Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T17:58:42.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deepwater occurrence of a new Glyptocrinus (Crinoidea, Camerata) from the Late Ordovician of southwestern Ohio and northern Kentucky: revision of crinoid paleocommunity composition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2016

Jack W. Kallmeyer  and
William I. Ausich
Jack W. Kallmeyer
Affiliation:
4663 Moselle Drive, Liberty Township, Ohio 45011, USA 〈paleojack@fuse.net〉
William I. Ausich
Affiliation:
School of Earth Sciences, 155 South Oval Mall, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA 〈ausich.1@osu.edu〉
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new crinoid association reported from the Kope Formation (Katian, Ordovician) of northern Kentucky and southwestern Ohio changes the model for facies distribution of crinoids along an Ordovician onshore-offshore depth gradient. Glyptocrinus nodosus n. sp., Plicodendrocrinus casei (Meek, 1871), Cincinnaticrinus varibrachialis (Warn and Strimple, 1977), and Ectenocrinus simplex (Hall, 1847) are reported from a suspension-feeding assemblage with 26 taxa. This assemblage developed above an argillaceous packstone with most of the fossils preserved in shale. The fauna was comprised principally of secondary epifaunally tiered suspension feeders, deposit feeders, and predators. This is the first reported occurrence of Glyptocrinus Hall, 1847 and Plicodendrocrinus Brower, 1995 from the Kope Formation (lower Cincinnatian), and Glyptocrinus is represented by a new species, G. nodosus. Also, this is the first report of pinnulate camerate crinoids from the deep-water facies of the Kope Formation. Thus, deep-water Cincinnatian crinoid assemblages were comprised of disparids, cladids, and camerates; and the assemblage was characterized by a variety of filtration fan types for acquisition of resources.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 89 , Issue 6 , November 2015 , pp. 1068 - 1075
Copyright
Copyright © 2016, 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

Algeo, T.J., and Brett, C.E., 2001, Sequence, Cyclic, and Event Stratigraphy of Upper Ordovician and Silurian Strata of the Cincinnati Arch Region: 1999 Field Conference, Great Lakes Section SEPM-SSG (Society for Sedimentary Geology), Kentucky Guidebook Series v. 1, 152 p.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., 1980, A model for niche differentiation in Lower Mississippian crinoid communities: Journal of Paleontology, v. 54, p. 273–288.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., 1996, Phylum Echinodermata, in Feldmann, R.M., Fossils of Ohio: Ohio Division of Geological Survey Bulletin, v. 70, p. 242–261.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., and Baumiller, T.K., 1993, Taphonomic method for determining muscular articulations in fossil crinoids: Palaios, v. 8, p. 477–484.Google Scholar
Ausich, W.I., Brett, C.E., and Simms, M.J., 1999, Crinoid form and function, in Hess, H., Ausich, W.I., Brett, C.E., and Simms, M.J. Fossil Crinoids: Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 3–30.Google Scholar
Bassler, R.S., and Moodey, M.W., 1943, Bibliographic and faunal index of Paleozoic echinoderms: Geological Society of America Special Papers, v. 45, 734 p.Google Scholar
Baumiller, T.K., 1993, Survivorship analysis of Paleozoic Crinoidea: effect of filter morphology on evolutionary rates: Palebiology, v. 19, p. 304–321.Google Scholar
Bather, F.A., 1899, A phylogenetic classification of the Pelmatozoa: British Association for the Advancement of Science Report for 1898, p. 916–922.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1856, New species of fossils from the Silurian rocks of Canada: Geological Survey of Canada Report of Progress, 1853–1856, p. 256–271.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1859, On the Crinoideae of the Lower Silurian rocks of Canada: Canadian Organic Remains, Decade v. 4. Canada Geological Survey, 72 p.Google Scholar
Bottjer, D.J., and Ausich, W.I., 1986, Phanerozoic development of tiering in soft substrata suspension-feeding communities: Paleobiology, v. 12, p. 400–420.Google Scholar
Brett, C.E., and Algeo, T.J., 2001, Stratigraphy of the Upper Ordovician Kope Formation in its type area, northern Kentucky, including revised nomenclature, in Sequence, Cyclic, and Event Stratigraphy of Upper Ordovician and Silurian Strata of the Cincinnati Arch Region: 1999 Field Conference, Great Lakes Section SEPM-SSG (Society for Sedimentary Geology), Kentucky Guidebook Series 1, p. 47–64.Google Scholar
Brett, C.E., Algeo, T.J., and McGlaughlin, P.I., 2003, The use of event beds and sedimentary cycles in high-resolution stratigraphic correlation of lithologically repetitive successions: The Upper Ordovician Kope Formation of northern Kentucky and southern Ohio, in Harries, P., and Geary, D., eds., High-Resolution Stratigraphic Approaches to Paleontology: New York, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press, p. 316–351.Google Scholar
Brett, C.E., Kirchner, B.T., Tsujita, C.J., and Datillo, B.F., 2008a, Depositional dynamics recorded in mixed siliciclastic-carbonate marine successions: Insights from the Upper Ordovician Kope Formation of Ohio and Kentucky, USA: in Pratt, B.R., and Holmden C., eds., Dynamics of Epeiric Seas: Geological Association of Canada, Special Paper, 48, p. 73–102.Google Scholar
Brett, C.E., Deline, B.L., and McLaughlin, P.I., 2008b, Attachment, facies distribution, and life history strategies in crinoids from the Upper Ordovician of Kentucky, in Ausich, W.I., and Webster, G.D., eds., Echinoderm Paleobiology: Bloomington and Indianapolis, Indiana University Press, p. 23–52.Google Scholar
Brower, J.C., 1995, Dendrocrinid crinoids from the Ordovician of northern Iowa and southern Minnesota: Journal of Paleontology, v. 69, p. 939–960.Google Scholar
Brower, J.C., 2011, Paleoecology of suspension-feeding echinoderm assemblages from the Upper Ordovician (Katian, Shermanian) Walcott-Rust Quarry of New York: Journal of Paleontology, v. 85, p. 369–391.Google Scholar
Brower, J.C., and Veinus, J., 1978, Ontogeny of Hybocrinus punctatus (Miller and Gurley), an Ordovician crinoid: Mathematical Geology, v. 7, p. 129–147.Google Scholar
Dalvé, E., 1948, The fossil fauna of the Ordovician in the Cincinnati Region: University Museum, Department of Geology and Geography, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, 56 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J., 1847, Palaeontology of New York, v. 1, Containing descriptions of the organic remains of the lower division of the New-York system (equivalent of the Lower Silurian rocks of Europe): Natural History of New York, Albany, State of New York, v. 6, 338 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J., 1852, Palaeontology of New York, v. 2, Containing descriptions of the organic remains of the lower middle division of the New-York system: Natural History of New York, New York, D. Appleton & Co. and Wiley & Putnam; Boston, Gould, Kendall, & Lincoln, v. 6, 362 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J., 1866, Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and other fossils from the Lower Silurian strata of the age of the Hudson-River Group and Trenton Limestone: Albany, 17 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J., and Whitfield, R.P., 1875, Descriptions of invertebrate fossils, mainly from the Silurian System, Crinoidea of the Waverly Group. Ohio Geological Survey, Report, v. 2, Geology and Palaeontology, pt. 2, Palaeontology, p. 162–179.Google Scholar
Holland, S.M., Miller, A.I., Meyer, D.L., and Dattilo, B.F., 2001, The detection and importance of subtle biofacies within a single lithofacies: The Upper Ordovician Kope Formation of the Cincinnati, Ohio Region. Palaios, v. 16, p. 205–217.Google Scholar
Holterhoff, P.F., 1997, Paleocommunity and evolutionary ecology of Paleozoic crinoids, in Waters, J.A., and Maples, C.G., eds., Geobiology of Echinoderms: The Paleontological Society Papers, v. 3, p. 69–106.Google Scholar
Jell, P.A., 1999, Silurian and Devonian crinoids from central Victoria: Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, v. 43(1), p. 1–114.Google Scholar
Jin, J., 2012, Cincinnetina, a new Late Ordovician dalmanellid brachiopod from the Cincinnati type area, USA: implications for the evolution and palaeogeography of the epicontinental fauna of Laurentia: Palaeontology, v. 55, p. 205–228.Google Scholar
Kallmeyer, J.W., and Donovan, S.K., 1998, Tenuicrinus longibasalis, a new disparid in the subfamily Cincinnaticrininae, Upper Ordovician, Edenian, north central Kentucky: Northeastern Geology and Environmental Sciences, v. 20, p. 28–38.Google Scholar
Kammer, T.W., and Ausich, W.I., 1987, Aerosol suspension feeding and current velocities: distributional controls for the late Osagean crinoids: Paleobiology, v. 13, p. 379–395.Google Scholar
Kitazawa, K., Oji, T., and Sunamura, M., 2007, Food composition of crinoids (Crinoidea: Echinodermata) in relation to stalk length and fan density: their paleoecological implications: Marine Biology, v. 152, p. 959–968.Google Scholar
Macurda, D.B, and Meyer, D.L., 1974, Feeding posture of modern stalked crinoids: Nature, v. 247, p. 394–396.Google Scholar
Meek, F.B., 1871, On some new Silurian (Ordovician) crinoids and shells: American Journal of Science series 3, v. 1, p. 295–299.Google Scholar
Meek, F.B., 1873, Descriptions of invertebrate fossils of the Silurian and Devonian systems: Ohio Geological Survey, v. 1(2), 243 p.Google Scholar
Meyer, D.L., and Davis, R.A., 2009, A Sea Without Fish: Life in the Ordovician Sea of the Cincinnati Region: Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 346 p.Google Scholar
Meyer, D.L., Miller, A.I., Holland, S.M., and Datillo, B.F., 2002, Crinoid distribution and feeding morphology through a depositional sequence: Kope and Fairview formations, Upper Ordovician, Cincinnati Arch Region: Journal of Paleontology, v. 76, p. 725–732.Google Scholar
Miller, J.S., 1821, A Natural History of the Crinoidea or lily-shaped animals, with observations on the genera Asteria, Euryale, Comatula, and Marsupites: Bristol, Bryan and Co., 150 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., 1874, Glyptocrinus fornshelli: Cincinnati Quarterly Journal of Science, v. 1, p. 348–351.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., 1882, Description of ten new species of fossils: Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, v. 5, p. 79–88.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., 1889, North American geology and paleontology: Cincinnati, Western Methodist Book Concern, 664 p.Google Scholar
Moore, R.C., 1952, Crinoids, in Moore, R.C., Lalicker, C.G., and Fischer, A.G. Invertebrate Fossils: New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co, p. 604–652.Google Scholar
Moore, R.C., and Laudon, L.R., 1943, Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids: Geological Society of America Special Papers, v. 46, 153 p.Google Scholar
Parks, W.A., and Alcock, F.J., 1912, On two new crinoids from the Trenton Formation of Ontario: Ottawa Naturalist, v. 26, p. 41–45.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G., 1978, General morphology, in Moore, R.C., and Teichert, C., eds., Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America (and University of Kansas), p. T58–T216.Google Scholar
von Schlotheim, E.F., 1820, Die Petrefactenkunde auf ihrem jetzigen Standpunkte durch die Beschreibung seiner Sammlung versteinerter und fossiler Überreste des Thier-und Pflanzenreichs der Vorwelt erläutert: Gotha, Beckersche Buchhandlung, 437 p.Google Scholar
von Zittel, K.A., 1876-80, Handbuch der Palaeontologie: v. 1, Palaeozoologie: München, Leipzig, R. Oldenbourg, (1879), no. 1, p. 1–765, (Echinoderms, p. 308–560).Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F., 1880-1886, Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea: Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Pt. I. The families Ichthyocrinidae and Cyathocrinidae (1880), p. 226–378 (separate re-paged p. 1–153). Pt. II. Family Sphaeroidocrinidae, with the sub-families Platycrinidae, Rhodocrinidae, and Actinocrinidae (1881), p. 177–411, (separate re-paged, p. 1–237). Pt. III, Sec. 1. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1885), p. 225–364 (separate re-paged, 1–138). Pt. III, Sec. 2. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1886), p. 64–226 (separate re-paged to continue with section 1, 139–302).Google Scholar
Walcott, C.D., 1884, Descriptions of new species of fossils from the Trenton Group of New York: New York State Museum of Natural History, Annual Report, v. 35, p. 207–214.Google Scholar
Warn, J.M., and Strimple, H.L., 1977, The disparid inadunate superfamilies Homocrinacea and Cincinnaticrinacea (Echinodermata: Crinoidea), Ordovician – Silurian, North America: Bulletins of American Paleontology, v. 72(296), 138 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G.D., and Webster, D.W., 2014, Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids, coronates, and hemistreptocrinoids, 1758 – 2012: http://crinoids.azurewebsites.net/ (accessed January 2015).Google Scholar
Wilson, A.E., 1946, Echinodermata of the Ottawa Formation of the Ottawa-St. Lawrence Lowland: Canada Geological Survey, Bulletin, v. 4, p. 1–61.Google Scholar