosciences, Université Rennes 1, F-35000 Rennes, France,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The discovery of a new species, Cyclolampas altus new species in the upper Callovian of Burgundy (France) leads to the systematic revision of the rare echinoid genus Cyclolampas Pomel, 1883. Two morphometric approaches are used jointly to describe and quantify variations in test shape: the analysis of linear measurements and the Elliptic Fourier shape analysis. Both analyses yield congruent results that highlight the amplitude of within-species variations and quantify the part due to allometry. Along with the description of C. altus, the systematic position of species formerly assigned to the genera Pygorhytis Pomel, 1883 and Cyclolampas is amended. Previously attributed to the genus Pygorhytis, Cyclolampas castanea (Desor, 1858) is reassigned to the genus Cyclolampas on the base of new observations. Conversely, the examination of the Bajocian species Pygorhytis kiliani (Lambert, 1909) and Pygorhytis gillieroni Desor in Desor and de Loriol, 1872, which were previously assigned to Cyclolampas now supports their taxonomic reassignment to the genus Pygorhytis. Finally, the two species Cyclolampas verneuili (Cotteau, 1870) and Cyclolampas cotteaui Mintz, 1966 (nomen nudum) are considered junior synonyms of the genus type species Cyclolampas voltzii (Agassiz, 1839). The questioned origin date of the genus, estimated either to the Bajocian or to the Oxfordian, is now clearly established to be upper Callovian. These new results fit well with the overall scheme of atelostomate echinoid evolution and migration to deep-sea environments during the Middle and Upper Jurassic.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 87 , Issue 1 , January 2013 , pp. 105 - 122
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

Agassiz, L. 1835. Prodrome d'une monographie des radiaires ou Echinodermes. Mémoire de la Société des Sciences Naturelles de Neuchâtel, 1:168–199.Google Scholar
Agassiz, L. 1839. Description des échinodermes fossiles de la Suisse. 1re partie. Spatangoïdes et Clypeasteroïdes. Nouveaux Mémoires de la Société Helvétique des Sciences Naturelles, 3:1–101.Google Scholar
Agassiz, L. and Desor, E. 1846 –1847. Catalogue Raisonné des Espèces, de Genres, et des Familles d'Echinides. Part 1. Annales des Sciences Naturelles, 3 (6):305–374, 3(7):129–168.Google Scholar
Bailey, R. C. and Byrnes, J. 1990. A new, old method for assessing measurement error in both univariate and multivariate morphometrics studies. Systematic Zoology, 39:124–130.Google Scholar
Barras, C. G. 2007. Phylogeny of the Jurassic to Early Cretaceous ‘Disasteroid' echinoids (Echinoidea; Echinodermata), and the origins of spatangoids and holasteroids. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, 5 (2):133–161.Google Scholar
Barras, C. G. 2008. Morphological innovation associated with the expansion of atelostomate irregular echinoids into fine-grained sediments during the Jurassic. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 263:44–57.Google Scholar
Beurlen, K. 1934. Monographie der Echinoiden-Familie Collyritidae d'Orbigny. Palaeontographica, 80:41–194.Google Scholar
Bonnot, A. 1996. Découverte d'une nouvelle espèce du genre Euaspidoceras (Ammonitina, Aspidoceratidae) dans l'horizon à Collotiformis (Callovien supérieur, zone à Athleta, sous-zone à Collotiformis) de Montreuil-Bellay (France, Maine-et-Loire). Annales de Paléontologie, 82:117–139.Google Scholar
Bonnot, A., Marchand, D., Pascal, A., and Marquet, J.-B. 1984. Le contact Dogger-Malm en Côte-d'Or (France). I. La coupe type de la Pérouse. Réinterprétations sédimentologique et stratigraphique. Bulletin Scientifique de Bourgogne, 37:71–84Google Scholar
Bonnot, A., Marchand, D., And Garcia, J.-P. 1992. Le contact Dogger-Malm en Côte d'Or (France)–II. La coupe type de Saulx-le-Duc–Interprétation biostratigraphique. Bulletin Scientifique de Bourgogne, 45:53–65.Google Scholar
Bonnot, A. and Marchand, D. 1994. Le contact Dogger-Malm en Côte-d'Or (France). III. La coupe de Chaignay: interprétation biostratigraphique. Bulletin scientifique de Bourgogne, 46:43–50.Google Scholar
Bonnot, A. and Marchand, D. 1997. Kosmoceras irwingi nov. sp., un Kosmoceratinae (Ammonitina) micromorphe d'âge Callovien Supérieur. Annales de Paléontologie, 83:217–232.Google Scholar
Clarke, K. R. 1993. Non-parametric multivariate analysis of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology, 18:117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collin, P.-Y., Courville, P., Loreau, J.-P., Marchand, D., and Thierry, J. 1999. Séries condensées et indice de préservation d'unités biostratigraphiques: exemple de l'ennoiement de la plate-forme nord-bourguignonne (France) au Callovo-Oxfordien. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences de Paris, Sciences de la Terre et des planètes, 328:105–111.Google Scholar
Cotteau, G. H. 1862 –1867. Paléontologie française. Terrains Crétacés. Tome VII, Echinides. Victore Masson, Paris, 892p.Google Scholar
Cotteau, G. H. 1870. Echinodermata: Echinoidea. InZittel, K. A.(ed.), Die Fauna der altern Cephalopoden fuehrenden Tithonbildungen. Palaeontographica, supp. V. T. Fischer, Cassel, 272p.Google Scholar
Cotteau, G. H. 1874. Terrains Jurassiques, Echinides Irréguliers. Tome IX. Ind'Orbigny, A.(ed.), Paléontologie Française, Description des Animaux Invertébrés. G. Masson, Paris, 551p.Google Scholar
Crampton, J. S. 1995. Elliptic Fourier shape analysis of fossil bivalves: some practical considerations. Lethaia, 28:179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronier, C., Renaud, S., Feist, R., and Auffray, J.-C. 1998. Ontogeny of Trimerocephalus lelievrei (Trilobita, Phacopida), a representative of the Late Devonian phacopine paedomorphocline: a morphometric approach. Paleobiology, 24:359–370.Google Scholar
Deecke, W. 1929. Fossilium Catalogus. I. Animalia, 39. Echinoida jurassica. Berlin, 540p.Google Scholar
Desor, E. 1842. Des Dysaster. InAgassiz, L.(ed.), Monographies d'échinodermes vivants et fossiles 3. O. Petitpierre, Neuchâtel, 25p.Google Scholar
Desor, E. 1858. Synopsis des échinides fossiles. Reinwald, Kriedel and Niedner, Paris, Wiesbaden, 490p.Google Scholar
Desor, E. and de Loriol, P. 1872. Echinologie helvétique. Terrain jurassique. Reinwald, Ch., Kriedel, C. W., Paris, Wiesbaden, 441p.Google Scholar
Dommergues, C. H., Dommergues, J.-L., and Verrecchia, E. P. 2007. The discrete cosine transform, a Fourier-related method for morphometric analysis of open contours. Mathematical Geology, 39:749–763.Google Scholar
Dommergues, J.-L. and Marchand, D. 1988. Paléobiogéographie historique et écologique: application aux Ammonites du Jurassique, p. 351–364. InWiedmann, J. and Kullmann, J.(eds.), Cephalopods, Present and Past. E. Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Durham, J. W. and Wagner, C. D. 1966. Glossary of morphological terms applied to echinoids, p. U251–U257. InMoore, R. C.(ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Pt. U. Echinodermata 3.Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Gaillard, C., Neraudeau, D., and Thierry, J. 2011. Tithonia oxfordiana, a new irregular echinoid associated with Jurassic seep deposits in South-East France. Palaeontology, 54:735–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauthier, V. 1896. Description des Echinides fossiles des terrains jurassiques de la Tunisie recueillis par M. Le Mesle. Exploration Scientifique de la Tunisie, Paris, 24p.Google Scholar
Gérard, C. and Contaut, H. 1936. Les Ammonites de la Zone à Peltoceras athleta du Centre-Ouest de la France. Mémoire de la Société géologique de France, 29, 100p.Google Scholar
Gregory, J. W. 1893. The Jurassic Fauna of Cutch, I: The Echinoidea. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India. Palaeontologia Indica, Series 9, 2 (1):1–11.Google Scholar
Haines, A. J. and Crampton, J. S. 2000. Improvements to the method of Fourier shape analysis as applied in morphometric studies. Palaeontology, 43 (4):765–783.Google Scholar
Hammer, O., Harper, D. A. T., and Ryan, P. D. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, 4:1–9.Google Scholar
International Commission On Zoological Nomenclature. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (fourth edition). The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, 126p.Google Scholar
Iwata, H. and Ukai, Y. 2002. SHAPE: A Computer Program Package for Quantitative Evaluation of Biological Shapes Based on Elliptic Fourier Descriptors. The Journal of Heredity, 93:384–385.Google Scholar
Jeannet, A. 1951. Stratigraphie und Palaeontologie des oolitischen Eisenerzlagers von Herznach und seiner Umgebung. Beiträge zur Geologie der Schweiz, 13(5). Geotechnische, Zürich, 240p.Google Scholar
Jesionek-Szymanska, W. 1959. Remarks on the structure of the apical system of irregular echinoids. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 4:339–353.Google Scholar
Jesionek-Szymanska, W. 1963. Echinides irréguliers du Dogger de Pologne. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 8:293–414.Google Scholar
Jesionek-Szymanska, W. 1970. On a new pygasterid (Echinoidea) from the Jurassic (middle Lias) of Nevada, U.S.A. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 15:411–423.Google Scholar
Kier, P. M. 1974. Evolutionary trends and their functional significance in the post-Paleozoic Echinoids. Supplement to the Journal of Paleontology, 48:1–96.Google Scholar
Kier, P. M. 1984. Echinoids from the Triassic (St. Cassian) of Italy, their lantern supports, and a revised phylogeny of Triassic echinoids. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology, 56:1–41.Google Scholar
Lamarck, J. B. P. A. M. de. 1816. Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres. 3. Radiaires, Vers, Insectes (Echinides). Baillière, Paris, 770p.Google Scholar
Lambert, J. 1909. Sur un Echinide du Massif du Pelvoux, p. 11–19. InKilian, M. M. W. and Lambert, J.(eds.), Sur le gisement Bajocien de Villard-d'Arène (Hautes-Alpes) et sur un Echinide du Massif du Pelvoux. Grands Etablissements de l'Imprimerie Générale, Grenoble.Google Scholar
Lambert, J. 1933. Echinides Fossiles du Maroc. Protectorat de la République Française au Maroc, Série Mines et Cartes Géologiques, Notes et Mémoires 27, 79p.Google Scholar
Lambert, J. and Thiery, P. 1909 –1924. Essai de Nomenclature Raisonnée des Echinides. Ferrière, Chaumont, 607p.Google Scholar
Legendre, P. and Legendre, L. 1998. Numerical Ecology. Elsevier Science BV, Amsterdam, 853p.Google Scholar
Leske, N. G. 1778. Jacobi Theodori Klein Naturalis dispositio Echinodermatum, edita et descriptionibus novisque inventis et synonymis acutorum aucta. G. E. Beer, Lipsiae, xxii+278 p.Google Scholar
