Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T02:59:25.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ontogeny of an Ordovician trinucleid (Trilobita) from Armorica, France: A morphometric approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Aurelien Delabroye  and
Catherine Cronier
Aurelien Delabroye
Affiliation:
USTL Sciences de la Terre, Laboratoire de Paléontologie et Paléogéographie du Paléozoïque, UMR 8014 et FR 1818 du CNRS, 59655 Villeneuve d'Ascq Cedex, France,
Catherine Cronier
Affiliation:
USTL Sciences de la Terre, Laboratoire de Paléontologie et Paléogéographie du Paléozoïque, UMR 8014 et FR 1818 du CNRS, 59655 Villeneuve d'Ascq Cedex, France,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A large number of well-preserved immature exoskeletons enable the first detailed quantitative description of the ontogeny of the trinucleid Marrolithus bureaui (Oehlert, 1895) from the Lower Caradoc of the Armorican Massif (Armorica, northwest France). For the accurate description of cephalic features, a landmark-based approach was adopted in order to recognize ontogenetic instars and to establish the patterns of size increase and shape change during ontogenetic development. The quantitative analysis permitted the demonstration of a progressive shape change in agreement with ontogenetic ordination and a comparison of the timing of size and shape changes. Changes that took place during the meraspid period included, in particular, the development of a more pronounced sub-quadrangular cephalic outline, a compression (sag.) of the glabella and a size decrease until disappearance of the alae in late stages. This quantitative ontogenetic reconstitution of Marrolithus bureaui might be considered as a reference for the better understanding of phylogenetic affinities between other trinucleid species.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 82 , Issue 4 , July 2008 , pp. 800 - 810
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, D. C., Rohlf, F. J., and Slice, D. 2004. Geometric Morphometrics: Ten Years of Progress Following the Revolution. Italian Journal of Zoology, 71:5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adrain, J. M., Edgecombe, G. D., Fortey, R. A., Hammer, Ø., Laurie, J. R., MacCormik, T., Owen, A. W., Waisfeld, B. G., Webby, B. D., Westrop, S. R., and Zhi-yi, Z. 2004. Trilobites, p. 231–254. In Webby, B. D., Paris, F., Droser, M. L., and Percival, I. D. (eds.), The Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event. Columbia University Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrande, J. 1852. Système Silurien du Centre de la Bohème. lère partie: Recherches Paléontologiques. Crustacés: Trilobites. Prague and Paris, 935 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergström, S. T., Finney, S. C., Xu, C., Goldman, D., and Leslie, S. A. 2006. Three new Ordovician global stage names. Lethaia, 39:387–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, F. and Lespérance, P. 1971. Biométrie de deux “espèces” de Cryptolithus (Trilobita) (Caradocien du Québec et du Vermont). Colloque Ordovicien-Silurien, Mémoire du Bureau de Recherche Géologique et Minière, 73:27–40.Google Scholar
Bettley, R. M., Fortey, R. A., and Siveter, D. J. 2001. High-resolution correlation of Anglo-Welsh Middle to Upper Ordovician sequences and its relevance to international chronostratigraphy. Journal of the Geological Society, 158:937–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bookstein, F. L. 1991. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data/Geometry and Biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 435 p.Google Scholar
Čech, S. 1975. Cranidial reticulation and functional morphology of the cephalic fringe in Trinucleidae (Trilobita). Věstník Ústředního ústavu geologického, 50:173–178.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E. and Speyer, S. E. 1989. Larval ecology, life history strategies, and patterns of extinction and survivorship among Ordovician trilobites. Paleobiology, 15:118–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E. and Speyer, S. E. 1997. Ontogeny, p. 173–247. In Kaesler, R. L. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O, Arthropoda 1, Trilobita 1 (revised). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Crônier, C. and Feist, R. 1997. Morphologie et évolution ontogénétique de Trimerocephalus lelievrei nov. sp., premier trilobite phacopidé aveugle du Famennien nord-africain. Geobios, Mémoire Spécial, 20:161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crônier, C. and Fortey, R. A. 2006. Morphology and ontogeny of an Early Devonian phacopid trilobite with reduced sight from southern Thailand. Journal of Paleontology, 80:529–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crônier, C., Auffray, J.-C., and Courville, P. 2005. A quantitative comparison of the ontogeny of two closely-related Upper Devonian Phacopid trilobites. Lethaia, 38:123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crônier, C., Feist, R., and Auffray, J.-C. 2004. Variation in the eye of Acuticryphops (Phacopina, Trilobita) and its evolutionary significance: a biometric and morphometric approach. Paleobiology, 30:471–481.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crônier, C., Bartzsch, K., Weyer, D., and Feist, R. 1999. Larval morphology and ontogeny of a Late Devonian Phacopid with reduced sight from Thuringia, Germany. Journal of Paleontology, 73:240–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crônier, C., Renaud, S., Feist, R., and Auffray, J.-C. 1998. Ontogeny of Trimerocephalus lelievrei (Trilobita, Phacopida), a representative of the Late Devonian phacopine paedomorphocline: A morphometric approach. Paleobiology, 24:359–370.Google Scholar
Dean, W. T. 1960. The Ordovician trilobite faunas of South Shropshire. I. Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Geology), 4:71–143.Google Scholar
Dean, W. T. 1966. The lower Ordovician stratigraphy and trilobites of the Landeyran Valley and the neighbouring district of the Montagne Noire, southwestern France. Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Geology), 12:245–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delabroye, A. and Crônier, C. 2007. Quantitative analysis of an Upper Ordovician trinucleid Marrolithus from Armorica, France. Acta Paleontologica Sinica, 46(supplement):95–98.Google Scholar
Henry, J.-L. 1980. Trilobites ordoviciens du Massif Armoricain. Mémoires de la Société Géologique et Minéralogique de Bretagne, 22:1–250.Google Scholar
Henry, J.-L. 1989. Paléoenvironnements et dynamique de faunes de trilobites dans l'Ordovicien (Llanvirn supérieur-Caradoc basal) du Massif Armoricain (France). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 73:139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, J.-L., Vidal, M., and Lacombe, L. 1993. Apparition soudaine de Protolloydolithus (Trilobita, Trinucleidae) dans l'Ordovicien (Llandeilo) du Massif Armoricain: un essai d'interprétation. Geobios, 26:201–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hewett, C. J. 1974. Growth and moulting in the common Lobster (Homarus vulgaris Milne-Edwards). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 54:379–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, C. P., Ingham, J. K., and Addison, R. 1975. The morphology, classification and evolution of the Trinucleidae (Trilobita). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B, 272:537–607.Google Scholar
Hughes, N. C. 1971. The Ordovician trilobite faunas of the Builth-Llandrindod inlier, Central Wales, Pt II, Bulletin of the British Museum, Natural History (Geology), 20:115–182.Google Scholar
Hughes, N. C. and Chapman, R. E. 1995. Growth and variation in the Silurian proetide trilobite Aulacopleura konincki and its implications for trilobite paleobiology. Lethaia, 28:333–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hupé, P. 1953. Classsification des Trilobites. Annales de Paléontologie, 39:1–110.Google Scholar
Kerforne, F. 1900. Description de trois nouveaux trilobites de l'Ordovicien de Bretagne. Bulletins de la Société Géologique de France, 28:783–791.Google Scholar
Lebrun, P. 1994. Les Onnia ordoviciens (Trinucléïdés, Trilobites) du Massif Armoricain. Minéraux & Fossiles, 224:7–20.Google Scholar
Lebrun, P. 2002. Trilobites de France (Tome 1): généralités sur les trilobites, Massif Armoricain (Bretagne, Normandie, Vendée). Minéraux & Fossiles, hors-séries, 14:1–132.Google Scholar
Lu, Y. 1963. The ontogeny of Hanchungolithus multiseriatus (Endo) and Ningkianolithus welleri (Endo), with a brief note of the classification of the Trinucleidae. Acta palaeontologica Sinica, 11:319–339.Google Scholar
Nielsen, A. T. 2004. Ordovician sea level changes: a Baltoscandian perspective, p. 84–93. In Webby, B. D., Paris, F., Droser, M. L., and Percival, I. D. (eds.), The Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event. Columbia University Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oehlert, D.-P. 1895. Sur les Trinucleus de l'Ouest de la France. Bulletins de la Société Géologique de France, 23:299–335.Google Scholar
Přibyl, A. and Vaněk, J. 1969. Trilobites of the family Trinucleidae Hawle and Corda, 1847 from the Ordovician of Bohemia. Sborník geologicky-ch věd Paleontologie, 11:85–137.Google Scholar
Rohlf, F. J. 1993. Ntsys-Pc; numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, Version 1.80. Exeter Software, Setauket, New York.Google Scholar
Rohlf, F. J. 2003a. tpsSuper, superimposition and image averaging, version 1.12. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook.Google Scholar
Rohlf, F. J. 2003b. tpsRelw, relative warp analysis, version 1.44. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook.Google Scholar
Rohlf, F. J. and Slice, D. E. 1990. Extensions of the Procrustes methods for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Systematic Zoology, 39:49–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romano, M. 1990. The trilobite Protolloydolithus from the middle Ordovician of North Portugal. Palaeontology, 33:487–493.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. P. and Ross, C. A. 1992. Ordovician sea level fluctuations. In Webby, B. D. and Laurie, J. R. (eds.), Global Perspectives on Ordovician Geology: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on the Ordovician System, Balkema, Rotterdam, 327–335.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. P. and Ross, C. A. 1995. North American depositional sequences and correlations. In Cooper, J. D., Droser, M. L., and Finney, S. C. (eds.), Ordovician Odyssey: Short Papers for the 7th International Symposium on the Ordovician System, Fullerton, California, 309–313.Google Scholar
Salter, J. W. 1847. On the structure of Trinucleus, with remarks on the species. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 3:251–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, F. C. 1995. Ordovician trinucleid trilobites of the Prague Basin, Czech Republic. The Paleontological Society Memoir, 40:1–23.Google Scholar
Smith, L. H. 1998. Species level phenotypic variation in Lower Paleozoic Trilobites. Paleobiology, 24:17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Størmer, L. 1930. Scandinavian Trinucleidae. Skrifter Norske Videnskaps-Akademi, Oslo, Mathem.-Naturvid. Klasse, 4:1–111.Google Scholar
Webby, B. D., Cooper, R. A., Bergström, S. M., and Paris, F. 2004. Stratigraphic Framework. In Webby, B. D., Paris, F., Droser, M. L., and Percival, I. D. (eds.), The Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event, Columbia University Press, New York, 41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, M. 2007. Ontogeny and evolution of the Early Cambrian trilobite genus Nephrolenellus (Olenelloidea). Journal of Paleontology, 81(6):1168–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, M. and Hughes, N. C. 1999. Compaction-related deformation in Cambrian Olenelloid trilobites and its implications for fossil morphometry. Journal of Paleontology, 73:355–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, M., Sheets, D. H., and Hughes, N. C. 2001. Allometric patterning in trilobite ontogeny: testing for heterochrony in Nephrolenellus. In Zelditch, M. L. (ed.), Beyond Heterochrony: The Evolution of Development. Wiley and Sons, New York, 105–144.Google Scholar
Webster, M. and Zelditch, M. L. 2005. Evolutionary modifications of ontogeny: heterochrony and beyond. Paleobiology, 31:354–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittard, W. F. 1955. The Ordovician trilobites of the Shelve inlier, west Shropshire, Pt. I, Palaeontographical Society monographs, London, 1–40.Google Scholar
Whittard, W. F. 1956. The Ordovician trilobites of the Shelve inlier, west Shropshire, Pt. II, Palaeontographical Society monographs, London, 41–70.Google Scholar
Whittard, W. F. 1958. The Ordovician trilobites of the Shelve inlier, west Shropshire, Pt. III, Palaeontographical Society monographs, London, 71–116.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1940. On some Trinucleidae described by Joachim Barrande. American Journal of Sciences, 238:241–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1957. The ontogeny of trilobites. Biological Reviews, 32:421–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1959a. Ontogeny of Trilobita. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O, Arthropoda 1:127–144. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1959b. Silicified Middle Ordovician trilobites: Remopleurididae, Trinucleidae, Raphiophoridae, Endymioniidae. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, 12:371–496.Google Scholar
Zelditch, M. L., Swiderski, D. L., Sheets, H. D., and Fink, W. L. 2004. Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists: A Primer. Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam, 443 p.Google Scholar