Hostname: page-component-68c7f8b79f-b92xj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-12-20T04:56:31.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Carboniferous actinoceratoid Nautiloidea (Cephalopoda)—a new perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Björn Kröger  and
Royal Mapes
Björn Kröger
Affiliation:
Museum für Naturkunde, Humboldt Universität Berlin, Invalidenstraße 43, D-10115 Berlin, Germany, bjoekroe@gmx.de
Royal Mapes
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, Ohio University, Athens 45701,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

New material from the Late Mississippian Fayetteville and Caney Formations of the south-central USA supports the taxonomic revision of the Mississippian actinoceroid cephalopods. New representatives of the previously poorly known Rayonnoceras solidiforme, Campyloceras striatulum, and Campyloceras imoense are described. Carbactinoceras procerum new species and Elmoceras graffhami new genus and species are described, and the genus Campyloceras is emended. Character evaluation suggests the shape of the endosiphuncular deposits in the Actinoceratida and Pseudactinocerida are homoplastic because similar patterns of endosiphuncular deposits occur in distantly related nautiloid clades. Apex shape, however, is shown to have previously unrecognized potential for taxon discrimination. Cladistic analysis of 13 actinoceroid and pseudorthocerid nautiloids supports the splitting of the Orthocerida and the creation of a sister group to the Actinoceratida which is identical with the largely neglected Pseudorthocerida.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 81 , Issue 4 , July 2007 , pp. 714 - 724
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Balashov, Z. G. 1956. Novye ordovikskie nautiloidei SSSR. Ezhegodnik vsesoyusnogo paleontologicheskogo obshestva, 15:123–137.Google Scholar
Balashov, E. G., and Zhuravleva, F. A. 1962. Ortriad Orthoceratida, p. 82–92. In Ruzhencev, V. E. (ed.), Osnovy Paleontologii. Isdatielstvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, Moskva.Google Scholar
Barrande, J. 1865-1877. Système silurien du centre de la Bohême, I.ère partie: Recherches Paléontologiques, Volume 2, Classe des Mollusques, Ordre des Céphalopodes, 1865: ser. 6, pl. 1-107; 1866: ser. 7, pl. 108-244; 1867: ser. 1, 712 p.; 1868: ser. 8, pl. 245-350; 1870: ser. 2, 263 p., ser. 9, pl. 351-460; 1874: ser. 3, 804 p.; 1877: ser. 4, 742 p., ser. 5, 743 p., supplement 1, 297 p.; supplement 2, pl. 461-544. Prague.Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S. 1963. Systema i filogenia Pseudorthoceratid. Bjulletyn moskoskogo obshestva Ispytately Prirody, Otdelny Geologia, 38(4): 149–150.Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S. 1968. K evolutii otryada Pseudorthoceratida (golovonogie Molluski). Vsesoyusnoe Paleontologicheskoie Obchestvo, Trudy XII Sessii Vsesoyusnovo Paleontologicheskovo Obchestvo, 1968:90–97.Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S. 1972. Posdneordovikskie i Silurskie mollyuski Kasachstana i Srednyei Asii. Isdatielstvo Nauka, Moscow, 109 p.Google Scholar
Bronn, H. G. 1835-38. Lethaea geognostica oder Abbildungen und Beschreibungen der für die Gebirgsarten kennzeichnenden Versteinerungen. Band 1. Schweizerbartsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, 544 p.Google Scholar
Brugière, J. G. 1789. Histoire naturelle des vers. Volume 1. Encyclopedie methodique, 6:1–757, Paris and Liège.Google Scholar
Chen, Ting-en. 1981. Some nautiloids from Xizang. The Series of the Comprehensive Scientific Expedition to the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau. Palaeontology of Xizang, 3:261–282. (In Chinese)Google Scholar
Croneis, C. 1926. New cephalopods from the Fayetteville Shale. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, 67:341–352.Google Scholar
Doguzhaeva, L. A., Mutvei, H., and Mapes, R. H. 1999. Early ontogeny of the siphuncle and shell in the Early Carboniferous Rayonnoceras (Actinocerida) from Arkansas, USA, p. 255–261. In Oloriz, F. and Rodriguez-Tovar, F. R. (eds.), Advancing Research on Living and Fossil Cephalopods. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dommergues, J.-L., and Meister, C. 1999. Cladistic formalisation of relationships within a superfamily of Lower Jurassic Ammonitina: Eoderocerataceae SPATH, 1929. Revue Paléobiologique Genéve, 18:273–286.Google Scholar
Dzik, J. 1984. Phylogeny of the Nautiloidea. Palaeontologica Polonica, 45:3–203.Google Scholar
Engeser, T. 1996. The position of the Ammonoidea within the Cephalopoda, p. 3–23. In Landman, N. H., Tanabe, K., and Davis, R. A. (eds.), Ammonoid Paleobiology. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erben, H. K. 1964. Bactritoidea, p. K491–519. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. K, Mollusca 3. Cephalopoda. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Felsenstein, J. 2002. Inferring Phylogenies. Sinauer Associates. Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1939. Study of Pseudorthoceratidae. Palaeontographica Americana, 11(10):1–214.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1940. The apical end of Actinoceras. Some Devonian Actinoceroidea. Journal of Paleontology, 14:436–442.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1946. Ordovician cephalopods from the Cincinnati region, Pt. 1. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 29(116):3–547.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1957. Study of the Actinoceratida, II. Macroloxoceras, a Devonian homeomorph of the Actinoceratida. New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, State Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Bulletin, 2:61–68.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1988. Progress and changing concepts in cephalopod and particularly nautiloid phylogeny and distribution, p. 17–24. In Wiedmann, J. and Kullmann, J. (eds.), Cephalopods Present and Past. Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhhandlung, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H., and Caster, K. E. 1935. The cephalopod fauna of the Conewango Series of the Upper Devonian in New York and Pennsylvania. Bulletin of American Paleontology, 22(75):1–74.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1924. Silurian cephalopods of northern Michigan. Contributions from the Museum of Geology, The University of Michigan, 2:19–120.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1929. The cephalopods of the Red River Formation of southern Manitoba. Journal of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 24:129–235.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1932. Black River and other cephalopods from Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ontario (Pt. 1). Journal of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 27:47–136.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F., and Teichert, C. 1930. The actinoceroids of east-central North America. Journal of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 25:201–296.Google Scholar
Foord, A. H. 1897. Monograph of the Carboniferous Cephalopoda of Ireland. Part I. Family Orthoceratidae. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 22 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girty, G. H. 1912. On some new genera and species of Pennsylvanian fossils from the Wewoka Formation of Oklahoma. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 21:119–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, M. 1965. Carboniferous cephalopods of Arkansas. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 460, 303 p.Google Scholar
Gudo, M. 2002. Soft body reconstructions of Palaeozoic corals: Implications for the system of Anthozoa (Coelenterata). Lethaia, 35:345–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Histon, K. 1998. A revision of A. H. Foord's monograph of Irish Carboniferous nautiloid cephalopods (1897-1901). Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 62 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
House, M. R. 1993. Fluctuations in ammonoid evolution and possible environmental controls, p. 13–34. In House, M. R. (ed.), The Ammonoidea: Environment, Ecology, and Evolutionary Change. Systematics Association Special Volume 47. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Hyatt, A. 1884. Genera of fossil cephalopods. Boston Society of Natural History Proceedings 22:273–338.Google Scholar
Hyatt, A. 1900. Cephalopoda, p. 502–604. In Zittel, K. A. and Eastmann, C. R. (eds.), Textbook of Palaeontology. Volume 1. MacMillan. New York.Google Scholar
Kiselev, G. N. 1971. Embryonalnye rakoviny silurskich michelinoceratin. Voprosy Paleontologii, 6:41–51.Google Scholar
Kiselev, G. N. 1998. Silurian cephalopods of northern Siberia. Sankt-Petersburg University, St. Petersburg, 94 p. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Kobayashi, T. 1937. Contribution to the study of the apical end of Ordovician nautiloids. Japanese Journal of Geology and Geography, 14:1–21.Google Scholar
Koninck, L. G. de. 1880. Faune de calcaire carbonifère de la Belgique, 2e partie, Gyroceras, Cyrtoceras, Gomphoceras, Orthoceras, Subclymenia et Goniatites. Annales du Musée Royal d'Histoire naturelle de Belgique, 5:1–133.Google Scholar
Kröger, B., and Mapes, R. H. 2004. Lower Carboniferous (Chesterian) embryonic orthoceratid nautiloids. Journal of Paleontology, 78:560–573.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kröger, B., and Mapes, R. H. 2005. Revision of some common Carboniferous genera of North American orthoceratid nautiloids. Journal of Paleontology, 79:954–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, O. 1940. Paläozoologie in Tabellen. Fischer Verlag, Jena, 50 p.Google Scholar
Liang, Xi-luo, and Ming-qian, Wang. 1991. Carboniferous cephalopods of Xinjiang. Palaeontologica Sinica, series B, 27:1–171. (In Chinese, with English summary, p. 141-161)Google Scholar
Manger, W. L. 1977. Stop descriptions–first day, p. 11–18. In Sutherland, P. K. and Manger, W. L. (eds.), Upper Chesterian–Morrowan Stratigraphy and the Mississippian–Pennsylvanian Boundary in Northeastern Oklahoma and Northwestern Arkansas. Oklahoma Geological Survey Guidebook, 18.Google Scholar
Manger, W. L., Meeks, L. K., and Stephen, D. A. 1999. Pathologic gigantism in Middle Carboniferous cephalopods, southern mid-continent, United States, p. 77–89. In Oloriz, F. and Rodriguez-Tovar, F. R. (eds.), Advancing Research on Living and Fossil Cephalopods. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McChesney, J. H. 1860. Descriptions of new species of fossils from the Paleozoic rocks of the western states, with illustrations. Transactions of the Chicago Academy of Science, 1:1–57.Google Scholar
McCoy, F. 1844. A Synopsis of the Characters of the Carboniferous Limestone Fossils of Ireland. Dublin, 207 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, A. K., and Garner, H. F. 1953. Lower Mississippian cephalopods of Michigan, Pt I, Orthoconic nautiloids. Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, The University of Michigan, 10(7):159–192.Google Scholar
Miller, A. K., and Youngquist, W. 1947. The discovery and significance of a cephalopod fauna in the Mississippian Caballero Formation of New Mexico. Journal of Paleontology, 21:113–117.Google Scholar
Mutvei, H. 1997. Characterization of actinoceratoid cephalopods by their siphuncular structure. Lethaia, 29:339–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutvei, H. 2002a. Connecting ring structure and its significance for classification of the orthoceratid cephalopods. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 47:157–168.Google Scholar
Mutvei, H. 2002b. Nautiloid systematics based on siphuncular structure and position of muscle scars. Abhandlungen der Geologischen Bundesanstalt, 57:379–392.Google Scholar
Niko, S. 1998. Kobayashiceras gifuense, a new actinocerid cephalopod from the Lower Devonian of Japan. Journal of Paleontology, 72:36–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, J. 1836. Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire, or a Description of the Strata and Organic Remains, Pt 2, The Mountain Limestone District. Murray, London, 253 p.Google Scholar
Poe, J., and Wiens, J. J. 2000. Character selection and the methology of morphological phylogenetics, p. 20–36. In Wiens, J. (ed.), Phylogenetic Analysis of Morphological Data. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Ristedt, H. 1968. Zur Revision der Orthoceratidae. Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur in Mainz, Abhandlungen der mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Klasse, 1968:211–287.Google Scholar
Ristedt, H. 1971. Zum Bau der orthoceriden Cephalopoden. Palaeontographica A, 137:155–195.Google Scholar
Saemann, L. 1852. Über die Nautiliden. Palaeontographica, 3:121–167.Google Scholar
Schindewolf, O. H. 1935. Bemerkungen zur Ontogenese der Actinoceren und Endoceren (Ceph., Nautil.). Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie, 74B:89–113.Google Scholar
Schindewolf, O. H. 1943. Über das Apikalende der Actinoceren. Jahrbuch des Reichsamtes für Bodenforschung, 62:207–247.Google Scholar
Serpagli, E., and Gnoli, M. 1977. Upper Silurian cephalopods from southwestern Sardinia. Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana, 16:153–196.Google Scholar
Shimansky, V. N. 1954. Pryamye nautiloidei i baktritoidei sakmarskogo i artinskogo yarusov Yushnogo Urala. Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskogo Instituta, Trudy, 44, 156 p.Google Scholar
Shimansky, V. N. 1962. Nadotryad Bactritidoidea, p. 229–242. In Ruzhencev, V. E. (ed.), Osnovy Paleontologii, Mollyuski-Geolovonogie I, Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Moscow.Google Scholar
Shimansky, V. N. 1996. New Carboniferous orthoceratids from Novaya Zemlya. Byulleten Moskovskogo Obshchevestva Ispytatelei Prirody Otdel Geologicheskii, 71(3):78–81. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Shimizu, S., and Obata, T. 1935. New genera of Gotlandian and Ordovician nautiloids. Shanghai Science Institute Journal, 2:1–10.Google Scholar
Stokes, C. 1840. On some species of Orthocerata. Transactions of the Geological Society of London, series 2, 5:705–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweet, W. C. 1964. Nautiloidea-Orthocerida, p. K216–K261. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. L. 2003. PAUP* homepage, http://paup.csit.fsu.edu/.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1933. Der Bau der actinoceroiden Cephalopoden. Palaeontographica A, 77:111–230.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1934. Untersuchungen an actinoceroiden Cephalopoden aus Nordgrönland. Meddelelser om Grønland, 92(19):1–47.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1964a. Actinoceratoidea, p. K190–K216. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1964b. Nautiloidea-Orthocerida, p. K320–K342. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1988. Main features in cephalopod evolution, p. 11–79. In Wilbur, K. M. (ed.), The Mollusca, 12, Paleontology and Neontology of Cephalopods. Academic Press, San Diego.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teichert, C., and Moore, R. C. 1964. Descriptions of Subclasses and Orders. Introductory Discussion, p. K127–K129. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Troedsson, G. T. 1926. On the Middle and Upper Ordovician faunas of northern Greenland, I. Cephalopods. Meddelelser om Grønland, 71:1–157.Google Scholar
Zhu, Mao-yan, and Li, Xue-sen. 1996. Early Ordovician actinoceroids from southern Jilin. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 35:349–361. (In Chinese, with English summary, p. 361-364).Google Scholar
Zhuravleva, F. A. 1978. Devonian Orthoceratoidea. Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskogo Instituta, Trudy, 168, 224 p. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Zhuravleva, F. A. 1989. Novye pseudorthoceratidi (Cephalopoda, Orthoceratida) is osnovania Karbona Mugodshar. Paleontologicheskii Zhurnal, 1989(1):36–41.Google Scholar
Zhuravleva, F. A., and Balashov, Z. G. 1981. On the early ontogenesis of the actinoceroids. Paleontological Journal, 15(4):14–27.Google Scholar
Zittel, K. A. v. 1923. Grundzüge der Paläontologie. Volume 1. R. Oldenbourg. München, Berlin, 710 p.Google Scholar