Mintz, L. W. 1966. The Origins, Phylogeny, Descendants of the Echinoid Family Disasteridae A. Gras, 1848. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Berkeley, 314p.Google Scholar
Mintz, L. W. 1968. Echinoids of the mesozoic families Collyritidae d'Orbigny, 1853 and Disasteridae Gras, 1848. Journal of Paleontology, 42:1272–1288.Google Scholar
Mortensen, T. 1950. A monograph of the Echinoidea. I.5 Spatangoida. Reitzel, Copenhagen, 432 p.Google Scholar
Moyne, S., Thierry, J., and Angenard, D. 2007. Architectural variability of the test in the genus Collyrites (Echinoidea, Disasteroida) during Middle Jurassic. Annales de Paléontologie, 93:233–247.Google Scholar
Ooster, W. A. 1865. Pétrifactions Remarquables des Alpes Suisses, Synopsis des Echinodermes Fossiles des Alpes Suisses. George, Geneva, 131p.Google Scholar
Oppel, A. 1854 –1858. Die Juraformation Englands, Frankreichs und des südwestlichen Deutschlands. Jahreshefte des Vereins für vaterländische Naturkunde in Württemberg, 12:1–857.Google Scholar
Orbigny, A. d'. 1842 –1851. Paléontologie française. Description des Mollusques et Rayonnés fossiles, Terrains Jurassiques, Vol. 1., Céphalopodes. Vicor Masson, Paris, 340p.Google Scholar
Orbigny, A. d'. 1853 –1860. Paléontologie Française. Description des Mollusques et Rayonnés fossiles, Terrains Crétacés, Vol. 6, Echinides Irréguliers. Victor Masson, Paris, 596p.Google Scholar
Pomel, A. 1883. Classification méthodique et genera des Echinides vivants et fossiles. Adolphe Jourdan, Alger, 131p.Google Scholar
Prieser, T. 1937. Beitrag zur Systematik und Stammesgeschichte der Europäischen Peltoceraten. Palæontographica, lxxxvi, A(1–4), 1p.Google Scholar
Quenstedt, F. A. 1845 –1849. Petrefaktenkunde Deutschlands. Die Cephalopoden. Fuess, Tübingen, 580p.Google Scholar
Quenstedt, F. A. 1872 –1875. Petrefactenkunde Deutschlands. I. 3. Echinodermen (Echinoiden). Fues's Verlag, Leipzig, 719p.Google Scholar
Quenstedt, F. A. 1882 –1885. Die Ammoniten des Schwäbischen Jura. I. Der Schwarze Jura. Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung (E. Koch), Stuttgart, 440p.Google Scholar
Quenstedt, F. A. 1886 –1887. Die Ammoniten des Swäbischen Jura. II. Der Braune Jura. Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung (E. Koch), Stuttgart, 536p.Google Scholar
Remond, C., Gelard, J.-P., and Fernoux, F. 1992. Carte géologique de la France (1/50000), notice explicative de la feuille de Saint-Seine-l'Abbaye (469). BRGM, Orléans, 96p.Google Scholar
Renaud, S. and Michaux, J. R. 2003. Adaptative latitudinal trends in the mandible shape of Apodemus wood mice. Journal of Biogeography, 30:1617–1628.Google Scholar
Saucede, T., Mooi, R., and David, B. 2007. Phylogeny and origin of Jurassic irregular echinoids (Echinodermata: Echinoidea). Geological Magazine, 144:333–359.Google Scholar
Schauroth, C. F. von. 1865. Verzeichnis der Versteinerungen im Herzoglichen Naturaliencabinet zu Coburg. Dietz, Coburg, 327p.Google Scholar
Scouflaire, Q., Marchand, D., Bonnot, A., Courville, P., Raffray, M., and Huault, V. 1997. Le contact Callovien–Oxfordien dans les environs de Chaignay: nouvelles données stratigraphiques et paléontologiques. Bulletin Scientifique de Bourgogne, 49:45–63.Google Scholar
Sintzov, I. 1888 Carte géologique générale de la Russie: Saint Petersburg. Mémoires du Comité Géologique, 7 (1), 132p.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. 1984. Echinoid Paleobiology. Special Topics in Palaeontology. Allen and Unwin, London, 190p.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. and Anzalone, L. 2000. Loriolella, a key taxon for understanding the early evolution of irregular echinoids. Palaeontology, 43:303–324.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. 2004. Phylogeny and systematics of holasteroid echinoids and their migration into the deep-sea. Palaeontology, 47:123–150.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. and Stockley, B. 2005. The geological history of deep-sea colonization by echinoids: roles of surface productivity and deep-water ventilation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 272:865–69.Google Scholar
Solovjev, A. N. 1971. Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous disasterids of the USSR. Transactions of the Palaeontological Institute, Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R., 131:1–120.Google Scholar
Sowerby, J. 1812 –1822. The Mineral Conchology of Great Britain. Meredith, London, 383p.Google Scholar
Spath, L. F. 1927 –1933. Revision of the Jurassic Cephalopod Fauna of Kachh (Cutch). Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, 2 (1–6), 945p.Google Scholar
Sprinkle, J. 1983. Patterns and problems in echinoderm evolution, p. 1–18. InJangoux, M. and Lawrence, J. M.(eds.), Echinoderm Studies 1. Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Stahl, L. F. 1824. Uebersicht über die Versteinerungen Würtembergs. Correspondenz-Blatt Württemberg Landwirthsch, 6:1–28.Google Scholar
Thierry, J. 1974. Etude quantitative de la dynamique des Collyritidae (Echinoidea) du Jurassique de Bourgogne. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, 7:385–395.Google Scholar
Thierry, J. 1984. Evolutionary history of Jurassic Collyritidae (Echinoidea, Disasteroida) in the Paris Basin (France), p. 125–133. InKeegan, B. F. and O'Connor, B. D. S.(eds.), Echinodermata. Proceedings of the fifth international Echinoderm Conference Galway. Balkema, Rotterdam, Boston.Google Scholar
Thierry, J. 1988. Provincialisme et/ou Ecologie des Ammonites du Callovien en France, p. 387–402. InWiedmann, J. and Kullmann, J.(eds.), Cephalopods, Present and Past. E. Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Thierry, J., Clavel, B., Hantzpergue, P., Neraudeau, D., Rigollet, L., and Vadet, A. 1997. Distribution chronologique et géographique des échinides jurassiques en France: essai d'utilisation biostratigraphique, p. 253–271. InCariou, E. and Hantzpergue, P.(eds.), Biostratigraphie du Jurassique ouest-européen et méditerranéen: zonations parallèles et distribution des invertébrés et microfossiles Bulletin du Centre de Recherche Elf Exploration Production, 17:253–271.Google Scholar
Thierry, J. and Neraudeau, D. 1994. Variations in Jurassic echinoid diversity at ammonite zone levels: stratigraphical and palaeoecological significance, p. 901–909. InDavid, B., Guille, A., Féral, J.-P. and Roux, M.(eds.), Echinoderms through Time (Echinoderms Dijon). Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Tsytovitch, X. 1911. Hecticoceras du Callovien de Chezeri. Mémoire de la Société Paleontologique Suisse, 37:1–82.Google Scholar
Wagner, C. D. and Durham, J. W. 1966. Holasteroids, p. U523–U543. InMoore, R. C.(ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Pt. U. Echinodermata 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Warton, D. I. and Hudson, H. M. 2004. A MANOVA statistic is just as powerful as distance-based statistics, for multivariate abundances. Ecology, 85:858–874.Google Scholar
Wright, T. W. 1855 –1860. Monograph of the British fossil Echinodermata of the Oolitic formations, Vol. 1, Echinoidea. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society, London, 481p.Google Scholar
Zittel, K. A. von. 1876 –1880. Handbuch der Paläontologie (1). R. Oldenbourg, München and Leipzig, 765p.Google Scholar