Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T22:15:15.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of models in the understanding of Cambrian arthropod morphology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

David L. Bruton ,
Aage Jensen  and
René Jacquet
David L. Bruton
Affiliation:
Paleontoligisk Museum, Sars Gate 1, 0562 Oslo 5, Norway
Aage Jensen
Affiliation:
Paleontoligisk Museum, Sars Gate 1, 0562 Oslo 5, Norway
René Jacquet
Affiliation:
Paleontoligisk Museum, Sars Gate 1, 0562 Oslo 5, Norway
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Large scale models in polyester and araldite have been made of Sidneyia, Leanchoilia and Emeraldella from the Middle Cambrian, Burgess Shale. Details are given of how the models have been produced and used in functional morphology studies, particularly with respect to walking in Sidneyia.

Keywords

ArthropodaBurgess Shalescale modelsfunctional morphologygait patternswalking
Type
Structure and function
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 76 , Issue 2-3: Fossil Anthropods as Living Animals , 1985 , pp. 365 - 369
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

Briggs, D. E. G. & Williams, S. H. 1981. The restoration of flattened fossils. LETHAIA 14, 157–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruton, D. L. 1981. The Middle Cambrian arthropod Sidneyia inexpectans, Middle Cambrian, Burgess Shale, British Columbia. PHILOS TRANS R SOC LONDON B 295, 619–56.Google Scholar
Bruton, D. L. & Whittington, H. B. 1983. Emeraldella and Leanchoilia, two arthropods from the Burgess Shale, Middle Cambrian, British Columbia. PHILOS TRANS R SOC LONDON B 300, 553–85.Google Scholar
Chase, T. L. 1979. Methods for the preparation of palaeontological models. In Bassett, M. G. (ed.) Curation of palaeontological collections. SPEC PAP PALAEONT 22, 225–67.Google Scholar
Manton, S. M. 1964. Mandibular mechanisms and the evolution of arthropods. PHILOS TRANS R SOC LONDON B 247, 1–183.Google Scholar
Manton, S. M. 1973. The evolution of arthropodan locomotory mechanisms. Part 11. Habits, morphology and evolution of the Uniramia (Onychophora, Myriapoda, Hexapoda) and a comparison with the Arachnida, together with a functional review of uniramian musculature. ZOOL J LINN SOC 53, 257–375.Google Scholar
Selden, P. A. 1981. Functional morphology of the prosoma of Baltoeurypterus tetragonophthalmus (Fisher) (Chelicerata: Eurypterida). TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH EARTH SCI 72, 9–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterston, C. D. 1979. Problems of functional morphology and classification in stylonuroid eurypterids (Chelicerata, Merostomata), with observations on the Scottish Silurian Stylonuroidea. TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH 70, 251–322.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1971. The Burgess Shale: history of research and preservation of fossils. PROC N AM PAL CONVENT CHICAGO 1969, 1, 1170–201.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1980. The significance of the fauna of the Burgess Shale, Middle Cambrian, British Columbia. PROC GEOL ASS 91, 127–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar