Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:52:29.081Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ontogeny and relationships of Trinucleoidea (Trilobita)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Brian D. E. Chatterton ,
Gregory D. Edgecombe ,
Stephen E. Speyer ,
Allen S. Hunt  and
Richard A. Fortey
Brian D. E. Chatterton
Affiliation:
1Department of Geology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E3, Canada
Gregory D. Edgecombe
Affiliation:
1Department of Geology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E3, Canada
Stephen E. Speyer
Affiliation:
21676 West Village Way, Tempe, Arizona 85282
Allen S. Hunt
Affiliation:
3Department of Geology, University of Vermont, Burlington, 05405-0122
Richard A. Fortey
Affiliation:
4Department of Palaeontology, The Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, Great Britain
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Protaspides and later growth stages are described and discussed for the Ordovician trinucleid trilobite Cryptolithus tesselatus Green and the raphiophorid Lonchodomas chaziensis Shaw. A small triangular rostral plate is described for a single protaspid instar in both Cryptolithus and Lonchodomas. The presence of this small sclerite in the ontogeny of these taxa supports the origin of the Trinucleoidea from the Ptychopariida through reduction in and then fusion or loss of the rostral plate. Earlier and later growth stages have fused ventral sclerites, with no signs of connective sutures. All members of the Trinucleoidea with known ontogenies share similar small, ovoid asaphoid protaspides, with distinct axes and varying numbers of sharp, conical to subtubular, submarginal spines on the dorsal exoskeleton and marginal spines on the hypostome. Two protaspid instars are identified in both Cryptolithus and Lonchodomas, sharing many characters that indicate homologous levels of development. A single origin for the median suture of the Asaphida is supported, with an anterior rostellum as its precursor.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 68 , Issue 3 , May 1994 , pp. 523 - 540
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

Angelin, N. P. 1854. Palaeontologia Scandanavica. Pars I. Crustacea formationis transitionis. Fasc. II. Lipsiae (T.O. Weigel), Lundae, p. 21–92.Google Scholar
Barrande, J. 1852. Systême Silurien du centre de la Bohême. 1ère partie. Recherches paléontologiques, Vol. 1, Crustacés: Trilobites. Published by the author, Prague and Paris, 3 + 935 p.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. 1915. Bibliographic index of American Ordovician and Silurian fossils. Smithsonian Institution, United States National Museum, Bulletin 92, 1,251 p.Google Scholar
Bergström, J. 1973. Organization, life and systematics of trilobites. Fossils and Strata, 2, 69 p.Google Scholar
Butts, C. 1941. Geology of the Appalachian Valley in Virginia. Part II. Fossil plates and explanations. Virginia Geological Survey Bulletin 52, 271 p.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E., Siveter, D. J., Edgecombe, G. D., and Hunt, A. S. 1990. Larvae and relationships of the Calymenina (Trilobita). Journal of Paleontology, 64:255–277.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E., and Speyer, S. E.In press. Ontogeny of Trilobita. In Kaesler, R. L. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part O, revised edition. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Cisne, J. L. 1973. Beecher's trilobite bed revisited: ecology of an Ordovician deepwater fauna. Postilla, 160, 25 p.Google Scholar
Cooper, B. N. 1953. Trilobites from the Lower Champlainian formations of the Appalachian Valley. Geological Society of America, Memoir 55, 69 p.Google Scholar
Edgecombe, G. D. 1992. Trilobite phylogeny and the Cambrian–Ordovician “event”: cladistic reappraisal, p. 144–177. In Novacek, M. J. and Wheeler, Q. D. (eds.), Extinction and Phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A. 1990. Ontogeny, hypostome attachment and trilobite classification. Palaeontology, 33:529–576.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Chatterton, B. D. E. 1988. Classification of the trilobite suborder Asaphina. Palaeontology, 31:165–222.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Morris, S. F. 1978. Discovery of nauplius-like trilobite larvae. Palaeontology, 21:821–833.Google Scholar
Gill, E. D. 1949. Prosopon, a term to replace the biologically erroneous term ornament. Journal of Paleontology, 23:572.Google Scholar
Green, J. 1832. A monograph of the trilobites of North America. Joseph Brano, Philadelphia, 93 p.Google Scholar
Harrington, H. J. 1959. Classification, p. O145–O170. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part O, Arthropoda 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Harrington, H. J., Moore, R. C., and Stubblefield, C. J. 1959. Morphological terms applied to Trilobita, p. O117–O126. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part O, Arthropoda 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Hauser, D. L., and Presche, W. 1991. The effect of ordered characters on phylogenetic reconstruction. Cladistics, 7:243–265.Google Scholar
Hawle, I., and Corda, A. 1847. Prodrom einiger Monographie der böhmischen Trilobiten. Abhandlungen Königlichen Böhmischen Gesselschaft der Wissenschaften, Prague, 176 p.Google Scholar
