Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:18:41.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

X-ray CT scan as an aid to identification and description of a new bivalve species (Mollusca) from the Mississippian Bluefield Formation, Southeastern West Virginia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Robert L. Peck ,
Jack B. Bailey ,
Richard J. Heck  and
Nathan T. Scaiff
Robert L. Peck
Affiliation:
HC 74 Box 98-G, Hinton, West Virginia 25951-9115,
Jack B. Bailey
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Western Illinois University, 1 University Circle, Macomb, Illinois 61455,
Richard J. Heck
Affiliation:
Department of Land Resource Science, Ontario Agriculture College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1,
Nathan T. Scaiff
Affiliation:
Ontario Agriculture College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

X-ray CT scans at two different energies of three articulated specimens of Spathelopsis oakvalensis n. sp., a bivalve from the Bluefield Formation of the Mauch Chunk Group (Mississippian, Chesterian) from southeastern West Virginia, permitted observation and description of poorly known internal features of the shell, resulting in a reversal of the shell orientation alleged by past authors and concomitant reassignment of this problematic genus to the palaeotaxodont family Nuculanidae Adams and Adams. Distinctive posterior and anterior gapes in Spathelopsis suggest separation of inhalant and exhalant water streams, a characteristic associated with derived but not primitive palaeotaxodonts.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 83 , Issue 6 , November 2009 , pp. 954 - 961
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

Adams, H. and Adams, A. 1858. The genera of recent Mollusca. Vol. 3, 136 p.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. B. 2009. Shell orientation terminology among the Bivalvia (Mollusca): Problems and proposed solutions. Journal of Paleontology, 83(3):493–495.Google Scholar
Baumgartner-Mora, C., Baumgartner, P. O., and Baumgartner, L. 2004. X-ray microtomography of larger Foraminifera. International Geological Congress, Abstracts = Congres Geologique International, resumes, Vol. 32, Part 2, p. 919.Google Scholar
Beushausen, L. von. 1895. Die Lamellibranchiaten des rheinischen Devon mit Ausschluss der Aviculiden. Abhandlungen der Könglich Preussischen geologischen Landesanstalt, neue Folge, 17:1–514; Atlas, pl. 1–38.Google Scholar
Boni, A. 1939. Radiografie di fossili paricolarmente di brachiopodi. Bollettino della Societá Geologica Italiana, 57:265–286.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. D. and Bradshaw, M. A. 1971. Functional morphology of some fossil palaeotaxodont bivalve hinges as a guide to orientation. Paleontology, 14(2):242–249.Google Scholar
Carbonnel, G. and Grosdidier, E. 1993. Differenciation des especes d'ostracodes attribuees aux genres Asymmetricythere Bassiouni, 1971 et Togoina Apostelescu, 1961 par representation tomographique en analyse factorielle [Differentiation of ostracode species belonging to the genus Asymmetricythere Bassiouni, 1971 and Togoina Apostelescu, 1961 with tomographic representation by factorial analysis]. Bulletin des Centres de Recherches Exploration-Production Elf-Aquitaine, 17(2): 443–453.Google Scholar
Carlson, W. D., Rowe, T., Ketcham, R. A., and Colbert, M. W. 2003. Applications of high-resolution X-ray computed tomography in petrology, meteorics and paleontology, p. 7–22. In Mees, F., Swennen, R., Van Geet, M., and Jacobs, P. (eds.), Applications of X-ray Computed Tomography in the Geosciences, Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 215 p.Google Scholar
Carter, J. G. and Ambrose, W. W. 1989. Techniques for studying molluscan shell microstructure, p. 101–119. In Feldmann, R. M., Chapman, R. E., and Hannibal, J. T. (eds.), Paleotechniques. Paleontological Society Special Publication 4.Google Scholar
Carter, J. G., Campbell, D. C., and Campbell, M. R. 2000. Cladistic perspectives on early bivalve evolution, p. 47–79. In Harper, E. M., Taylor, J. D., and Crame, J. A. (eds.), The Evolutionary History of the Bivalvia. Geological Society of London Special Publications, 177 p.Google Scholar
Chernyshev, B. I. 1943. Do systematyky verkhn'o-paleozoys'kykh Taxodonta [Contributions to the systematics of the Upper Paleozoic Taxodonta]. Akadademii Nauk Ukrayins'koyi RSR [Kiev], Instytut Geologichnykh Nauk, p. 35.Google Scholar
Coan, E. V., Scott, P. V., and Bernard, F. R. 2000. Bivalve Seashells of Western North America. Marine Bivalve Mollusks from Arctic Alaska to Baja California. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History Monograph 2, Studies in Biodiversity 2, 764 p.Google Scholar
Conrad, T. A. 1842. Description of new species of organic remains belonging to the Silurian, Devonian and Carboniferous Systems of the United States. Academy of Natural Sciences Philadelphia Journal, 8:183–190.Google Scholar
Fujiwara, S., Oji, T., Tanaka, Y., and Kondo, Y. 2005. Relay strategy and adaptation to a muddy environment in Isselicrinus (Isselicrinidae, Crinoidea). Palaios, 20(3): 241–248.Google Scholar
Genise, J. F., Laza, J. H., Fernandez, W., and Frogoni, J. 2002. Cámaras pupales fósiles de coleópteros; el icnogénero Rebuffoichnus Roselli. Revista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales n. s., 4(2): 159–165.Google Scholar
Girty, G. H. 1911a. New genera and species of Carboniferous fossils from the Fayetteville shale of Arkansas. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 20:189–238.Google Scholar
Girty, G. H. 1911b. The fauna of the Moorefield Shale of Arkansas. United States Geological Survey Bulletin 439, 148 p.Google Scholar
Girty, G. H. 1926. Faunas of the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian Periods, p. 847–860. In Reger, D. B. Mercer, Monroe, and Summers Counties. West Virginia Geological Survey County Report, 963 p.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. and Henry, T. W. 1981. Late Mississippian and Early Pennsylvanian invertebrate faunas, east-central Appalachians—a preliminary report, p. 165–171. In Roberts, T. G. (ed.), GSA Cincinnati '81 Field Trip Guidebooks, Volume 1: Stratigraphy, Sedimentology. Geological Society of America.Google Scholar
Gray, J. E. 1824. Shells, p. ccxl–ccxlvi. In Parry, W. E. A supplement to the appendix of Captain Parry's voyage for the discovery of a northwest passage, in the years 1819–1820 containing an account of the subjects of natural history. J. Murray, London.Google Scholar
Hagadorn, J. W. and Buck, M. M. 2004. Digital paleobiology and taphonomy of an Ordovician lagerstatte: Beecher's Trilobite Bed. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, 36(5):383.Google Scholar
Hall, J. and Whitfield, R. P. 1873. Notice of three new species of fossil shells from the Devonian of Ohio. New York State University Regents 23rd Annual Report on the State Cabinet of Natural History, p. 240–241.Google Scholar
Hall, J. and Whitfield, R. P. 1872. Descriptions of new species of fossils from the vicinity of Louisville, Kentucky, and the falls of the Ohio. New York State Museum of Natural History, Annual Report, 24:181–200a.Google Scholar
Hoare, R. D. 1993. Mississippian (Chesterian) bivalves from the Pennsylvanian stratotype area in West Virginia and Virginia. Journal of Paleontology, 67(3):374–396.Google Scholar
Hoare, R. D., Heaney, M. J., and Mapes, R. H. 1989. Bivalves (Mollusca) from the Imo Formation (Mississippian, Chesterian) of north-central Arkansas. Journal of Paleontology, 63(5):582–603.Google Scholar
Hughes, G. W., Siddiqui, S., and Sadler, R. K. 2003. Shu'aiba rudist Taphonomy using computerized tomography and image logs, Shaybah Field, Saudi Arabia. GeoArabia (Manama), 8(4):585–596.Google Scholar
Hughes, G. W., Siddiqui, S., and Sadler, R. K. 2004. Computerized tomography reveals Aptian species and taphonomy. Geologia Croatica, 57(1):67–71.Google Scholar
Humphreville, R. G. 1981. Stratigraphy and paleoecology of the Upper Mississippian Bluefield Formation. Unpublished , , Blacksburg, VA.Google Scholar
Khalifin, L. L. 1940. Peletsipody nizhnego devona Altaya [Pelecypods of the Lower Devonian of the Altai] in Trudy nauchnoy konferentsii po izucheniyu I osvoeniyu proizvoditel'nykh sil Sibiri [Transactions of the scientific conference on the study and use of the productive forces of Siberia]. Tomsk [USSR], Gosudarstvennyy Universitet, v. 2, p. 256–289.Google Scholar
Korobkov, I. A. 1954. Spravochnik i metodicheskoe Rukovodstvo po tretichnym mollyuskam Plastinchatozhabernye: Gosud. Nauchno-tech. Issledov Nefti. Gorno-toplivnoi lit-ry, Leningradskoi Otdelenie, 444 p.Google Scholar
Lintz, J. Jr. 1958. The fauna of the Ames and Brush Creek Shales of the Conemaugh Formation of western Maryland. Journal of Paleontology, 32:97–112.Google Scholar
McAlester, A. L. 1968. Type species of Paleozoic Nuculoid Bivalve Genera. Geological Society of America Memoir, 105:1–143.Google Scholar
McAlester, A. L. 1969. Superfamily Nuculanacea, p. N231. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part N, Vol. 1, Mollusca 6 Bivalvia. The Geological Society of America, and the University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Mortimer, J. E. 1962. A comparative study of post-larval feeding mechanisms in the Bivalvia. , , Scotland, U.K., 90 p.Google Scholar
Morton, B. 1996. The evolutionary history of the Bivalvia, p. 337–359. In Taylor, J. (ed.), Origin and Evolutionary Radiation of the Mollusca. The Malacological Society of London. Centenary Symposium. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D. 1969. Subclass Palaeotaxodonta Korobkov, 1954, p. N227. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part N, Vol. 1, Mollusca 6 Bivalvia. The Geological Society of America, and the University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Owen, G. 1961. A note on the habits and nutrition of Solemya parkinsoni (Protobranchia: Bivalvia). Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 102(1):15–21.Google Scholar
Pigg, K. B., Devore, M. L., Ketcham, R. A., and Kenrick, P. 2006. Value of HRXCT for systematic studies of pyritized fossil fruits. Abstracts with Programs – Geological Society of America, 38(7):445.Google Scholar
Pojeta, J. Jr. 1988. The origin and Paleozoic diversification of solemyoid pelecypods. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Memoir, 44:201–271.Google Scholar
Pojeta, J. Jr., and Runnegar, B. 1985. The early evolution of diasome mollusks, p. 295–336. In Trueman, E. R. and Clark, M. R. (eds), The Mollusca, Vol. 10, Evolution. Academic Press, Orlando.Google Scholar
Powell, M. G. 2008. Timing and selectivity of the Late Mississippian mass extinction of brachiopod genera from the central Appalachian Basin. Palaios, 23:525–534.Google Scholar
Quetscher, A. and Ilger, J.-M. 2007. Anwendung nicht-invasiver Untersuchungsmethoden in der Palaeontomologie (3D-Laserscanner, 3D-Roentgentomograf, 3D-Digitalmikroskop, Fotoscanner). Clausthaler Geowissenschaften, 6:87–94.Google Scholar
Reger, D. B. and Price, P. H. 1926. Mercer, Monroe, and Summers Counties. West Virginia Geological Survey County Reports, 963 p.Google Scholar
Sandy, M. R. 1989. Preparation of serial sections, p. 146–156. In Feldmann, R. M., Chapman, R. E., and Hannibal, J. T. (eds.), Paleotechniques. Paleontological Society Special Publication 4.Google Scholar
Scheckler, S. E. 1986a. Old Red Continent facies in the Late Devonian and Early Carboniferous of Appalachian North America. Annales de la Société de Belgique, 109:223–236.Google Scholar
Scheckler, S. E. 1986b. Floras of the Devonian Mississippian transition, p. 81–96. In Broadhead, T. W. (ed.), Land Plants, Notes for a Short Course. University of Tennessee, Department of Geological Sciences, Studies in Geology, 15.Google Scholar
Soot-Ryen, H. 1964. Nuculoid pelecypods from the Silurian of Gotland. Arkiv för Mineralogi och Geologi (Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademien), band 3, heft 6, no. 28:489–519.Google Scholar
Speijer, R. P., van Loo, D., Masschaele, B., Vlassenbroeck, J., Cnudde, V., and Jacobs, P. 2008. Quantifying foraminiferal growth with high-resolution x-ray computed tomography; new opportunities in foraminiferal ontogeny, phylogeny, and paleoceanographic applications. Geosphere, 4(4):760–63.Google Scholar
Starobogatov, Y. I. 1992. Morphological basis for phylogeny and classification of Bivalvia. Ruthenica, 2(1):1–25.Google Scholar
Stock, S. R. and Veis, A. F. 2003. Preliminary microfocus X-ray computed tomography survey of echinoid fossil microstructure, p. 225–235. In Mees, F., Swennen, R., Van Geet, M., and Jacobs, P. (eds.), Applications of X-ray Computed Tomography in the Geosciences. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 215.Google Scholar
Sturmer, W. 1985. A small coleoid cephalopod with soft parts from the Lower Devonian discovered using radiography. Nature, 318:53–55.Google Scholar
Sundberg, F. A., Bennington, J. B., Wizevich, M. C., and Bambach, R. K. 1990. Upper Carboniferous (Namurian) amphibian trackways from the Bluefield Formation, West Virginia, USA. Ichnos, 1(2):111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, W. A. 1959. Upper Mississippian stratigraphy of southwestern Virginia, southern West Virginia, and eastern Kentucky. Unpublished , , 324 p.Google Scholar
Torres, A. M. 1999. A three-dimensional CT (CAT) scan through a rock with Permian alga Ivanovia tebagaensis . Journal of Paleontology, 73(1):154–158.Google Scholar
Vendrasco, M. J., Wood, T. E., and Runnegar, B. N. 2004. Articulate Palaeozoic fossil with 17 plates greatly expands disparity of early chitons. Nature (London), 429(6989):288–291.Google Scholar
Waller, T. 1998. Origin of the molluscan class Bivalvia and a phylogeny of the major groups, p. 1–45. In Johnston, P. A. and Haggart, J. W. (eds.), Bivalves, An Eon of Evolution – Paleobiological Studies Honoring Norman D. Newell. University of Calgary Press, Calgary.Google Scholar
Wells, D. 1950. Lower Middle Mississippian of southeastern West Virginia. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, 34(5):882–922.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. A. and Palmer, T. J. 1989. Preparation of acetate peels, p. 142–145. In Feldmann, R. M., Chapman, R. E., and Hannibal, J. T. (eds.), Paleotechniques. Paleontological Society Special Publication 4.Google Scholar
Zinsmeister, W. J. and de Nooyer, C. 1996. Computed Tomography: Non-destructive techniques for visualizing internal morphology of invertebrates. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 28(7):294.Google Scholar