Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T23:20:31.296Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chelicerata from the Dinantian of Foulden, Berwickshire, Scotland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

Charles D. Waterston
Charles D. Waterston
Affiliation:
Royal Scottish Museum, Chambers Street, Edinburgh EH1 1JF, Scotland.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A lower Carboniferous limulacean Rolfeia fouldenensis gen. et sp. nov. is described. It is regarded as a sister group of Paleolimulus and distinguished from it by the presence of fixed opisthosomal spines and by the more primitive outline of the opisthosoma. Both characters could have been derived from belinuroid ancestors, and both were retained in the advanced belinurids and euproopids. The view that limulaceans are more closely related to certain primitive belinuraceans rather than descended from the euproopaceans is thus supported by the new evidence. Although Rolfeia was probably still capable of coaption, it is postulated that, like other limulaceans, it had adopted burial as a form of defence. It is suggested that the primary adaptive function of the fixed opisthosomal spines was to support the body over a soft substrate although they may also have served a defensive role.

The occurrence at Foulden of the eurypterid Cyrtoctenus peachi Størmer and Waterston is confirmed. The eoscorpiid Trachyscorpio squarrosus Kjellesvig-Waering 1984 has been described from Foulden and disjecta membra of Gigantoscorpio cf. willsi Størmer discovered in the recent excavation are described. The type of preservation and adaptive features of the chelicerates would suggest that the eurypterid and scorpion fragments are allochthonous and the xiphosurans probably autochthonous.

Keywords

ArachnidaArthropodaCarboniferousMerostomataRolfeiataxonomyXiphosurida
Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 76 , Issue 1 , 1985 , pp. 25 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1985

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

Bergström, J. 1975. Functional morphology and evolution of xiphosurids. FOSSILS AND STRATA 4, 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergström, J. 1978. Morphology of Fossil Arthropods as a Guide to Phylogenetic relationships. In Gupta, A. P. (ed.) Arthropod Phytogeny, 3–56. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.Google Scholar
Clarkson, E. N. K. 1969. A functional study of the Silurian odontopleurid trilobite Leonaspis deflexa (Lake). LETHAIA 2, 329–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dix, E. & Jones, S. H. 1932. A note on an arthropod from the South Wales coalfield. GEOL MAG 69, 275–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, C. O. 1923. Kansas Permian Insects. Part 2. Paleolimulus, a New Genus of Paleozoic Xiphosura, with Notes on other Genera. AM J SCI (5) 5, 443–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eldredge, N. 1970. Observations on burrowing behaviour in Limulus polyphemus (Chelicerata, Merostomata), with implications on the functional anatomy of trilobites. AM MUS NOVIT 2436, 1–17.Google Scholar
Eldredge, N. 1974. Revision of the Suborder Synziphosurina (Chelicerata, Merostomata), with Remarks on Merostome Phytogeny. AM MUS NOVIT 2543, 1–41.Google Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1975. Swimming and burrowing in Limulus and Mesolimulus. FOSSILS AND STRATA 4, 181–290.Google Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1977a. Mechanism and significance of enrollment in xiphosurans (Chelicerata, Merostomata). ABSTR GEOL SOC AM 9, 264–5.Google Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1977b. Functional significance of spines in the Pennsylvanian horseshoe crab Euproops danae. PALEOBIOLOGY 3, 175–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1979. Evidence of subaerial activity of Euproops danae (Merostomata, Xiphosurida). In Nitecki, M. H. (ed.) Mazon Creek Fossils, 379–477. New York, Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1981. The Role of Functional Analysis in Phylogenetic Inference: Examples from the History of the Xiphosura. AM ZOOL 21, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1982. Phylogenetic and Macroevolutionary Patterns within the Xiphosura. PROC THIRD N AM PALEONTOL CONV 1, 175–80.Google Scholar
Francis, E. H. 1983. Carboniferous. In Craig, G. Y. (ed.) Geology of Scotland 2nd edn, 253–96. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ivanov, P. P. 1933. Die embryonale Entwicklung von Limulus moluccanus. ZOOL JAHRB 56, Abt. Anat., 163–348.Google Scholar
Kjellesvig-Waering, E. N. 1985. A restudy of the fossil Scorpionida of the world. PALAEONTOGR AM (in press).Google Scholar
Peach, B. N. 1881. On some new species of fossil scorpions from the Carboniferous rocks of Scotland and the English Borders. TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH 30, 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1944. Late Paleozoic Xiphosurans. BULL MUS COMP ZOOL 94, 475–508.Google Scholar
Riek, E. F. & Gill, E. D. 1971. A new xiphosuran genus from Lower Cretaceous freshwater sediments at Koonwarra, Victoria, Australia. PALAEONTOLOGY 14, 206–10.Google Scholar
Ruedemann, R. 1918. Paleontological contributions from the New York Museum. ANNU REP NEW YORK STATE MUS (1915) 1, 1–148.Google Scholar
Scholl, G. 1977. Beitrage zur Embryonalenentwicklung von Limulus polyphemus L. (Chelicerata, Xiphosura). ZOOMORPHOLOGIE 86, 99–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schram, F. R. 1979. Limulines of the Mississippian Bear Gulch Limestone of Central Montana, U.S.A. TRANS SAN DIEGO SOC NAT HIST 19, 67–74.Google Scholar
Størmer, L. 1944. On the Relationships and Phylogeny of Fossil and Recent Arachnomorpha. SKR NOR VIDENSK-AKAD MAT-NATURVIDENSK KL 5, 1–158.Google Scholar
Størmer, L. 1952. Phylogeny and Taxonomy of Fossil Horseshoe Crabs. J PALEONTOL 26, 630–40.Google Scholar
Størmer, L. 1955. Merostomata. In Moore, R. C. (ed.) Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. P. Arthropoda 2, pl–p41. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas & Geological Society of America.Google Scholar
Størmer, L. 1963. Gigantoscorpio willsi a new scorpion from the Lower Carboniferous of Scotland and its associated preying microorganisms. SKR NOR VIDENSK-AKAD MAT-NATURVIDENSK KL 1963 8, 1–171.Google Scholar
Størmer, L. & Waterston, C. D. 1968. Cyrtoctenus gen. nov., a Large Late Palaeozoic Arthropod with pectinate Appendages. TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH 68, 63–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stürmer, W. & Bergström, J. 1981. Weinbergina, a xiphosuran from the Devonian Hunsrück Shale. PALAEONTOL Z 55, 237–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tschernyschev, B. I. 1933. Arthropods from the Urals and other regions of the USSR. MATER TSENT NAUCHNO-ISSLED GEOL-RAZVED INST Paleont. Stratigr. Fasc. 1, 15–24 (with English summary).Google Scholar
Vosatka, E. D. 1970. Observations on the swimming, righting and burrowing movements of young horse-shoe crabs, Limulus polyphemus. OHIO J SCI 70, 276–83.Google Scholar
Waterston, C. D., Oelofsen, B. W. & Oosthuizen, R. 1985. Cyrtoctenus wittebergensis sp. nov. (Chelicerata: Eurypterida), a large sweep-feeder from the Carboniferous of South Africa. TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH EARTH SCI 76 (in press).Google Scholar
Wood, S. P. & Rolfe, W. D. I. 1985. Introduction to the palaeontology of the Dinantian of Foulden, Berwickshire, Scotland. TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH EARTH SCI 76, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, H. 1878. In Woodward, H. 1866–1878. A monograph of the British Crustacea, belonging to the Order Merostomata. PALAEONTOGR SOC MONOGR.CrossRefGoogle Scholar