Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T23:13:53.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Belichnus new ichnogenus, a ballistic trace on mollusc shells from the Holocene of the Benguela region, South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

John Pether*
Affiliation:
Department of Cenozoic Palaeontology, South African Museum, P.O. Box 61, Cape Town, 8000, South Africa

Abstract

Small holes of irregular outline and mainly 0.2 to 1.5 mm in diameter are present in the exteriors of molluscan shells obtained from the latest Quaternary transgressive sequence on the Orange Shelf, Benguela region, off southwestern Africa. In shell interiors, the shell surrounding the holes is broken out to form flaring, conical spalls. The holes are clearly not borings, but are punctures caused by a small, pointed object having been forcefully driven into the shell. The holes in bivalves occur preferentially in small, thin-shelled tellinids and are nonrandomly placed in the central portions of valves. It is proposed that the holes are praedichnia produced by the rapid, ballistic-like raptorial strikes of spearing stomatopods, the pointed dactyl tips having penetrated the shells. Associated evidence of shell smashing, consisting of large holes in valves and gastropod whorls, supports the suggestion of stomatopod activity. The only stomatopod that inhabits the Benguela ecosystem, the spearer Pterygosquilla armata capensis Manning, 1969, is the probable tracemaker. Although shell nearly 1 mm thick has been pierced, the apparent selection of thin-shelled tellinids (0.14 to 0.34 mm thick) may reflect the requirement of shelling smashing in order to access the tissues. Nevertheless, the spearing of shelled prey is atypical for stomatopods and therefore confirmatory zoological observations are required, particularly to clarify the context of shell spearing. The ichnogenus Belichnus is proposed to accommodate these unique traces of pointed impacts, with ichnospecies B. monos (single punctures) and B. dusos (combined punctures) to accommodate the main morphological varieties observed.

Type
Research Article
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

Abelló, P., and Macpherson, E. 1990. Influence of environmental conditions on the distribution of Pterygosquilla armata capensis (Crustacea: Stomatopoda) off Namibia. South African Journal of Marine Science, 9:169175.Google Scholar
Arnold, J. M., and Arnold, K. O. 1969. Some aspects of hole-boring by Octopus vulgaris . American Zoologist, 9:991996.Google Scholar
Barnard, K. H. 1964. Contributions to the knowledge of South African marine molluscs. Part V. Lamellibranchiata. Annals of the South African Museum, 47:361593.Google Scholar
Bromley, R. G. 1981. Concepts in ichnotaxonomy illustrated by small round holes in shells. Acta Geologica Hispanica, 16:5564.Google Scholar
Burrows, M. 1969. The mechanics and neural control of the prey capture strike in the mantid shrimps Squilla and Hemisquilla . Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Physiologie, 62:361381.Google Scholar
Caldwell, R. L. 1987. Assessment strategies in stomatopods. Bulletin of Marine Science, 41:135150.Google Scholar
Caldwell, R. L. 1991. Stomatopods: the better to see you with my dear. Australian Natural History, 23:696705.Google Scholar
Caldwell, R. L., and Dingle, H. 1975. Ecology and evolution of agonistic behaviour in stomatopods. Naturwissenschaften, 62:214222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, R. L., and Dingle, H. 1976. Stomatopods. Scientific American, 234:8189.Google Scholar
Checa, A. 1993. Non-predatory shell damage in Recent deep-endobenthic bivalves from Spain. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 100:309331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geary, D. H., Allmon, W. D., and Reaka-Kudla, M. L. 1991. Stomatopod predation on fossil gastropods from the Plio-Pleistocene of Florida. Journal of Paleontology, 65:355360.Google Scholar
Griffiths, C. L., and Blaine, M. J. 1988. Distribution, population structure and biology of stomatopod crustacea off the west coast of South Africa. South African Journal of Marine Science, 7:4550.Google Scholar
Kelley, P. H. 1988. Predation by Miocene gastropods of the Chesapeake Group: stereotyped and predictable. Palaios, 3:436448.Google Scholar
Kilburn, R., and Rippey, E. 1982. Sea Shells of Southern Africa. Macmillan South Africa, Johannesburg, 249 p.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae (Editio decima, reformata). Volume 1, Regnum animale. L. Salvii, Stockholm, 824 p.Google Scholar
Manning, R. B. 1969. Notes on some stomatopod crustacea from southern Africa. Smithsonian Contributions of Zoology, 1:117.Google Scholar
Nixon, M., and Maconnachie, E. 1988. Drilling of Octopus vulgaris (Mollusca: Cephalapoda) in the Mediterranean. Journal of Zoology, London, 216:687716.Google Scholar
Pether, J. 1993. Relict shells of Subantartic Mollusca from the Orange Shelf, Benguela Region, off southwestern Africa. The Veliger, 36:276284.Google Scholar
Reaka, M. L. 1980. On learning and living in holes by mantis shrimp. Animal Behaviour, 28:111115.Google Scholar
Schram, F. R. 1986. Crustacea. Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 606 p.Google Scholar
Sowerby, G. B. 1889. Some further notes on marine shells collected at Port Elizabeth, South Africa, with descriptions of some new species. Journal of Conchology, 6:615.Google Scholar
Sowerby, G. B. 1892. Marine Shells of South Africa. Sowerby, London, 89 p.Google Scholar
Sowerby, G. B. 1904. Molluscs of South Africa (Pelecypoda). Marine Investigations in South Africa, 4:119.Google Scholar
Thiele, J., and Jaeckel, S. 1931. Muscheln der Deutschen Tiefsee Expedition. Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Deutschen Tiefsee Expedition “Valdivia,” 21:161268.Google Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1978. Biogeography and Adaptation: Patterns of Marine Life. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 332 p.Google Scholar