Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-05T13:20:59.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Kladognathus apparatus (Conodonta, Carboniferous): homologies with ozarkodinids, and the prioniodinid Bauplan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Mark A. Purnell
Mark A. Purnell*
Affiliation:
Department of Invertebrate Palaeontology, Royal Ontario Museum and Department of Geology, University of Toronto, 100 Queen's Park, Toronto, Ontario M5S 2C6, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The midgut of a new specimen of Typhloesus wellsi (Melton and Scott) from the Bear Gulch Member (Namurian, Montana) contains a complete, well-preserved apparatus of Kladognathus Rexroad. The apparatus comprises 2 Pa, 2 Pb, 1 Sa, 4 Sb, 4 Sc, and 2 M elements. Kladognathus and Oulodus angulatus (Hinde) are the only members of the Prioniodinida of which complete, well-preserved bedding plane assemblages are known. The arrangement of elements in these assemblages suggests that the prioniodinid Bauplan was similar to that of ozarkodinids.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 67 , Issue 5 , September 1993 , pp. 875 - 882
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

Aldridge, R. J. 1987. Conodont palaeobiology: a historical review, p. 11–34. In Aldridge, R. J. (ed.), Palaeobiology of Conodonts. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Aldridge, R. J., Briggs, D. E. G., Clarkson, E. N. K., and Smith, M. P. 1986. The affinities of conodonts—new evidence from the Carboniferous of Edinburgh, Scotland. Lethaia, 19:279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldridge, R. J., Smith, M. P., Norby, R. D., and Briggs, D. E. G. 1987. The architecture and function of Carboniferous polygnathacean conodont apparatuses, p. 63–76. In Aldridge, R. J. (ed.), Palaeobiology of Conodonts. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Barnes, C. R., Kennedy, D. J., McCracken, A. D., Nowlan, G. S., and Tarrant, G. A. 1979. The structure and evolution of Ordovician conodont apparatuses. Lethaia, 12:125–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassler, R. S. 1925. Classification and stratigraphic use of conodonts. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 36:218–220.Google Scholar
Branson, E. B. 1938. Stratigraphy and paleontology of the Lower Mississippian of Missouri, Pt. 1. University of Missouri Studies, 13:1–208.Google Scholar
Burmeister, C. H. C. 1847. Handbuch der Entomologie. Volume 5. Enslin, Berlin, 584 p.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S. 1985. Conodontophorids or conodontophages? A review of the evidence on the ‘conodontochordates’ from the Bear Gulch Limestone (Namurian) of Montana, U.S.A. IX International Carboniferous Congress, Compte Rendue, 5:473–480.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S. 1989. Conodont palaeobiology: recent progress and unsolved problems. Terra Nova, 1:135–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway Morris, S. 1990. Typhloesus wellsi (Melton and Scott, 1973), a bizarre metazoan from the Carboniferous of Montana, U.S.A. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 327:595–624.Google Scholar
Factor, D. F., and Feldmann, R. M. 1985. Systematics and paleoecology of malacostracan arthropods in the Bear Gulch Limestone (Namurian) of central Montana. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 54:319–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, A. S., and Rexroad, C. B. 1982. An evaluation of statistical reconstructions of multielement conodont taxa from Middle Chesterian rocks (Carboniferous) in southern Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 56:959–969.Google Scholar
Jeppsson, L., and Merrill, G. K. 1982. How best to designate obsolete taxonomic names and concepts: examples among conodonts. Journal of Paleontology, 56:1489–1493.Google Scholar
Klapper, G., and Philip, G. M. 1971. Devonian conodont apparatuses and their vicarious skeletal elements. Lethaia, 4:429–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, M. 1964. Conodonts. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 196 p.Google Scholar
Mapes, R. H., and Rexroad, C. B. 1986. Conodonts from the Imo Formation (Upper Chesterian) north central Arkansas. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 20:113–123.Google Scholar
Melton, W. G., and Scott, H. W. 1970. Progress report on the study of the conodont-bearing animal. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 2:395.Google Scholar
Melton, W. G., and Scott, H. W. 1973. Conodont-bearing animals from the Bear Gulch Limestone, Montana. Geological Society of America, Special Paper, 141:31–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, S. M., and Merrill, G. K. 1974. Pennsylvanian nonplatform conodonts, IIa: the dimorphic apparatus of Idioprioniodus. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 8:119–130.Google Scholar
Nicoll, R. S. 1977. Conodont apparatuses in an Upper Devonian palaeoniscoid fish from the Canning Basin, Western Australia. Bureau of Mineral Resources Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics, 2:217–228.Google Scholar
Nicoll, R. S. 1985. Multielement composition of the conodont species Polygnathus xylus xylus Stauffer, 1940 and Ozarkodina brevis (Bischoff and Ziegler, 1957) from the Upper Devonian of the Canning Basin, Western Australia. Bureau of Mineral Resources Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics, 9:133–147.Google Scholar
Nicoll, R. S. 1987. Form and function of the Pa element in the conodont animal, p. 77–90. In Aldridge, R. J. (ed.), Palaeobiology of Conodonts. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Nicoll, R. S., and Rexroad, C. B. 1987. Re-examination of Silurian conodont clusters from northern Indiana, p. 49–61. In Aldridge, R. J. (ed.), Palaeobiology of Conodonts. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Norby, R. D. 1976. Conodont apparatuses from Chesterian (Mississippian) strata of Montana and Illinois. Unpubl. , , 295 p.Google Scholar
Norby, R. D., and Avcin, M. J. 1987. Contact microradiography of conodont assemblages, p. 153–167. In Austin, R. L. (ed.), Conodonts: Investigative Techniques and Applications. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Purnell, M. A. 1991. Bizarre metazoan ate Kladognathus—then died! Program and Abstracts, Canadian Paleontology Conference I, Vancouver, p. 69.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. B. 1957. Conodonts from the Chester series in the type area of southwestern Illinois. Report of Investigations, Illinois State Geological Survey, 199, 43 p.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. B. 1958. Conodonts from the Glen Dean Formation (Chester) of the Illinois Basin. Illinois State Geological Survey, Report of Investigations, 209:1–27.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. B. 1981. Conodonts from the Vienna Limestone Member of the Branchville Formation (Chesterian) in southern Indiana. Indiana Geological Survey, Occasional Paper, 34:1–16.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. B., and Collinson, C. 1961. Preliminary range chart of conodonts from the Chester Series (Mississippian) in the Illinois Basin. Illinois State Geological Survey, Circular, 319:1–11.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. B., and Collinson, C. 1963. Conodonts from the St. Louis Formation (Valmeyeran Series) of Illinois, Indiana and Missouri. Illinois State Geological Survey, Circular, 355:1–28.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. B., and Horowitz, A. S. 1990. Conodont paleoecology and multielement associations of the Beaver Bend Limestone (Chesterian) in Indiana, p. 493–537. In Ziegler, W. (ed.), Papers on Conodonts and Ordovician to Triassic Conodont Stratigraphy. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 118.Google Scholar
Rhodes, F. H. T., and Austin, R. L. 1981. Natural assemblages of elements: interpretation and taxonomy, p. W68–W78. In Robison, R. A. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. W, Miscellanea, Supplement 2, Conodonta. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Robison, R. A. (ed.) 1981. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. W, Miscellanea, Supplement 2, Conodonta. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 202 p.Google Scholar
Scott, H. W. 1942. Conodont assemblages from the Heath Shale of Montana. Journal of Paleontology, 16:293–300.Google Scholar
Scott, H. W. 1973. New Conodontochordata from the Bear Gulch Limestone (Namurian, Montana). Michigan State University, Paleontological Series, 1:81–100.Google Scholar
Smith, M. P. 1990. The Conodonta—palaeobiology and evolutionary history of a major Palaeozoic chordate group. Geological Magazine, 127:365–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweet, W. C. 1981. Classification and terminology of skeletal apparatuses, p. W16–W20. In Robison, R. A. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. W, Miscellanea, Supplement 2, Conodonta. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Sweet, W. C. 1988. The Conodonta: Morphology, Taxonomy, Paleoecology and Evolutionary History of a Long Extinct Animal Phylum. Oxford Monographs on Geology and Geophysics, 10, 212 p.Google Scholar
Sweet, W. C., and Schönlaub, H. P. 1975. Conodonts of the genus Oulodus Branson and Mehl, 1933. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 9:41–59.Google Scholar
Theron, J. N., Rickards, R. B., and Aldridge, R. J. 1990. Bedding plane assemblages of Promissum pulchrum, a new giant Ashgill conodont from the Table Mountain Group, South Africa. Palaeontology, 33:577–594.Google Scholar
von Bitter, P. H., and Merrill, G. K. 1983. Late Palaeozoic species of Ellisonia (Conodontophorida)—evolutionary and palaeoecological significance. Royal Ontario Museum, Life Sciences Contributions, 136, 56 p.Google Scholar
Wardlaw, B. R. 1986. Late Mississippian–Early Pennsylvanian (Namurian) conodont biostratigraphy of the northern Rocky Mountains. X International Congress on Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, Compte Rendue, 4:391–401.Google Scholar
Williams, L. A. 1983. Deposition of the Bear Gulch Limestone: a Carboniferous Plattenkalk from central Montana. Sedimentology, 30:843–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar