Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T17:25:36.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Primitive cladid crinoids from the early Osagean Burlington Limestone and the phylogenetics of Mississippian species of Cyathocrinites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Thomas W. Kammer  and
Forest J. Gahn
Thomas W. Kammer
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geography, West Virginia University, Morgantown 26506-6300,
Forest J. Gahn
Affiliation:
Museum of Paleontology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 48109-1079,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

All 19 known species of the primitive cladid crinoid genera Atelestocrinus, Cyathocrinites, Goniocrinus, Parisocrinus, Pellecrinus, and Zygotocrinus from the early Osagean Burlington Limestone of the North American midcontinent are reviewed and redescribed or, where necessary, redefined. Nine of these species are illustrated for the first time herein. Sixteen are considered valid, including C. deroseari n. sp. Of the remaining three species, one is left in open nomenclature, and two are considered nomen dubia. Pellecrinus is recognized for the first time from the Burlington Limestone, although the specimens can not be identified to the species level and are left in open nomenclature.

Cyathocrinites ranges from the Middle Silurian to at least the Middle Mississippian. During the Early Mississippian Cyathocrinites experienced an evolutionary radiation with a maximum diversity of nine species in the Burlington Limestone. Phylogenetic relationships were investigated in a parsimony-based phylogenetic analysis by combining morphologic data from the Burlington species with data from the four other species of Cyathocrinites from the late Osagean and early Meramecian of the east-central United States. The Kinderhookian C. chouteauensis (Miller and Gurley, 1896) served as the outgroup. A phylogenetic analysis of 14 species of Mississippian Cyathocrinites yielded a single most parsimonious tree with a length of 28 steps (C. I. = 0.607, H. I. = 0.392, R. I. = 0.718, R. C. = 0.436). Results of this analysis suggest that at least two major clades existed within Mississippian Cyathocrinites. One clade contains C. sampsoni (Miller, 1891b), C. gilesi (Wachsmuth and Springer, 1878), C. farleyi (Meek and Worthen, 1866), and C. barydactylus (Wachsmuth and Springer, 1878). The second clade contains C. iowensis, C. kelloggi (White, 1862), C. barrisi (Hall, 1861a), C. rigidus, C. deroseari n. sp., C. asperrimus (Springer, 1911), C. lamellosus (White, 1863), and C. harrodi (Wachsmuth and Springer, 1880). Cyathocrinites multibrachiatus forms a polytomy with these two clades. Members of the first clade exhibit a unique overall morphology present only during the Mississippian, suggesting the clade arose during this time. Members of the second clade, plus C. multibrachiatus, exhibit some characters present in Cyathocrinites species as old as the Middle Silurian and, thus, may have its roots among Silurian and Devonian species.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , January 2003 , pp. 121 - 138
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

Ausich, W. I. 1997. Regional encrinites: a vanished lithofacies, p. 509–519. In Brett, C. E. (ed.), Paleontological Events: Stratigraphic, Ecologic, and Evolutionary Implications. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1998a. Early phylogeny and subclass division of the Crinoidea (Phylum Echinodermata). Journal of Paleontology, 72:499–510.10.1017/S0022336000024276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1998b. Phylogeny of Arenig to Caradoc crinoids (Phylum Echinodermata) and suprageneric classification of the Crinoidea. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, new series, no. 9, 36 p.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1999. Lower Mississippian Burlington Limestone along the Mississippi River Valley in Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri, USA, p. 139–144. In Hess, H., Ausich, W. I., Brett, C. E., and Simms, M. J. (eds.), Fossil Crinoids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9780511626159.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Lane, N. G. 1982. Crinoids from the Edwardsville Formation (Lower Mississippian) of southern Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 56:1343–1361.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Kammer, T. W., and Baumiller, T. K. 1994. Demise of the Middle Paleozoic crinoid fauna: a single extinction event or rapid faunal turnover? Paleobiology, 20:345–361.10.1017/S0094837300012811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassler, R. S., and Moodey, M. W. 1943. Bibliographic and faunal index of Paleozoic pelmatozoan echinoderms. Geological Society of America Special Paper 45, 734 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bengston, P. 1988. Open nomenclature. Palaeontology, 31:223–227.Google Scholar
Bremer, K. 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution, 42(4):795–803.10.1111/j.1558-5646.1988.tb02497.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donovan, S. K. 1988. The early evolution of the Crinoidea, p. 235–244. In Paul, C. R. C. and Smith, A. B. (eds.), Echinoderm Phylogeny and Evolutionary Biology. Clarendon Press, Oxford,, 373 p.Google Scholar
Felsenstein, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies; an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution, 39:783–791.10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb00420.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frest, T. J. 1977. Cyathocrinites from the Silurian (Wenlock) strata of southeastern Indiana. Fieldiana Geology, 35(7):109–136.Google Scholar
Gahn, F. J., and Kammer, T. W. 2002. The cladid crinoid Barycrinus from the Burlington Limestone (early Osagean) and the phylogenetics of Mississippian botryocrinids. Journal of Paleontology, 76:123–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. 1857. Observations upon the Carboniferous limestones of the Mississippi Valley. American Journal of Science, 23:187–203.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1858. Report on the Geological Survey of Iowa embracing the results of investigations made during portions of the years 1855, 1856, 1857. Geological Survey of Iowa, Volume 1, Parts 1 and 2, 724 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1860. Contributions to the palaeontology of Iowa: being descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and other fossils. Iowa Geological Survey, 1(2) supplement, 94 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861a. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and other fossils, from the Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Iowa Geological Survey Report of Investigations, Preliminary Notice. Albany, New York, 19 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861b. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi valley. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 7:261–328.Google Scholar
Harris, S. E., and Parker, M. C. 1964. Stratigraphy of the Osage Series in southeastern Iowa. Iowa Geological Survey, Report of Investigations 1, 52 p.10.17077/0578-6045.1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaekel, O. 1918. Phylogenie und System der Pelmatozoen. Paläeontologische Zeitschrift, 3(1):1–128.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. 2001. Phenotypic bradytely in the Costalocrinus-Barycrinus lineage of Paleozoic cladid crinoids. Journal of Paleontology, 75:383–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1992. Advanced cladid crinoids from the Middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: Primitivegrade calyces. Journal of Paleontology, 66:461–480.10.1017/S0022336000034016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1993. Advanced cladid crinoids from the Middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: Intermediate-grade calyces. Journal of Paleontology, 67:614–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1994. Advanced cladid crinoids from the Middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: Advancedgrade calyces. Journal of Paleontology, 68:339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1996. Primitive cladid crinoids from upper Osagean-lower Meramecian rocks of east-central United States. Journal of Paleontology, 70:835–866.10.1017/S0022336000023878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., Baumiller, T. K., and Ausich, W. I. 1997. Species longevity as a function of niche breadth: evidence from fossil crinoids. Geology, 25:219–222.10.1130/0091-7613(1997)025<0219:SLAAFO>2.3.CO;22.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., Baumiller, T. K., and Ausich, W. I. 1998. Evolutionary significance of differential species longevity in Osgean-Meramecian (Mississippian) crinoid clades. Paleobiology, 24:155–176.Google Scholar
Kaiser, C. H. 1950. Stratigraphy of the lower Mississippian rocks in southwestern Missouri. Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 34(11):2133–2175.Google Scholar
Kelly, S. M. 1986. Classification and evolution of Class Crinoidea. Abstracts of the 4th North American Paleontological Convention, p. A23.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1929. The fossil crinoid genus Vasocrinus Lyon. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 74 (art. 15):1–16.10.5479/si.00963801.74-2760.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, E. 1943. Zygotocrinus, a new fossil inadunate crinoid genus. American Journal of Science, 241:640–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, H. R. 1978. The Burlington shelf (Mississippian, north-central United States). Geologica et Paleontologica, 12:165–176.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1933. The stratigraphy and paleontology of the Gilmore City Formation of Iowa. University of Iowa Studies, 15(2):1–74.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1937. Stratigraphy of the northern extension of the Burlington Limestone in Missouri and Iowa. Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 21:1158–1167.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1973. Stratigraphic crinoid zonation in Iowa Mississippian rocks. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science, 80:25–33.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R., and Severson, J. L. 1953. New crinoid fauna, Mississippian, Lodgepole Formation, Montana. Journal of Paleontology, 27:505–536.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R., Parks, J. M., and Spreng, A. C. 1952. Mississippian crinoid fauna from the Banff Formation, Sunwapata Pass, Alberta. Journal of Paleontology, 26:544–575.Google Scholar
Lyon, S. S., and Casseday, S. A. 1859. Description of nine new species of Crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana and Kentucky. American Journal of Science, Series 2, 28:233–246.Google Scholar
Lyon, S. S., and Casseday, S. A. 1860. A synonymic list of the Echinodermata of the Palaeozoic rocks of North America. Proceedings of the American Academy of Science and Arts, 4:282–304.Google Scholar
Macurda, D. B., and Meyer, D. L. 1974. Feeding posture of modern stalked crinoids. Nature, 247:394–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1860. Description of new species of Crinoidea and Echinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of Illinois, and other western states. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Proceedings, Series 2, 4:379–397.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1861. Descriptions of new Paleozoic fossils from Illinois and Iowa. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Proceedings for 1861, p. 128–148.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1866. Contributions to the paleontology of Illinois and other western states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia (1865), 17:251–274.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1868a. Remarks on some types of Carboniferous Crinoidea with descriptions of new genera and species of the same, and of one echinoid. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Proceedings, 20:335–359.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1868b. Palaeontology of Illinois. Illinois Geological Survey, 3:289–565.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1869. Descriptions of new Carboniferous fossils from the western states. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Proceedings, 22:137–172.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1870. Description of new species and genera of fossils from the Paleozoic rocks of the western states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1870, p. 22–56.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1873. Descriptions of invertebrates from Carboniferous system. Illinois Geological Survey, 5:321–619.Google Scholar
Miller, J. S. 1821. A Natural History of the Crinoidea or Lily-Shaped Animals, with Observation on the genera Asteria, Euryale, Comatula, and Marsupites. Bryan and Company, Bristol, England, 150 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1880. Description of two new species from the Niagara Group and five from the Keokuk Group. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 2(4):254–259.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1882. Description of ten new species of fossils. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 5:79–88.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1889. North American Geology and Paleontology. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati, Ohio, 664 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1891a. Paleontology. Advance Sheets from the Indiana Department of Geology and Natural Resources Annual Report 17, 103 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1891b. A description of some Lower Carboniferous crinoids from Missouri. Missouri Geological Survey Bulletin 4, 40 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., and Gurley, W. F. E. 1890. Description of some new genera and species of Echinodermata from the Coal Measures and Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana, Missouri, and Iowa. Indiana Department of Geology and Natural History Annual Report, 16:327–373.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., and Gurley, W. F. E. 1894. New genera and species of Echinodermata. Illinois State Museum of Natural History Bulletin 5, 53 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., and Gurley, W. F. E. 1895a. Description of new species of Palaeozoic Echinodermata. Illinois State Museum, Bulletin, 6:1–62.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., and Gurley, W. F. E. 1895b. New and interesting species of Palaeozoic fossils. Illinois State Museum, Bulletin, 7:1–89.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., and Gurley, W. F. E. 1896. New species of Echinodermata and a new crustacean from the Palaeozoic rocks. Illinois State Museum, Bulletin, 10:1–91.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., and Laudon, L. R. 1943. Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids. Geological Society of America Special Paper 46, 167 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, R. C., Lane, N. G., and Strimple, H. L. 1978. Order Cladida, p. T578–T755. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. T, Echinodermata 2(2). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Niles, W. H., and Wachsmuth, C. 1866. Evidence of two distinct geological formations in the Burlington Limestone. American Journal of Science, 42:95–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, D. D., and Shumard, B. F. 1850. Descriptions of fifteen new species of Crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous limestone of Iowa. Journal of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, Series 2, Volume 2, Pt. 1, p. 57–70.Google Scholar
