No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The biological implications of an edrioasteroid attached to a pleurocystitid rhombiferan
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 July 2015
Abstract
The attachment of a small edrioasteroid to the nonperiproctal surface of a small specimen of the pleurocystitid rhombiferan Amecystis has implications for the life posture of pleurocystitids and indicates that Amecystis was epifaunal. Articulation of the preserved portions of both thecae indicates that the edrioasteroid and Amecystis were alive at or very near the time of burial and that the edrioasteroid used the Amecystis theca as an attachment surface. Other examples of edricasteroids attaching to live organisms are known suggesting that an edrioasteroid attached to a live rhombiferan is not highly unusual. The position of the edrioasteroid on the rhombiferan suggests that Amecystis was oriented with the anal side down in life and that this pleurocystitid was fully epifaunal.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Paleontological Society 2000
References
Aiyer, R. G.
1935. Early development and metamorphosis of the tropical echinoid Salmacis bicolor, Agassiz. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Science, Section B., 1, 11:714–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bather, F. A.
1913. Caradocian Cystidea from Girvan. Royal Society of Edinburgh, Transactions, 49:359–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, B. M.
1976a. Phylogenetic implications of ontogenetic development in the class Edrioasteroidea. Journal of Paleontology, 51:619–632.Google Scholar
Bell, B. M.
1976b. A study of North American Edrioasteroidea. New York State Museum Memoir
21, 446 p.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., Moffat, H. A., and Tayler, W. L.
1997. Echinoderm taphonomy, taphofacies and Lagerstätten, p. 147–190. In
Waters, J. A. and Maples, C. G. (eds.), Geobiology of Echinoderms. Paleontological Society Papers 3, Paleontological Society, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Broadhead, T. W., and Strimple, H. L.
1975. Respiration in a vagrant Ordovician cystoid Amecystis
. Paleobiology, 1:312–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brower, J. C.
1996. Growth and functional morphology of Pleurocystites squamosus Billings, an Ordovician rhombiferan echinoderm. North American Paleontological Convention
96, p. 48.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C.
1999. A new Pleurocystitid rhombiferan echinoderm from the Middle Ordovician Galena Group of northern Iowa and southern Minnesota. Journal of Paleontology, 73:129–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guensburg, T. E.
1988. Systematics, functional morphology, and life modes of Late Ordovician edrioasteroids, Orchard Creek Shale, southern Illinois. Journal of Paleontology, 62:110–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, D. L., and Strimple, H. L.
1968. A new Devonian cystoid attached to a discontinuity surface. Iowa Geological Survey, Report of Investigations, 2:1–49.Google Scholar
Lewis, R.
1980. Taphonomy, p. 27–39. In
Broadhead, T. W. and Waters, J. A. (eds.), Echinoderms, Notes for a Short Course. University of Tennessee Department of Geological Sciences Studies in Geology, 3.Google Scholar
Liddell, W. D.
1975. Recent crinoid biostrantinomy. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Program, 7:1169.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. L.
1971. Post Mortem disarticulation of recent crinoids and ophiuroids under natural conditions. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, 3:645.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. L.
1990. Population paleoecology and comparative anatomy of two edrioasteroid (Echinodermata) pavements: Upper Ordovician of Kentucky and Ohio. Historical Biology
4:155–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, H. B., Jutare, T., Bauer, J. C., and Jones, J. A.
1963. The biology of Lytechinus variagatus
. Bulletin of Marine Science, Gulf Caribbean, 13:23–53.Google Scholar
Parsley, R. L., 1970. Revision of the North American Pleurocystitidae (Rhombifera-Cystoidea). Bulletins of American Paleontology, 58:135–213.Google Scholar
Paul, C. R. C.
1967. The functional morphology and mode of life of the cystoid Pleurocystites E. Billings, 1854, p. 105–123. In
Milot, E. (ed.), Echinoderm Biology. Symposium of the Zoological Society of London, Number 20.Google Scholar
Paul, C. R. C.
1984. British Ordovician cystoids, part 2, Palaeontolographical Society Monographs, 136:65–152.Google Scholar
Prokop, R.
1965.
Argodiscus hornyi gen. n. et sp. n. (Edrioasteroidea), Z Českého Středního Ordoviku. Časopis Národního Muzea—Oddíl Přírodovědný, 134:30–34.Google Scholar
Schäfer, W.
1972. Ecology and paleoecology of Marine Environments. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 568 p.Google Scholar
Sprinkle, J.
1974. New rhombiferan cystoids from the Middle Ordovician of Nevada. Journal of Paleontology, 48:1174–1201.Google Scholar
Sprinkle, J., and Bell, B. M.
1978. Paedomorphosis in edrioasteroid echinoderms. Paleobiology, 4:82–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprinkle, J., and Guensburg, T. E.
1995. Origin of echinoderms in the Paleozoic Evolutionary Fauna: The role of substrates. Palaios, 10:437–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumrall, C. D.
1997. The role of fossils in the phylogenetic reconstruction of echinodermata, p. 276–288. In
Waters, J. A. and Maples, C. G. (eds.), Geobiology of Echinoderms. Paleontological Society Papers 3, Paleontological Society, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Sumrall, C. D., and Sprinkle, J.
1992. Could edrioasteroids move? p. 248. In
Lidgard, S. and Crane, P. R. (eds.), North American Paleontological Convention 5 Abstracts with Program. Paleontological Society Special Publication 6.Google Scholar
Sumrall, C. D., and Sprinkle, J.
1995. Plating and pectinirhombs of the Ordovician Rhombiferan Plethoschisma
. Journal of Paleontology, 69:772–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar