Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-11T19:00:00.984Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two coleoid jaws from the Upper Cretaceous of Hokkaido, Japan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Kazushige Tanabe ,
Yoshinori Hikida  and
Yasuhiro Iba
Kazushige Tanabe
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan, and
Yoshinori Hikida
Affiliation:
Nakagawa Museum of Natural History, Nakagawa Town, Hokkaido 098-2626, Japan,
Yasuhiro Iba
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan, and
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two isolated cephalopod jaws recovered from the middle Turonian of the Obira area and the Campanian of the Nakagawa area, Hokkaido, Japan, consist of short outer, and large and posteriorly elongated inner “chitinous” lamellae, with a sharply pointed rostrum in the outer lamella. These features are common with the upper jaws of Recent cephalopods. Comparison with the upper jaws of ammonoids and Recent cephalopods indicates that the two Cretaceous upper jaws are attributed to the Coleoidea other than the Octopodida. This assignment is also suggested by the cladistic analysis of the Nakagawa specimen compared with five upper jaw characters on 22 Recent cephalopod species. The Obira specimen differs from the Nakagawa specimen in having a much smaller jaw and a larger jaw angle, but its order-level assignment could not be determined because of imperfect preservation. The Nakagawa specimen shares several common features with the upper jaws of Recent Oegopsina; thus we assigned its higher systematic position to this suborder. Based on the extremely large upper jaw (97 mm maximum length), a new genus and species (Yezoteuthis giganteus) is proposed. This new taxon would have been as large as the modern giant squid Architeuthis, which commonly exceeds more than 5 m in body length. Our study postulates that studies of jaws are important to reconstruct the phylogeny of the Coleoidea.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 80 , Issue 1 , January 2006 , pp. 138 - 145
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

Bather, F. A. 1888. Shell-growth in Cephalopoda (Siphonopoda). Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (6)1:298–310.Google Scholar
Chiaie, S. 1823–1831. Momorie sulla storia e notomia degli Animali sense vertebre del regno di Napoli. 4 vols. Text and atlas. Naples.Google Scholar
Chun, C. 1903. Aus den Tiefen des Weltmeeres (second edition). Gustav Fischer, Jena, 592 p.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. R. 1962. The identification of cephalopod “beaks” and the relationship between beak size and total body weight. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Zoology, 8(10):419–480.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. R. 1980. Cephalopoda in the diet of sperm whales of the Southern Hemisphere and their bearing on sperm whale biology. Discovery Reports, 37:1–324.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. R. (ed.). 1986. A Handbook for the Identification of Cephalopod Beaks. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 273 p.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. R., and Maddock, L. 1988a. Beaks of living coleoid Cephalopoda, p. 121–131. In Clarke, M. R. and Trueman, E. R. (eds.), The Mollusca. Vol. 12. Paleontology and Neontology of Cephalopods. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. R., and Maddock, L. 1988b. Statoliths of fossil coleoid cephalopods, p. 153–168. In Clarke, M. R. and Trueman, E. R. (eds.), The Mollusca. Vol. 12. Paleontology and Neontology of Cephalopods. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
Cuvier, G. 1797. Tableau Elémentaire de l'Histoire Naturelle des Animaux. Paris, xvi + 710 p.Google Scholar
Donovan, D. T. 1977. Evolution of the Dibranchiate Cephalopoda, p. 15–48. In Nixon, M. and Messenger, J. B. (eds.), The Biology of Cephalopods. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London, No. 38. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Donovan, D. T., and Toll, R. B. 1988. The gladius in coleoid (Cephalopoda) evolution, p. 89–101. In Clarke, M. R. and Trueman, E. R. (eds.), The Mollusca. Vol. 12. Paleontology and Neontology of Cephalopods. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
d'Orbigny, A. 1835–1848. In Histoire naturelle générale et particulière des cephalopods acétabulifères vivants et fossils. 2 vols. Text and atlas. Ferussac, Paris.Google Scholar
Doyle, P. 1992. A review of the biogeography of Cretaceous belemnites. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 92:207–216.Google Scholar
Engeser, T., and Clarke, M. R. 1988. Cephalopod hooks, both Recent and fossil, p. 133–151. In Clarke, M. R. and Trueman, E. R. (eds.), The Mollusca. Vol. 12. Paleontology and Neontology of Cephalopods. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
Engeser, T., and Reitner, J. 1986. Coleoidenreste aus der Oberkreide des Libanon im Staatlichen Museum für Naturkunde in Stuttgart. Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Naturkunde, series B, 124:1–15.Google Scholar
Férussac, A. 1834. Notice sur deux nouvelles espèces des Céphalopodes appurtenant aux genres Calmaret (Loligopsis veranii) et Cranchie (Cranchia bonnellii). L'Institut, 2(77):355.Google Scholar
Grossouvre, A. 1894. Recherches sur la craie supérieure, 2, Paléontologie. Les ammonites de la craie supérieure. Mémoires du Service de la Carte Géologique. Détaille de la France, 264 p. (misdated 1893)Google Scholar
Hewitt, R. A., Yosiike, T., and Westermann, G. E. G. 1991. Shell microstructure and ecology of the Cretaceous coleoid cephalopod Naefia from the Santonian of Japan. Cretaceous Research, 12:47–54.Google Scholar
Hirano, H., Obata, I., and Ukishima, M. 1990. Naefia matsumotoi, a unique coleoid (Cephalopoda) from the Upper Cretaceous of Japan. Saito Ho-on Kai Special Publications, 3:201–221.Google Scholar
Hoyle, W. E. 1885. Diagnoses of new species of Cephalopoda collected during the cruise of H.M.S. Challenger, II: The Decaopoda. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 5, 16:181–203.Google Scholar
Hunt, S., and Nixon, M. 1981. A comparative study of protein composition in the chitin-protein complexes of the beak, pen, sucker disc, radula and oesophageal cuticule of cephalopods. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 68:535–546.Google Scholar
Hyatt, A. 1867. The fossil cephalopods of the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University Bulletin, 1:71–102.Google Scholar
Iverson, I. L. K., and Pinkas, L. 1971. A pictorial guides to beaks of certain eastern Pacific cephalopods. Fish Bulletin, 152:83–105.Google Scholar
Jeletzky, J. A. 1966. Comparative morphology, phylogeny, and classification of fossil Coleoidea. The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Mollusca, article 7:1–162.Google Scholar
Jimbo, K. 1894. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Fauna der Kreideformation von Hokkaido. Palaeontologische Abhandlungen, Neue Folge, 2(3):1–47.Google Scholar
Joubin, L. 1895. Céphalopodes recueillis dans I'estomac d'un Cachalot, capture aux lles Açores. Compte Rendu des Séances de l'Académie des Sciences, 121:1172–1174.Google Scholar
Joubin, L. 1902. Observations sur divers Céphalopodes, sixieme note: Su rune Nouvelle Espèce du Genre Rossia. Bulletin de la Société Zoologique de France, 27:138–143.Google Scholar
Kaiser, P., and Lehmann, U. 1971. Vergleichende Studien zur Evolution des Kieferapparates rezenter und fossiler Cephalopoden. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 45:18–32.Google Scholar
Kanie, Y. 1998. New vampyromorph (Coleoidea: Cephalopoda) jaw apparatuses from the Late Cretaceous of Japan. Bulletin of Gumma Museum of Natural History, 2:23–34.Google Scholar
Kear, A. J. 1994. Morphology and function of the mandibular muscles in some coleoid cephalopods. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 74:801–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keferstein, W. 1866. Malacozoa Cephalopora, p. 519–1500. In Bronn, H. G. (ed.), Die Klassen und Ordnungen des Their-Reichs wissenschaftlich dargestellt in Wort und Bild, 3(2). Leipzig and Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Lamarck, J. B. 1798. Extrait d'un mémoire sur le genre de la Séche, du Calmar et du Poulpe, vulgairement nommés, Polypes de Mer. Bulletin des Sciences, par la Société Philomatique de Paris, 2(5):129–131.Google Scholar
Lamarck, J. B. 1799. Prodrome d'une nouvelle classification des coquilles. Memoires de la Societe d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris, 1:63–91.Google Scholar
Leach, W. E. 1817. Synopsis of the orders, families, and genera of the class Cephalopoda, p. 137–141. In Leach, W. E. and Nodder, R. P. (eds.), The Zoological Miscellany; Being Descriptions of New, or Interesting Animals. Vol. 3. London.Google Scholar
Lehmann, U. 1980. Ammonite jaw apparatus and soft parts, p. 275–287. In House, M. R. and Senior, J. R. (eds.), The Ammonoidea. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Lehmann, U. 1990. Ammonoideen. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, 257 p.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema Naturae (tenth edition). Vol. 1. Holminae (= Stockholm), 824 p.Google Scholar
Lönnberg, E. 1898. On the cephalopods collected by the Swedish expedition to Tierra del Fuego 1895–96. Svenska Expeditionen till Magellansländerna, 2(4):49–64.Google Scholar
Naef, A. 1916. Systematische Übersicht der mediterranen Cephalopoden. Pubblizioni della Stazione Zoologica di Napoli, 1:11–19.Google Scholar
Naef, A. 1921. Die Cephalopoden. Fauna und Flora des Golfes von Neapel, Monographie 35 (Vol. 1) Systematik. Berlin, 148 p.Google Scholar
Naef, A. 1922. Die Fossilen Tintenfische. Gustav Fischer, Jena, 322 p.Google Scholar
Nagao, T., and Matsumoto, T. 1939. A monograph of the Cretaceous Inoceramus of Japan. Pt. 1. Journal of the Faculty of Science, Hokkaido Imperial University, series 4, 4:241–299.Google Scholar
Neige, P., and Dommergues, J.-L. 2002. Disparity of beaks and statoliths of some coleoids: A morphometric approach to depict shape differentiation. Abhandlungen der Geologischen Bundesanstalt, 57:393–399.Google Scholar
Nixon, M. 1969. Growth of the beak and radula of Octopus vulgaris. Journal of Zoology, 159:363–379.Google Scholar
Nixon, M. 1988. The buccal mass of fossil and recent Cephalopoda, p. 103–122. In Clarke, M. R. and Trueman, E. R. (eds.), The Mollusca. Vol. 12. Paleontology and Neontology of Cephalopods. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
Nixon, M. 1996. Morphology of the jaws and radula in ammonoids, p. 23–42. In Landman, N. H., Tanabe, K., and Davis, R. A. (eds.), Ammonoid Paleobiology. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
Pickford, G. E. 1946. Vampyroteuthis infernalis Chun. An archaic dibranchiate cephalopod. I. Natural history and distribution. Dana Reports, Carlsberg Foundation, 29:1–40.Google Scholar
Pickford, G. E. 1949. Vampyroteuthis infernalis Chun. An archaic dibranchiate cephalopod. II. External anatomy. Dana Reports, Carlsberg Foundation, 32:1–132.Google Scholar
Riegraf, W. 1987. Plesioteuthis arcuata Von der Marck, 1873 (Cephalopoda, Teuthoida) from the Campanian (Late Cretaceous) of Westphalia (NW Germany). Münstersche Forschungen zur Geologie und Paläontologie, 66:95–110.Google Scholar
Rochebrune, A. T., and Mabille, J. 1889. Mollusques, p. H1–H143. In Mission Scientifique du Cap Horn, 1882–1883, 6(2).Google Scholar
Roeleveld, M. A. C., and Lipinski, M. R. 1991. The giant squid Architeuthis in southern African waters. Journal of Zoological Society of London, 224:431–477.Google Scholar
Roger, J. 1946. Les invertèbrés des couches à poisons du Crétacé supérieur du Liban. Mémoires de la Société Géologiques de France, 23(51):1–92.Google Scholar