Owen, D. D., and Shumard, B. F. 1852. Descriptions of seven new species of Crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous limestone of Iowa and Illinois. Journal of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, Series 2, Volume 2, part 2, p. 89–94.Google Scholar
Roeser, E. W. 1986. A Lower Mississippian (Kinderhookian-Osagean) crinoid fauna from the Cuyahoga Formation of northeastern Ohio. M.S. thesis, University of Cincinnati, 322 p.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R. 1905. Missouri palaeontology. American Geologist, 35:301–311.Google Scholar
Simms, M. J., and Sevastopulo, G. D. 1993. The origin of articulate crinoids. Palaeontology, 36:91–109.Google Scholar
Sokal, R. R., and Rohlf, F. J. 1981. Biometry (second edition). W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Springer, F. 1900. On the presence of pores in the ventral sac in fistulate crinoids. American Geologist, 26:133–151.Google Scholar
Springer, F. 1911. The crinoid fauna of the Knobstone formation. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 41:175–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Springer, F. 1926. American Silurian Crinoids. Smithsonian Institution Publication 2872:239 p.Google Scholar
Swofford, D. L. 2001. PAUP∗ Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (∗ and other methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Stearn, C. W., and Carroll, R. L. 1989. Paleontology: The Record of Life. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 453 p.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978. Skeletal morphology of fossil crinoids, p. T58–T216. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. T, Echinodermata 2(1). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Van Sant, J. F. 1964. Crawfordsville crinoids, p. 34–136. In Van Sant, J. F., and Lane, N. G. (eds.), Crawfordsville Crinoid Studies. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions Article, 7.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1878. Transition forms in crinoids and descriptions of 5 new species. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, p. 224–266.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1880. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1879, p. 226–378.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1885. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea, Pt. 3, Sec. 1, Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1885, p. 223–364 (1–139).Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1886. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidae, Pt. 3, Sec. 2, Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1885, p. 64–226 (140–302).Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1897. The North American Crinoidea Camerata. Harvard College Museum of Comparative Zoology, Memoir 21–22, 897 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1973. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids 1942–1968. Geological Society of America Memoir, 137, 341 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1977. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids 1969–1973. Geological Society of America Microform Publication, 8, 235 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1986. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids 1974–1980. Geological Society of America Microform Publication, 16, 405 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1988. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids 1981–1985. Geological Society of America Microform Publication, 18, 236 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1993. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids, 1986–1990. Geological Society of America Microform Publication, 25, 204 p.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1862. Description of new species of fossils from the Devonian and Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, 9:8–33.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1863. Observations on the summit structure of Pentremites, the structure and arrangement of certain parts of crinoids, and descriptions of new species from the Carboniferous rocks of Burlington, Iowa. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 7:481–506.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1865. Description of new species of fossils from the Devonian and Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Journal of the Boston Society of Natural History, 9:8–33.Google Scholar
Witzke, B. J., McCay, R. M., Bunker, B. J., and Woodson, F. J. 1990. Stratigraphy and paleoenvironments of Mississippian strata in Keokuk and Washington counties, southeast Iowa. Department of Natural Resources, Geological Survey Bureau. Guidebook Series no. 10, 105 p.Google Scholar
Wood, E. 1909. A critical summary of Troost's unpublished manuscript on the crinoids of Tennessee. United States National Museum Bulletin 64, 115 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar