Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:27:11.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Odontopleura (Trilobita, Silurian), and a method of constrained congruency analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Jonathan M. Adrain  and
Brian D. E. Chatterton
Jonathan M. Adrain
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E3, Canada
Brian D. E. Chatterton
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E3, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Odontopleura (Odontopleura) arctica, a new species of odontopleurine trilobite, is described from the Canadian Arctic. A method of cladistic analysis is detailed. Parsimony analysis should be performed treating all characters as unordered. The universe of directed trees implied by the resulting rootless network(s) can then be examined and a preferred tree selected by a criterion of congruency. Namely, the most parsimonious directed tree that accommodates the most congruent arrangement of character-states should be taken as the preferred cladogram. Since this is essentially a general congruency method operating within the constraints of parsimony, it is termed “constrained congruency.” The method is applied to the genus Odontopleura, resulting in the recognition of two major species groups, the nominate subgenus and Sinespinaspis n. subgen. Odontopleura (Ivanopleura) dufrenoyi Barrande is tentatively included in the genus, but considered too poorly known for cladistic analysis. Species assigned to Odontopleura (Odontopleura) include Odontopleura ovata Emmrich, Odontopleura brevigena Chatterton and Perry, Odontopleura (Odontopleura) arctica n. sp., and Diacanthaspis serotina Apollonov. Species assigned to Sinespinaspis n. subgen. include Taemasaspis llandoveryana Šnajdr, Odontopleura greenwoodi Chatterton and Perry, Odontopleura maccallai Chatterton and Perry, and Odontopleura nehedensis Chatterton and Perry. Odontopleura bombini Chatterton and Perry is tentatively placed in synonymy with Odontopleura nehedensis. The genus had a wide distribution throughout the Early and Middle Silurian, due to preferences for deep-water, distal shelf or shelf-slope transition zone habitats.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 64 , Issue 4 , July 1990 , pp. 600 - 614
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

Alberti, G. K. B. 1970. Trilobiten des jungeren Siluriums sowie des Unter- und Mitteldevons. Abhandlungen Senckenbergischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft, 525:1–233.Google Scholar
Appollonov, M. K. 1980. Class Trilobita, p. 86–118. In Apollonov, M. K., Bandaletov, S. M., and Nikitin, I. F. (eds.), The Ordovician–Silurian Boundary in Kazakhstan. Nauka, Alma-Ata (in Russian).Google Scholar
Barrande, J. 1846. Notice préliminaire sur la systěme Silurien et les Trilobites de Bohěme. Leipzig, 97 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, T. E. 1965. Trilobites from Upper Silurian rocks of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago: Encrinurus (Frammia) and Hemiarges. Geological Survey of Canada Bulletin, 134:1–14.Google Scholar
Boucot, A. J. 1975. Evolution and Extinction Rate Controls. Developments in Paleontology and Stratigraphy, 1. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Oxford, New York, 427 p.Google Scholar
Bruton, D. L. 1967. Silurian odontopleurid trilobites from Sweden, Estonia, and Latvia. Palaeontology, 10:214–244.Google Scholar
Bruton, D. L. 1968. A revision of the Odontopleuridae (Trilobita) from the Palaeozoic of Bohemia. Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo, 1. Matematisk-Naturvidenskapelig Klasse, Ny Serie, 25:1–73.Google Scholar
Burmeister, H. 1843. Die Organisation der Trilobiten. Berlin, 147 p.Google Scholar
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., and Edwards, A. W. F. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis. Models and estimation procedures. American Journal of Human Genetics, 19:233–257; Evolution, 21:550–570.Google ScholarPubMed
Chatterton, B. D. E., and Perry, D. G. 1979. Acanthalomina Prantl and Přibyl, a valid subgenus of the trilobite genus Diacanthaspis. Journal of Paleontology, 53:1327–1342.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E., and Perry, D. G. 1983. Silicified Silurian odontopleurid trilobites from the Mackenzie Mountains. Palaeontographica Canadiana No. 1, 127 p.Google Scholar
Chlupáč, I., 1987. Ecostratigraphy of Silurian trilobite assemblages of the Barrandian area, Czechoslovakia. Newsletters in Stratigraphy, 17:169–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. 1967. The phylogenetic fallacy. Systematic Zoology, 16:184–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. 1969. The phylogenetic fallacy revisited. Systematic Zoology, 18:115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. 1985a. On “character” and related terms. Systematic Zoology, 34:229–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. 1985b. On the status of outgroups in phylogenetics. Systematic Zoology, 34:364–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duarte Rodrigues, P. 1986. On the term character. Systematic Zoology, 35:140–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmrich, H. F. 1839. De Trilobitis Dissertatio Petrefactologica. Berolini, Berlin, 56 p.Google Scholar
Farris, J. S. 1970. Methods for computing Wagner trees. Systematic Zoology, 19:83–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farris, J. S. 1982. Outgroups and parsimony. Systematic Zoology, 31:328–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farris, J. S. 1983. The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis, p. 7–36. In Platnick, N. I. and Funk, V. A. (eds.), Advances in Cladistics, Vol. 2. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Farris, J. S., and Kluge, A. G. 1979. A botanical clique. Systematic Zoology, 28:400–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farris, J. S., Kluge, A. G., and Eckhardt, M. J. 1970. A numerical approach to phylogenetic systematics. Systematic Zoology, 19:172–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felsenstein, J. 1978. The number of evolutionary trees. Systematic Zoology, 27:27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felsenstein, J., and Sober, E. 1986. Parsimony and likelihood: an exchange. Systematic Zoology, 35:617–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaertner, H. R. 1930. Silurische und tiefunterdevonische Trilobiten und Brachiopoden aus dem Zentralkarnischen Alpen. Jahrbuch Preussische geologische Landesanstalt, 51:188–252.Google Scholar
Ghiselin, M. T. 1984. “Definition,” “character,” and other equivocal terms. Systematic Zoology, 33:104–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluge, A. G. 1989. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Systematic Zoology, 38:7–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluge, A. G., and Farris, J. S. 1969. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Systematic Zoology, 18:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, Y.-H., and Chang, W.-T. 1974. Ordovician Trilobita, p. 124–136. In (Handbook of the stratigraphy and paleontology of southwest China). Edited by the Nanking Institute of Geology and Paleontology, Academia Sinica. Science Press, 454 p. (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Lundberg, J. G. 1972. Wagner Networks and ancestors. Systematic Zoology, 21:398–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddison, W. P., Donoghue, M. J., and Maddison, D. R. 1984. Outgroup analysis and parsimony. Systematic Zoology, 33:83–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Männil, R. 1982. Wenlock and late Silurian trilobite associations of the East Baltic area and their stratigraphical value, p. 63–70. In Kaljo, D. and Klaamann, E. (eds.), Ecostratigraphy of the East Baltic Silurian. Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR Institute of Geology Tallinn and Valgus.Google Scholar
Meacham, C. A. 1980. Phylogeny of the Berberidaceae with an evaluation of classifications. Systematic Botany, 5:149–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meacham, C. A. 1981. A manual method for character compatibility analysis. Taxon, 30:591–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meacham, C. A. 1983. Theoretical and computational considerations of the compatibility of qualitative taxonomic characters, p. 304–314. In Felsenstein, J. (ed.), Numerical Taxonomy. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, and New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meacham, C. A. 1984. The role of hypothesized direction of characters in the estimation of evolutionary history. Taxon, 33:26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaux, B. 1989. Cladograms can reconstruct phylogenies: an example from the fossil record. Alcheringa, 13:21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikulic, D. G. 1980. Trilobites in Paleozoic carbonate buildups. Lethaia, 14:45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikulic, D. G., and Watkins, R. 1981. Trilobite ecology in the Ludlow Series of the Welsh Borderland, p. 101–117. In Gray, J., Boucot, A. J., and Berry, W. B. N. (eds.), Communities of the Past. Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, Inc., Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Patterson, C. 1988. The impact of evolutionary theories on systematics, p. 59–91. In Hawksworth, D. L. (ed.), Prospects in Systematics. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Perry, D. G., and Chatterton, B. D. E. 1977. Silurian (Wenlockian) trilobites from Baillie-Hamilton Island, Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 14:285–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prantl, F., and Přibyl, A. 1949. A study of the superfamily Odontopleuracea nov. superfam. (trilobites). Rozpravy Státńiho Geologického Ústavu Československe Republiky, Svazek 12, 221 p.Google Scholar
Přibyl, A., and Vaněk, J. 1965. Neue Trilobiten des böhmischen Ordoviziums. Věstník Ústředńiho ústavu geologického, 40:277–282.Google Scholar
Přibyl, A., Vaněk, J., and Hörbinger, F. 1986. New trilobites of the families Odontopleuridae, Lichidae and Raphiophoridae from the Silurian and Devonian of central Bohemia. Časopis pro mineralogii a geologii, 31:267–278.Google Scholar
Ramsköld, L. 1984. Silurian odontopleurid trilobites from Gotland. Palaeontology, 27:239–264.Google Scholar
Schoch, R. M. 1986. Phylogeny Reconstruction in Paleontology. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 353 p.Google Scholar
Schrank, E. 1969. Odontopleuriden (Trilobita) aus silurischen Geschieben. Berichte. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Geologische Wissenschaften A, 14:705–726.Google Scholar
Siveter, D. J. 1989. Silurian trilobites from the Annascaul Inlier, Dingle Peninsula, Ireland. Palaeontology, 32:109–161.Google Scholar
Šnajdr, M. 1975. New Trilobita from the Llandovery at Hýskov in the Beroun area, central Bohemia. Věstník Ǔstředniho ústavu geologického, 50:311–316.Google Scholar
Šnajdr, M. 1978. The Llandoverian trilobites from Hyskov (Barrandian area). Sbornik geologickych ved, Palaeontology, 21:7–47.Google Scholar
Šnajdr, M. 1979. Note on the regenerative ability of injured trilobites. Věstník Ústředniho ústavu geologického, 54:171–173.Google Scholar
Šnajdr, M. 1984a. Ivanopleura and Borkopleura, new odontopleurid genera from the Bohemian Silurian (Trilobita). Věstník Ústředniho ústavu geologického, 59:49–52.Google Scholar
Šnajdr, M. 1984b. On the genus Odontopleura Emmrich, 1839 (Trilobita). Věstník Ústředniho ústavu geologického, 59:95–104.Google Scholar
Sober, E. 1983. Parsimony in systematics: philosophical issues. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 14:335–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, E. 1985. A likelihood justification of parsimony. Cladistics, 1:209–233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swofford, D. L. 1985. PAUP (Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony). Version 2.4. [Privately printed and distributed by the author.]Google Scholar
Thomas, A. T. 1980. Trilobite associations in the British Wenlock, p. 447–451. In Harris, A. L., Holland, C. H., and Leake, B. E. (eds.), The Caledonides of the British Isles Reviewed. Special Publications of the Geological Society of London, 8.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. T. 1981. British Wenlock trilobites. Part 2. Palaeontographical Society [Monograph], p. 57–99.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. T., and Narbonne, G. M. 1979. Silurian trilobites from arctic Canada. Geological Magazine, 116:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomczykowa, E. 1957. Trilobites from the Wenlock and Lower Ludlow graptolitic shales of the Swiety Krzyz Mountains. Instytut Geologiczny Biuletyn, 122:83–143.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
Whittington, H. B. 1956. Silicified Middle Ordovician trilobites: the Odontopleuridae. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, Bulletin 114:155–288.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1959. Order Odontopleurida, p. O504–O510. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O, Arthropoda 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1961. Silurian Hemiarges (Trilobita) from Cornwallis Island and New York State. Journal of Paleontology, 35:433–444.Google Scholar