Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:54:51.250Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Paleoecology of a well-preserved nautiloid assemblage from a Late Ordovician shale unit, southwestern Ohio

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2016

Robert C. Frey
Robert C. Frey*
Affiliation:
1805 Laramie Drive, Powell, Ohio 43065
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A diverse, well-preserved assemblage of nautiloid cephalopods was collected from the Treptoceras duseri shale, a 1.5-m-thick claystone within the Waynesville Formation (Late Ordovician, early Richmondian) exposed in southwest Ohio. The strata, the enclosed fauna, and its taphonomy indicate deposition in a low-energy, mud-bottom marine environment, in water depths of 20–25 m, below wave base but within the zone of storm-current reworking.

Nautiloid specimens consist of complete conchs that have been replaced by calcite. Twelve species of nautiloids, belonging to eight genera, representative of four orders, have been collected from the shale in southwest Ohio. Longiconic orthocones are clearly the dominant nautiloid morphotype present, with the assemblage dominated by three species of the longiconic orthocerid Treptoceras and with fewer numbers of the endocerid Cameroceras and the slender orthocerid Isorthoceras?, the cyrtoconic oncocerids Oncoceras and Manitoulinoceras, and rare specimens of the orthocerid Gorbyoceras, the oncocerid Zittelloceras, and the ascocerid Schuchertoceras.

Nautiloid taphonomy, the diversity of nautiloid taxa present, the lack of postmortem buoyancy in the shells of the more common taxa, the recurrent nature of this assemblage, and the restricted distribution of this Treptoceras–Cameroceras fauna to portions of eastern North America in the Late Ordovician suggest that this nautiloid assemblage represents an in-situ accumulation of nautiloids representative of a living assemblage. These nautiloids were important elements associated with benthic communities in these epeiric sea mud-bottom environments and not simply assemblages of drifted, necroplanktonic shells.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 63 , Issue 5 , September 1989 , pp. 604 - 620
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

Alexander, R. R. 1986. Resistance to and repair of shell breakage induced by durophages in Late Ordovician brachiopods. Journal of Paleontology, 60:273–285.Google Scholar
Baird, G. C., Brett, C. E., and Frey, R. C. 1989. “Hitchhiking” epizoans on orthoconic cephalopods: preliminary review of the evidence and its implications. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 69:501–516.Google Scholar
Bretsky, P. W. 1970. Late Ordovician benthic marine communities in north-central New York. New York State Museum and Science Series Bulletin, 414:1–34.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. 1980. Motor performance and jet propulsion in Nautilus. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 13(6):400.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A., Ward, P. D., and Weaver, J. S. 1981. Post-mortem ascent in Nautilus shells: implications for cephalopod paleobiogeography. Paleobiology, 7:494–509.Google Scholar
Chen, Jun-Yuan. 1988. Ordovician changes in sea-level. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Memoir, 44:387–404.Google Scholar
Cousteau, J. Y., and Diolé, P. 1973. Octopus and Squid, the Soft Intelligence. Doubleday and Company, Garden City, New York, 305 p.Google Scholar
Cowen, R., Gertmann, R., and Wiggett, G. 1973. Camouflage patterns in Nautilus, and their implications for cephalopod paleobiology. Lethaia, 6:201–214.Google Scholar
Dixon, O. A. 1970. Nautiloids and current ripples as paleocurrent indicators in Upper Ordovician limestones, Anticosti Island, Quebec. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 40:682–687.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1942. An Arctic cephalopod faunule from the Cynthiana of Kentucky. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 27:5–50.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1946. Ordovician Cephalopoda from the Cincinnati region, Part 1. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 29:1–556.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1955a. Trails and tentacular impressions of orthoconic cephalopods. Journal of Paleontology, 29:857–867.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1955b. Saltations in nautiloid coiling. Evolution, 9:244–260.Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1957. Nautiloids of the Paleozoic, p. 829–852. In Ladd, H. (ed.), Treatise of Marine Ecology and Paleoecology. Geological Society of America, Memoir 67(2).Google Scholar
Flower, R. H. 1976. Ordovician cephalopod faunas and their roles in correlation, p. 523–552. In Bassett, M. G. (ed.), The Ordovician System. University of Wales Press and National Museum of Wales, Cardiff.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1914. Notes on the Lorraine faunas from New York and Quebec. Bulletin of the Science Laboratory, Denison University, 17:247–340.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1916. Upper Ordovician formations in Ontario and Quebec. Geological Survey of Canada, Memoir 83, 279 p.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1924. Upper Ordovician faunas of Ontario and Quebec. Geological Survey of Canada, Memoir 138, 255 p.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1928. Contributions to the geology of Foxe Land, Baffin Island; Part 2: The cephalopods of the Putnam Highland. University of Michigan Museum of Paleontology Contributions, 3(3):25–70.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1929. The cephalopods of the Red River Formation of Manitoba. Bulletin of the Science Laboratory, Denison University, 29:129–235.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1930. The color patterns of fossil cephalopods and brachiopods, with notes on gastropods and pelecypods. University of Michigan Museum of Paleontology Contributions, 3(6):109–150.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1935. Big Horn and related cephalopods. Bulletin of the Science Laboratory, Denison University, 35:1–196.Google Scholar
Frey, R. C. 1981. Narthecoceras (Cephalopoda) from the Upper Ordovician (Richmondian) of southwest Ohio. Journal of Paleontology, 55:1217–1224.Google Scholar
Frey, R. C. 1983. The paleontology and paleoecology of the Treptoceras duseri shale unit (Late Ordovician, Richmondian) of southwest Ohio. Unpubl. , Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, 719 p.Google Scholar
Frey, R. C. 1985. A well-preserved specimen of Schuchertoceras (Cephalopoda–Ascocerida) from the Upper Ordovician (basal Richmondian) of southwest Ohio. Journal of Paleontology, 59:1506–1511.Google Scholar
Frey, R. C. 1987a. The occurrence of pelecypods in early Paleozoic epeiric sea environments, Late Ordovician of the Cincinnati, Ohio area. Palaios, 2:3–23.Google Scholar
Frey, R. C. 1987b. The paleoecology of a Late Ordovician shale unit from southwest Ohio and southeastern Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 61:242–267.Google Scholar
Frey, R. C. 1988. The paleoecology of Treptoceras duseri (Michelinoceratida–Proteoceratidae) from the Upper Ordovician of southwest Ohio. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Memoir, 44:79–101.Google Scholar
Furnish, W. M., and Glenister, B. F. 1964a. Paleoecology, p. K114–K124. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise of Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Furnish, W. M., and Glenister, B. F. 1964b. Nautiloidea–Ascocerida, p. K261–K277. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise of Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1847. Organic Remains of the Lower Division of the New York System. Paleontology of New York, Vol. 1, 338 p.Google Scholar
Hay, H. B. 1981. Lithofacies and formations of the Cincinnatian Series (Upper Ordovician), southeastern Indiana and southwestern Ohio. Unpubl. , Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, 236 p.Google Scholar
Hewitt, R. A., and Watkins, R. 1980. Cephalopod ecology across a late Silurian shelf tract. Neus Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 160:96–117.Google Scholar
Hewitt, R. A., and Westermann, G. E. G. 1988. Nautiloid septal strength: revisited and revised concepts. Alcheringa, 12:123–128.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. B. C., and Buss, L. 1975. Allelopathy and spatial competition among coral reef invertebrates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, 72:5160–5163.Google Scholar
Jeletzky, J. A. 1966. Comparative morphology, phylogeny, and classification of fossil Coleoidea. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Article 7, 162 p.Google Scholar
Kesling, R. V. 1962. A new species of Billingsites, an ascocerid cephalopod from the Upper Ordovician Ogontz Formation of Michigan. University of Michigan Museum of Paleontology Contributions, 17(3):77–121.Google Scholar
Kreisa, R. D. 1981. Storm-generated sedimentary features in subtidal marine facies with examples from the Middle and Upper Ordovician of southwestern Virginia. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 51:823–848.Google Scholar
Landman, N. H., and Davis, R. A. 1988. Jaw and crop preserved in an orthoconic nautiloid cephalopod from the Bear Gulch Limestone (Mississippian, Montana). New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Memoir, 44:103–107.Google Scholar
Lehman, U. 1981. The Ammonites: Their Life and Their World. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 246 p.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R. 1979. Fossils of Ontario, Part 1: The Trilobites. Royal Ontario Museum Life Sciences, Miscellaneous Publications, 96 p.Google Scholar
Mapes, R. H. 1987. Upper Paleozoic cephalopod mandibles: frequency of occurrence, modes of preservation, and paleoecological implications. Journal of Paleontology, 61:521–538.Google Scholar
Marsaglia, K. M., and Klein, G. D. 1983. The paleogeography of Paleozoic and Mesozoic storm depositional systems. Journal of Geology, 91:117–142.Google Scholar
Mehl, J. 1984. Radula and Fargarme bei Michelinoceras sp. aus dem Silur von Boliven. Paläontologishe Zeitschrift, 58:211–229.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. L., Tobin, R. C., Pryor, W. A., Harrison, W. B., Osgood, R. G., Hinterlong, G. D., Krumpolz, B. J., and Mahan, T. K. 1981. Stratigraphy, sedimentology, and paleoecology of the Cincinnatian Series (Upper Ordovician), in the vicinity of Cincinnati, Ohio, p. 31–71. In Roberts, T. G. (ed.), GSA '81 Field Trip Guidebook, Vol. 1: Stratigraphy, Sedimentology. American Geological Institute, Falls Church, Virginia.Google Scholar
Miller, A. K., and Furnish, W. M. 1937. Paleoecology of Paleozoic cephalopods. National Research Council, Committee on Paleoecology, Report, 1936–1937:54–63.Google Scholar
Miller, A. K., and Youngquist, W. 1949. The Maquoketa coquina of cephalopods. Journal of Paleontology, 23:199–204.Google Scholar
Miller, A. K., Youngquist, W., and Collinson, C. 1954. Ordovician cephalopod fauna of Baffin Island. Geological Society of America, Memoir 62, 234 p.Google Scholar
Morris, R. J., and Rollins, H. B. 1971. The distribution and paleoecological interpretation of Cornulites in the Waynesville Formation (Upper Ordovician) of southwestern Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science, 71:159–170.Google Scholar
Nagle, S. 1967. Wave and current orientation of shells. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 37:1124–1138.Google Scholar
Nelson, S. J. 1963. Ordovician paleontology of the northern Hudson Bay Lowland. Geological Society of America, Memoir 90, 152 p.Google Scholar
Parks, W. A., and Fritz, M. 1922. The stratigraphy and paleontology of Toronto and vicinity, Pt. 9, No. 4. Ontario Department of Mines Annual Report, 32:16–28.Google Scholar
Reyment, R. A. 1958. Some factors in the distribution of fossil cephalopods. Stockholm Contributions to Geology, 1(6):97–184.Google Scholar
Reyment, R. A. 1968. Orthoconic nautiloids as indicators of shoreline surface currents. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 38:1387–1389.Google Scholar
Ruedemann, R. 1921. Observations on the mode of life of primitive cephalopods. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 32:315–320.Google Scholar
Reyment, R. A. 1926. Utica and Lorraine Formations of New York, Pt. 2 (molluscs, Crustacea, miscellania). Proceedings of the New York State Museum, Bulletin, 272:5–212.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., Spinosa, C., Teichert, C., and Banks, R. C. 1978. The jaw apparatus of Recent Nautilus and its paleoecological implications. Palaeontology, 21:129–141.Google Scholar
Stenzel, H. B. 1964. Living Nautilus, p. K59–K93. In Moore, R. C., (ed.), Treatise of Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Tasch, P. 1955. Paleoecological observations on the orthocerid coquina beds of the Maquoketa at Graf, Iowa. Journal of Paleontology, 29:510–518.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1964a. Morphology of hard parts, p. K13–K53. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise of Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1964b. Biostratinomy, p. K124–K127. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise of Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. K, Mollusca 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1967. Major features of cephalopod evolution, p. 162–210. In Teichert, C. and Yochelson, E. L. (eds.), Essays in Paleontology and Stratigraphy, R. C. Moore Commemorative Volume. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1970. Drifted Nautilus shells in the Bay of Bengal. Journal of Paleontology, 44:1129–1130.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1988. Main Features of cephalopod evolution, p. 11–79. In Clarke, M. R. and Trueman, E. R. (eds.), Paleontology and Neontology of the Cephalopoda, the Mollusca, Volume 12. Academic Press, Orlando.Google Scholar
Troedsson, G. T. 1926. On Middle and Upper Ordovician faunas of Greenland, I. Cephalopods. Meddelelser om Grømland, 71, 157 p.Google Scholar
Turek, V. 1978. Biological and stratigraphic significance of the Silurian nautiloid Aptychopsis. Lethaia, 11:127–138.Google Scholar
Wade, M. 1988. Nautiloids and their descendants: cephalopod classification in 1986. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Memoir, 44:15–25.Google Scholar
Ward, P. D. 1980. Restructuring the chambered Nautilus. Paleobiology, 6:247–249.Google Scholar
Ward, P. D. 1987. The Natural History of Nautilus. Allen and Unwin, Boston, 267 p.Google Scholar
Ward, P. D., and Westermann, G. E. G. 1985. Cephalopod paleoecology, p. 215–229. In Broadhead, T. G. (ed.), Mollusks, Notes for a Short Course. University of Tennessee Department of Geological Sciences Studies in Geology 13, Knoxville.Google Scholar
Weir, G. W., Peterson, W. L., and Swadley, W. C. 1984. Lithostratigraphy of Upper Ordovician strata exposed in Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1151-E, 121 p.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1973. Strength of concave septa and the depth limits of fossil cephalopods. Lethaia, 6:383–403.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1977. Form and function of orthoconic cephalopod shells with concave septa. Paleobiology, 3:300–321.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1985a. Post-mortem descent with septal implosion in Silurian nautiloids. Paläontologishe Zeitschrift, 59:79–97.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1985b. Exploding Nautilus camerae does not test septal index. Lethaia, 18:348.Google Scholar
Zinsmeister, W. J. 1987. Unusual nautilid occurrence in the upper Eocene La Meseta Formation, Seymour Island, Antarctica. Journal of Paleontology, 61:724–726.Google Scholar