Hisinger, W. 1840. Lethaea Svecica seu petrificata Sveciae, supplementa secundi. Holmiae, 11 p.Google Scholar
Hu, C.-H. 1971. Ontogeny and sexual dimorphism of lower Paleozoic Trilobita. Palaeontographica Americana, 44:30–155.Google Scholar
Hu, C.-H. 1975. Ontogenies of four species of silicified Middle Ordovician trilobites from Virginia. Proceedings of the Geological Society of China, 18:115–127.Google Scholar
Hughes, C. P. 1971. The Ordovician trilobite faunas of the Builth-Llandrindod Inlier, central Wales. III. Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Geology), 20:115–182.Google Scholar
Hunt, A. S. 1964. Trilobite growth, variation and instar development. Unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 234 p.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R. 1991. The median suture of Asaphida: a monophyletic character? The Trilobite Papers, 3:11–13.Google Scholar
Maslin, T. P. 1952. Morphological criteria of phylogenetic relationships. Systematic Zoology, 1:49–70.Google Scholar
M'Coy, F. 1849. On the classification of some British fossil Crustacea, with notices of new forms in the university collection at Cambridge. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (London), 2, 4:161–179, 392–414.Google Scholar
Mickevich, M. F., and Weller, S. J. 1990. Evolutionary character analysis: tracing character change on a cladogram. Cladistics, 6:137–170.Google Scholar
Nelson, G. 1978. Ontogeny, phylogeny, paleontology, and the biogenetic law. Systematic Zoology, 27:324–345.Google Scholar
Nowlan, G. S., McCracken, A. D., and Chatterton, B. D. E. 1988. Conodonts from the Ordovician–Silurian boundary strata, Whittaker Formation, Mackenzie Mountains, Northwest Territories, Canada. Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 373, 98 p.Google Scholar
Öpik, A. A. 1967. The Mindyallan Fauna of north-western Queensland. Bulletin of the Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics of Australia. 74 (2 vols.), 104 p., 167 p.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. R. 1960. Trilobites from the Upper Cambrian Dunderberg Shale, Eureka District, Nevada. U. S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 334-C, 109 p.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. R. 1965. Trilobites of the Late Cambrian Pterocephaliid Biomere in the Great Basin, western United States. U. S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 493, 105 p.Google Scholar
Platnick, N. I. 1989. Cladistics and phylogenetic analysis today, p. 17–24. In Ferholm, B., Bremer, K., and Jörnvall, H. (eds.), The Hierarchy of Life. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Przibram, H. 1931. Connecting laws of animal morphology. Four lectures held at the University of London, March, 1929. London University Press, London, 62 p.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1920. Some new Ordovician trilobites. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, 64:273–296.Google Scholar
Robison, R. A. 1964. Late Middle Cambrian faunas from western Utah. Journal of Paleontology, 38:510–566.Google Scholar
Sars, M. 1835. Über einige neue oder unvollstöndig bekannte Trilobiten. Isis, Jena, for 1835:334–343.Google Scholar
Shaw, F. C. 1968. Early Middle Ordovician Chazy trilobites of New York. New York State Museum and Science Service, Memoir 17, 163 p.Google Scholar
Speyer, S. E., and Chatterton, B. D. E. 1989. Trilobite larvae and larval ecology. Historical Biology, 3:27–60.Google Scholar
Swinnerton, H. H. 1915. Suggestions for a revised classification of trilobites. Geological Magazine, 2:487–496, 538–545.Google Scholar
Tripp, R. P., and Evitt, W. R. 1986. Silicified trilobites of the family Asaphidae from the Middle Ordovician of Virginia. Palaeontology, 29:705–724.Google Scholar
Ulrich, E. O. 1878. Descriptions of some new species of fossils from the Cincinnati Group. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 1:92–100.Google Scholar
Vogdes, A. W. 1893. A classed and annotated bibliography of the Paleozoic Crustacea 1698–1892 to which is added a catalogue of North American species. Occasional Papers of the California Academy of Sciences, 4, 412 p.Google Scholar
Weston, P. H. 1988. Indirect and direct methods in systematics, p. 27–56. In Humphries, C. J. (ed.), Ontogeny and Systematics, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Q. D. 1990. Ontogeny and character phylogeny. Cladistics, 6:225–268.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1941a. The Trinucleidae—with special reference to North American genera and species. Journal of Paleontology, 15:21–41.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1941b. Silicified Trenton trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 15:492–522.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1957. The ontogeny of trilobites. Biological Reviews, 32:421–469.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1959a. Silicified Middle Ordovician trilobites: Remopleurididae, Trinucleidae, Raphiophoridae, Endymionidae. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, 121:371–496.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1959b. Ontogeny of Trilobita, p. O127–O144. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part O, Arthropoda 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1968. Cryptolithus (Trilobita): specific characters and occurrence in Ordovician of eastern North America. Journal of Paleontology, 42:720-714.Google Scholar