Rüppell, E. 1829. Abbildung und Beschreibung einiger neuen oder wenig bekannten Versteinerungen aus der Kalkschieferformation von Slenhofen. Frankfurt/Main (Brönner), 12 p.Google Scholar
Ruzhencev, V. E. 1933. Concerning some Lower Permian ammonoids of the Aktyubinsk region. Moscow Society of Naturalists Bulletin, n.s. Vol. 41. Society of Geology 11(2):164–180. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B. 1981. A new species of Nautilus from Palau. Veliger, 24:1–7.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., Spinosa, C., Teichert, C., and Banks, R. C. 1978. The jaw apparatus of Recent Nautilus and its palaeontological implications. Palaeontology 21:129–141.Google Scholar
Steenstrup, J. 1856. Hectocotyldannelsen hos Octopodsiaegterne Argonauta og Tremoctopus, oplyst ved lagttagelse af lignende Dannelser hos Blacksprutterne I Almindelighed. Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskabs Skrifter, series 5, 4:185–216.Google Scholar
Steenstrup, J. 1857. Oplysninger om Atlanterhavets colossale Blaeksprutter. Forhandlinger ved de Skandinaviske Naturforskeres, 7:182–185.Google Scholar
Steenstrup, J. 1880. De Ommatostrephagtige Blaeksprutter indbyrdes Forhold, en Oreintering. Oversigt over det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskabs Forhandlinger, 1880:73–110.Google Scholar
Stevens, G. R. 1973. Cretaceous belemnites, p. 385–401. In Hallam, A. (ed.), Atlas of Palaeobiogeography. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Sweeney, M. J., and Roper, C. F. 1998. Classification, type localities, and type repositories of Recent Cephalopoda, p. 561–599. In Voss, N. A., Vecchione, M., and Sweeney, M. J. (eds.), Systematics and Biogeography of Cephalopods. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 586. Vol. 2.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. L. 2004. PAUP∗, phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (∗and other methods). Version 4. Sinauer Association, Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Tanabe, K., and Fukuda, Y. 1983. Buccal mass structure of the Cretaceous ammonite Gaudryceras. Lethaia, 16:249–256.Google Scholar
Tanabe, K., and Fukuda, Y. 1999. Morphology and function of cephalopod buccal mass, p. 245–262. In Savazzi, E. (ed.), Functional Morphology of the Invertebrate Skeleton. John Wiley & Sons, London.Google Scholar
Tanabe, K., and Landman, N. H. 2002. Morphological diversity of the jaws of Cretaceous Ammonoidea. Abhandlungen der Geologischen Bundesanstalt, Wien, 57:157–165.Google Scholar
Tanabe, K., Mapes, R. H., and Kidder, D. L. 2001. A phosphatized cephalopod mouthpart from the Upper Pennsylvanian of Oklahoma, U.S.A. Paleontological Research, 5:311–318.Google Scholar
Troschel, F. H. 1857. Bermerkungen über die Cephalopoden von Messina. Archiv für Naturgeschichte, 23(1):40–76.Google Scholar
Verrill, A. E. 1881. The cephalopods of the north-eastern coast of America, Pt. II: The smaller cephalopods, including the “squids” and octopi, with other allied forms. Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Sciences, 5(6):259–446.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. 1859. Revision der bisheringen systematischen Bestimmungen der Überreste von nackten Tintenfischen aus dem süddeutschen Juragebirge. Anzeiger der Kaiserlichen bayeren Akademie der Wissenschaften, mathematisch-physikalisch Klasse, 34:273–278.Google Scholar
Wetzel, W. 1930. Die Quiriqina-Schichten als Sediment und paläontologisches Archiv. Palaeontographica, 73:49–104.Google Scholar
Yokoyama, M. 1890. Versteinerungen aus der japanischen Kreide. Palaeontographica, 36:159–202.Google Scholar
Young, R. E., and Vecchione, M. 1996. Analysis of morphology to determine primary sister-taxon relationships within coleoid cephalopods. American Malacological Bulletin, 12(1/2):91–112.Google Scholar
Young, R. E., Vecchione, M., and Donovan, D. T. 1998. The evolution of coleoid cephalopods and their present biodiversity and ecology. South African Journal of Marine Science, 20:393–420.Google Scholar