Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:46:30.095Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Camerate crinoids from the Nunn Member (Tournaisian, Osagean) of the Lower Mississippian Lake Valley Formation, New Mexico

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Elizabeth C. Rhenberg  and
Thomas W. Kammer
Elizabeth C. Rhenberg
Affiliation:
School of Earth Sciences, 155 South Oval Mall, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA,
Thomas W. Kammer
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geography, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506-6300, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Nunn Member (early Osagean) of the Lake Valley Formation of New Mexico is known for its abundance and diversity of crinoids. Although crinoids were first reported in the late 1800s, no comprehensive study of the crinoids has been conducted and a complete list of the crinoid taxa does not exist. All subclasses of crinoids occur in the Lake Valley, but the camerates are by far the dominant group. Study of the Macurda collection from the University of Michigan, the Laudon collection from the University of New Mexico, and new collections provided more than 7000 specimens, 4,500 of which were identifiable camerates. Sixty-one species of camerates are recognized in the Nunn Member, including five new species: Blairocrinus macurdai, Iotacrinus novamexicanus, Agaricocrinus alamogordoensis, Uperocrinus kuesi, and Collicrinus laudoni. This camerate fauna is very similar to that of the lower Burlington Limestone of the Mississippi Valley. An update of the crinoid taxa in the Lake Valley Formation allows for a better understanding of the temporal and geographic relationships of crinoid faunas across North American during the Early Mississippian when camerates were at their global diversity maximum. The majority of the camerates come from the western New Mexico outcrops where the Nunn Member is thicker and the marine shelf was shallower, but several also occur in association with the deep-water Waulsortian mounds.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 87 , Issue 2 , March 2013 , pp. 312 - 340
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

Anonymous. 1881. Note on Lake Valley Fauna. The American Naturalist, 15:671.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2006. Stratigraphical and geographical distribution of Mississippian (Lower Carboniferous) Crinoidea from England and Wales. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 56:91–109.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2008. Generic concepts in the Amphoracrinidae Bather, 1899 (Class Crinoidea) and evaluation of generic assignments of North American species. Journal of Paleontology, 82:1139–1149.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2009. Generic concepts in the Platycrinitidae Austin and Austin, 1842 (Class Crinoidea). Journal of Paleontology, 83:694–717.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2010. Generic concepts in the Batocrinidae Wachsmuth and Springer, 1881 (Class Crinoidea). Journal of Paleontology, 84:32–50.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Sevastopulo, G. D. 2001. The Lower Carboniferous (Tournaisian) crinoids from Hook Head, County Wexford, Ireland. Monograph of the Palaeontological Society 617, 136p.Google Scholar
Austin, T. 1848. Observations on the Cystidea of M. Von Buch, and the Crinoidea generally. Geological Society of London, Quarterly Journal, 4:291–294.Google Scholar
Austin, T. Sr. and Austin, T. Jr. 1842. XVIII—Proposed arrangement of the Echinodermata, particularly as regards the Crinoidea, and a subdivision of the Class Adelostella (Echinidae). Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 1, 10:106–113.Google Scholar
Austin, T. Sr. and Austin, T. Jr. 1843 –1847. A monograph on recent and fossil Crinoidea, with figures and descriptions of some Recent and fossil allied genera. London and Bristol, England. 1 (2):1–32(1843); 1(3):33–48 (1844); 1(4):49–64 (1845); 1(5):65–80 (1846); 1(6–8):81–128 (1847).Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. 1938. Pelmatozoa Palaeozoica. InQuenstedt, W.(ed.)Fossilium catalogus, I: Animalia. Part 83. W. Junk, s'Gravenhage, 194p.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. and Moodey, M. W. 1943. Bibliographic and faunal index of Paleozoic pelmatozoan echinoderms. Geological Society of America Special Paper 45, 734p.Google Scholar
Bather, F. A. 1899. A phylogenetic classification of the Pelmatozoa. British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1898, p. 916–923.Google Scholar
Baumiller, T. K., Salamon, M. A., Gorzelak, P., Mooi, R., Messing, C. G., and Gahn, F. J. 2010. Post-Paleozoic crinoid radiation in response to benthic predation preceded the Mesozoic marine revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107:5893–5896.Google Scholar
Bowsher, A. L. 1954. The stratigraphic significance of a crinoid from the Redwall Limestone of Arizona. Journal of Paleontology, 28:113–116.Google Scholar
Bowsher, A. L. 1955. New genera of Mississippian camerate crinoids. Echinodermata Article 1, University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, 23p.Google Scholar
Bowsher, A. L. 1978. Family Actinocrinitidae, T452–T462. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, K.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Vol. 2, Pt. T. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder, Colorado and Lawerence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Breimer, A. 1962. A monograph on Spanish Paleozoic crinoidea. Overdruk uit Leidse Geologische Mededelingen, Deel 27, 190p.Google Scholar
Brezinski, D. K. 2000. Lower Mississippian trilobites from southern New Mexico. Journal of Paleontology, 74:1043–1064.Google Scholar
Broadhead, T. W. 1981. Carboniferous camerate crinoid subfamily, Dichocrininae. Palaeontographica, Abt. A, 176:81–157.Google Scholar
Bronn, H. G. 1849. Index palaeontologicus, unter Mitwirking der Herren Prof. H. R. Göppert und H. von Meyer. Handbuch einer Geschichte der Nature, 5, Abt. 1, A. Nomenclator Palaeontologicus, 1381p.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1965. The genus, Steganocrinus. Journal of Paleontology, 39:773–793.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1967. The actinocrinitid genera Abactinocrinus, Aacocrinus and Blairocrinus. Journal of Paleontology, 41:675–705.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1969. Crinoids, Chapter 12, p. 475–543. InMcKee, E. D. and Gutschick, R. C., History of the Redwall Limestone of northern Arizona. Geological Society of America Memoir 114.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1978. Camerates, p. T244–T263. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, K.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Vol. 1, Pt. T. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder, Colorado and Lawerence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Cope, E. D. 1882. Invertebrate fossils from the Lake Valley district. The American Naturalist, 16:158–159Google Scholar
Davydov, V. I., Korn, D., and Schmitz, M. D. 2012. The Carboniferous Period, p. 603–651. InGradstein, F. M., Ogg, J. G., Schmitz, M. D., and Ogg, G. M.(eds.), The Geologic Time Scale 2012. Elsevier, Oxford.Google Scholar
Gahn, F. J. and Kammer, T. W. 2002. The cladid crinoid Barycrinus from the Burlington Limestone (early Osagean) and the phylogenetics of the Mississippian botryocrinids. Journal of Paleontology, 76:123–133.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1858. Palaeontology of Iowa, Chapter 8, p. 473–724. InHall, J. and Whitney, J. D., Report of the Geological Survey of the State of Iowa: Embracing the Results of Investigations made during portions of the years 1855, 1856 and 1857, v. 1, part II;Palaeontology, p. 473–724, 29 pl., index to Part II separately paginated, 3p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1859. Contributions to the palaeontology of Iowa, being descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and other fossils. Supplement to vol. I, part II, of the Geological Report of Iowa, 92p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861a. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Journal of the Boston Society of Natural History, 3:261–328.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861b. Descriptions of new species of crinoidea; from investigations of the Iowa Geological Survey, Preliminary notice. C. van Benthuysen, Albany, New York, 18p.Google Scholar
Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. A. T., and Ryan, P. D. 2001. Paleontological Statistics (PAST) v. 2.03. <http://folk.uio.no/ohammer/past/>..>Google Scholar
Jeffery, D. L. and Stanton, R. J. Jr. 1996. Growth history of Lower Mississippian Waulsortian mounds; distribution, stratal patterns, and geometries, New Mexico. Facies. 35:29–58.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 2006. The “Age of Crinoids”: a Mississippian biodiversity spike coincident with widespread carbonate ramps. Palaios, 21:238–248.Google Scholar
Keyes, C. R. 1894. Paleontology of Missouri, part I: Missouri Geological Survey, 4:143–225.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1944. Cribanocrinus, a new rhodocrinoid genus. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 34:13–16.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1946. Plemnocrinus, a new crinoid genus from the Lower Misissippian. Journal of Paleontology, 20:435–441.Google Scholar
Konninck, L. G. DE and Le Hon, H. 1854. Recherches sur les crinoïdes du terrain carbonifère de la Belgiqu. Academie Royal de Belgique, Mèmoir, 28 (3), 215p.Google Scholar
Kues, B. S. 1986. Paleontology of the Caballero and Lake Valley formations (Lower Mississippian) west of the Rio Grande, south-central New Mexico; Truth or Consequences region. Guidebook—New Mexico Geological Society, 37:203–214.Google Scholar
Kues, B. S. 2008. Mississippian. In The Paleontology of New Mexico. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM, United States, 96:113.Google Scholar
Lane, H. R. 1974. Mississippian of Southeastern New Mexico and West Texas–a wedge-on-wedge relation. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 58:269–282.Google Scholar
Lane, H. R. 1984. Distribution of the Waulsortian facies (Early Mississippian) in North America; Limestones of the Mid-Continent. Tulsa Geological Society Special Publication, 2:259–271.Google Scholar
Lane, H. R. and Brenckle, P. L. 2005. Type Mississippian subdivisions and biostratigraphic succession, p. 83–107. InHeckel, P. H.(ed.), Stratigraphy and Biostratigraphy of the Mississippian Subsystem (Carboniferous System) in its Type Region, the Mississippi River Valley of Illinois, Missouri and Iowa. International Union of Geological Sciences Subcommission on Carboniferous Stratigraphy, Guidebook for Field Conference, St. Louis, Missouri, 8–13 September 2001. Illinois State Geological Survey, Guidebook 34.Google Scholar
Lane, H. R., Sandberg, C. A., and Ziegler, W. 1980. Taxonomy and phylogeny of some Lower Carboniferous conodonts and preliminary standard post-Siphonodella zonation. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 14:117–164.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1963. Two new Mississippian camerate (Batocrinidae) crinoid genera. Journal of Paleontology, 37:691–702.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1978a. Family Batocrinidae Wachsmuth and Springer, 1881, p. T466–T471. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, K.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Vol. 2, Pt. T. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1978b. Family Platycrinitidae Austin and Austin, 1842, p. T515–T519. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, K.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Vol. 2, Pt. T. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G., Sevastopulo, G. D., and Strimple, H. L. 1985. Amphipsalidocrinus; a monocyclic camerate microcrinoid. Journal of Paleontology, 59:79–84.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1933. The stratigraphy and paleontology of the Gilmore City Formation of Iowa. University of Iowa Studies, 15:1–74.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1973. Stratigraphic crinoid zonation in Iowa Mississippian rocks. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science, 80:25–33.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. and Bowsher, A. L. 1949. Mississippian formations of southwestern New Mexico. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 60:1–37.Google Scholar
Lee, K., Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 2005. Crinoids from the Nada Member of the Borden Formation (Lower Mississippian) in eastern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 79:337–355.Google Scholar
Lyon, S. S. and Casseday, S. A. 1859. Description of nine new species of crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana and Kentucky. American Journal of Science and Arts, ser. 2, 28:233–246.Google Scholar
McChesney, J. H. 1861. Descriptions of new fossils from the Paleozoic rocks of the western states. Transactions of the Chicago Academy of Science, 2:77–95.Google Scholar
McChesney, J. H. 1868. Descriptions of fossils from the Palaeozoic rocks of the western states. Transactions of the Chicago Academy of Science, 1:1–57.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. 1872. Preliminary list of the fossils collected by Dr. Hayden's exploring expedition of 1871, in Utah and Wyoming territories, with descriptions of a few new species, p. 373–377. InHayden, F. V., Preliminary report of the U.S. Geological Survey of Montana and portions of adjacent territories, preliminary report(fifth annual).Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1860. Descriptions of new species of crinoidea and echinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of Illinois, and other western states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 12:379–397.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1865. Descriptions of new species of crinoidea, etc. from the Paleozoic rocks of Illinois and some of the adjoining states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 17:143–155.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1866a. Descriptions of invertebrates from the Carboniferous system. Illinois Geological Survey, 2:143–411.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1866b. Contributions to the palaeontology of Illinois and other western states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, for 1865, 17:251–274.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1868a. Remarks on some types of Carboniferous crinoidea, with descriptions of new genera and species of the same, and of one echinoid. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 20:335–359.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1868b. Palaeontology of Illinois. Illinois Geological Survey, 3:289–565.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1869. Descriptions of new Carboniferous fossils from the western States. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 22:137–172.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1870. Descriptions of new Carboniferous fossils from the western States. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 21:137–172.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1873. Palaeontology, Descriptions of invertebrates from Carboniferous System. Illinois Geological Survey, 5:323–619.Google Scholar
Miller, J. S. 1821. A natural history of the Crinoidea, or lily-shaped animals; with observations on the genera, Asteria, Euryale, Comatula and Marsupites. Bryan and Co., Bristol, England, 150p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1881. Subcarboniferous fossils from the Lake Valley Mining District of New Mexico, with descriptions of new species. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 4 (4):306–315.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1889. North American geology and paleontology. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati, 664p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1891a. A description of some Lower Carboniferous crinoids. Geological Survey of Missouri Bulletin 4, 40p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1891b. Palaeontology, advance sheets. Indiana Department of Geology and Natural Resources, 17th Annual Report, 103p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1892. North American geology and paleontology, first appendix. Cincinnati, Western Methodist Book Concern, p. 665–718.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1897. Second appendix to North American geology and palaeontology. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati, p. 719–793.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1890. Description of some new genera and species of Echinodermata from the Coal Measures and Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana, Missouri, and Iowa. Journal Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 13:1–25.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1893. Description of some new species of invertebrates from the Palaeozoic rocks of Illinois and adjacent states. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 3, 81p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1894. New genera and species of Echinodermata. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 5, 53p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1895. New and interesting species of Palaeozoic fossils. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 7, 89p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1896a. Description of new and remarkable fossils from the Palaeozoic rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 8, 65p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1896b. New species of Echinodermata and a new crustacean from the Palaeozoic rocks. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 10, 91p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1897. New species of crinoids, cephalopods, and other Palaeozoic fossils. Illinois State Museum Bulletin 12, 69p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. 1952. Evolution rates among crinoids. Journal of Paleontology, 26:338–352.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. and Laudon, L. R. 1942. Megaliocrinus, a new camerate crinoid genus from the Morrow Series of northeastern Oklahoma. Denison University Bulletin, Journal of the Scientific Laboratories, 37:67–76.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. and Laudon, L. R. 1943. Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids. Geological Society of America Special Paper 46, 151p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. and Laudon, L. R. 1944. Class Crinoidea, p. 137–209. InShimer, H. W. and Shrock, R. R., Index fossils of North America. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Müster, G. G. 1839 –1846.Beschreibung einiger neuen Crinoideen aus der Uebergangs-formation. Beitrage zur Petrefacten-Kunde, 7 vols.Google Scholar
Owen, D. D. and Shumard, B. F. 1850. Descriptions of fifteen new species of Crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous limestone of Iowa, Wisconsin and Minnesota in the years 1848–1849. Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, series 2, 2:57–70.Google Scholar
Owen, D. D. and Shumard, B. F. 1852. Descriptions of seven new species of crinoidea from the subcarboniferous of Iowa and Illinois. Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, series 2, 2:89–94.Google Scholar
Peck, R. E. and Keyte, I. A. 1938. The Crinoidea of the Chouteau Limestone. InBranson, E. B.(ed), Stratigraphy and paleontology of the Lower Mississippian of Missouri, Pt. 2:Missouri University Studies, 13 (4):70–108.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. 1836. Illustrations of the geology of Yorkshire, or a description of the strata and organic remains, Pt. 2, The Mountain Limestone districts, second edition. John Murray, London, p. 203–208.Google Scholar
Roemer, F. A. 1855. Erste Periode, Kohlen-Gebirge, 788 p. InBronn, H. G.(ed.), Lethaea Geognostica (third edition), 2. E. Schweizerbart, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Sallan, L. C., Kammer, T. W., Aausich, W. I., and Cook, L. A. 2011. Persistent predator-prey dynamics revealed by mass extinction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108:8335–8338.Google Scholar
Shumard, B. F. 1855. Description of new species of organic remains. Missouri Geological Survey, 2:185–208.Google Scholar
Shumard, B. F. 1865 –1866. Catalogue of Palaeozoic fossils, Part 1, Echinodermata. Transactions of the St. Louis Academy Science, 1865, 2:334–394; 1866, p. 395–407.Google Scholar
Shumard, B. F. 1868. A catalogue of the Palaeozoic fossils of North America : Part I, Paleozoic Echinodermata: Transactions of the St. Louis Academy of Science, 1866, 2:334–407.Google Scholar
Springer, F. 1884. On the occurrence of the lower Burlington limestone in New Mexico. American Journal of Science, 27:97–103.Google Scholar
Strimple, H. L. and Koenig, J. W. 1956. Mississippian microcrinoids from Oklahoma and New Mexico. Journal of Paleontology, 30:1225–1247.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1953. Classe des Crinoïdes, p. 658–773. InPiveteau, J.(ed.), Traité de paléontologie, vol. 3. Masson and Cie, Paris.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978a. Skeletal Morphology of Fossil Crinoids, p. T59–T216. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, K.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Vol. 1, Pt. T. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978b. Camerata, p. T408–T519. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, K.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Vol. 2, Pt. T. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1878. Transition-forms in crinoids and descriptions of five new species. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 29:224–266.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1880 –1886. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Pt. I. The families Ichthyocrinidae and Cyathocrinidae (1880):226–378, (separate repaged p. 1–153); Pt. II. Family Sphaeroidocrinidae, with the sub-families Platycrinidae, Rhodocrinidae, and Actinocrinidae (1881):177–411 (separate repaged, p. 1–237); Pt. III, Sec. 1. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1885):225–364 (separate repaged, p. 1–138); Pt. III, Sec. 2. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1886):64–226(separate repaged to continue with section 1, 139–302).Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1889. Actinocrinites nodobrachiatus, p. 219. InMiller, S. A.(ed.), North American Geology and Paleontology. Cincinnati, Western Methodist Book Concern, 664 p.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1890. New species of crinoids and blastoids from the Kinderhook Group of the Lower Carboniferous rocks at LeGrand, Iowa, and a new genus from the Niagaran Group of Western Tennessee. Illinois Geological Survey, vol. 8, pt. 2, Palaeontology of Illinois, sec. 2, p. 155–206.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1897. The North American Crinoidea Camerata. Harvard College Museum of Comparative Zoology Memoirs 20 and 21, 897p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 2002. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids, coronates, and hemistreptocrinoids 1758–1999. Geological Society of America Special Paper 363, 2335p. (Online)Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. and Lane, N. G. 1987. Crinoids from the Anchor Limestone (Lower Mississippian) of the Monte Cristo Group Southern Nevada. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions Paper 119, 55p.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1862. Description of new species of fossils from the Devonian and Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 9:8–33.Google Scholar
Witzke, B. J. and Bunker, B. J. 2002. Bedrock geology in the Burlington area, southeast Iowa. Iowa Department of Natural Resources Guidebook. 23:53–74.Google Scholar
Wright, J. 1942. New British Carboniferous crinoids. Geological Magazine, 79:269–283.Google Scholar
Wright, J. 1950 –1960. The British Carboniferous Crinoidea. Palaeontographical Society, Monograph, 1(1):1–24, 1950; 1(2):25–46, 1951a; 1(3):47–102, 1951b; 1(4):103–148, 1952a; 1(5):149–190,1954a; 2(1):191–254, 1955a; 2(2):255–272, 1955b; 2(3):273–306, 1956b; 2(4):307–328,1958; 2(5):329–347 1960.Google Scholar