Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:15:52.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Ammonites from Spitsbergen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

L. F. Spath
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Of the rich collections of fossils made by Professors J. W. Gregory and E. J. Garwood, as members of Sir Martin Conway's expedition to Spitsbergen in 1896, only a few Labyrinthodont remains, so far, have been described; but through the kind offices of Dr. A. Smith Woodward, the writer some time ago was entrusted with the naming of the Cephalopoda in those collections. The Ammonites are of the greatest interest, both from a palæontological and a stratigraphical point of view; and in view of the impossibility of publishing, in the near future, a full description of the fauna, with the necessary number of plates, it is intended to give a short preliminary account of these Cephalopoda. It is matter for regret that other groups of invertebrate fossils, such as the Triassic Pelecypoda, or the Upper Jurassic Aucellids, could not be dealt with, and their detailed study, probably, would yield important results. Spitsbergen Vertebrata, on the other hand, always have received considerable attention.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 58 , Issue 7 , July 1921 , pp. 297 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1921

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

page 297 note 1 Woodward, A. Smith, “On Two New Labyrinthodont Skulls of the genera Capilosaurus and Aphaneramma”: Proc. Zool. Soc., vol. ii, 1904.Google Scholar

page 297 note 2 For bibliographies see e.g. Wiman, C., Bull. Geol. Inst. Univ. Upsala, vol. xvi, 1919, p. 85, and E. Andersson Stensiö, ib., p. 80.Google Scholar

page 297 note 3 Wittenburg, P v., “Üb. einige Trias. Fossil, v. Spitzbergen”: Trav. Mus. Géol. Pierre le Grand, vol. iv, 1910, p. 38. The Upper Trias seems to be developed chiefly on the eastern side of Spitsbergen. It may be mentioned in this connexion that a collection of fossils, made this summer (1920) by Mr. W. J. Reynolds, and lately presented to the British Museum, includes a number of Middle Triassic Ammonites from Sassen Bay and Bell Sound, Spitsbergen; but both Upper and Lower Trias are unrepresented by Ammonites in this collection.Google Scholar

page 297 note 4 A Grypoceras ? nordenskjöldi, Lindström sp., from “West of Fortress” near Cape Staratshin, West of Green Harbour, is in the Reynolds Collection.Google Scholar

page 298 note 1 1897, J. M. Dent … Co., London.Google Scholar

page 298 note 2 Vol. ix, No. 4, April, 1897, pp. 353–68, map, p. 472.Google Scholar

page 298 note 3 See “Recent Developments in Spitsbergen”, by DrBrown, R. N. Rudmose: Scott. Geogr. Mag., vol. xxxvi, 04, 1920, No. 2, pp. 111–16; also the same author's “The Coal-fields of Spitsbergen”: Nature, October 9, 1919. The summer population of Spitsbergen (1919) is estimated at 1,000.Google Scholar

page 298 note 4 Hyatt, , 1900 (in Zittel's Text-book of Palæontology, vol. i, p. 559),Google Scholar non Arctoceras, Böhm, J., 1899 (“Üb. Triad. Foss. v. d. Bären-Insel”: Zeit. Deutsch. Geol. Ges., vol. li, p. 326).Google Scholar In 1904 Böhm, J. (“Üb. d. Obertriad. Fauna d. Bären-Insel”: Kon. Svensk. Vet.-Akad. Handl, vol. xxxvii, No. 3, 1903, p. 61) withdrew his Arctoceras in favour of Hyatt's term, and replaced it by another generic name for his Carnian group.Google Scholar

page 299 note 1 “Arktisclie Triasfaunen”: Mém. Acad. Imp. Sci. St. Pétersbourg, ser. VII, vol. xxxiii, No. 6, 1886, pp. 29–38.Google Scholar

page 299 note 2 Non “Arctoceras” lindströmi. Böhm, J. in J. G. Andersson (“Üb. d. Stratigr. und Tektonik d. Bären-Insel”: Bull. Geol. Inst. Univ. Upsala, vol. iv, 1899, pt. ii, No. 8 (1900), p. 265), a Nathorstites, that has nothing to do with the Lower Triassic Arctoceras lindströmi (Mojsisovies).Google Scholar

page 299 note 3 Geb. u. Hallstatt, Supplement, 1902, p. 329.Google Scholar

page 299 note 4 Or rather from limestone-nodules in the bituminous, marly shales, mostly wrongly referred to in literature as “Posidonomya Kalk”, as has been pointed out by Professor Wiman (“Ein paar Labyrinthodontenreste a. d. Trias Spitzbergens”: Bull. Geol. Inst. Univ. Upsala, vol. ix, (1908–1909), 1910, p. 34). Most of the specimens are from “Nodule Bed, Base of Trident, Sassendal”; three examples only came from “lowest line of nodules” or “Lowest Limestone” on Mt. Marmier.Google Scholar

page 299 note 5 “Trias Brach. & Lamell.”: Mem. Geol. Surv. India, Pal. Indica, ser. xv, Himal. Foss., vol. iii, pt. ii, 1899, pl. i, fig. 24.Google Scholar

page 300 note 1 “Triassic Faunæ of Kashmir”: Mem. Geol. Surv: India, Pal. Indica, N.S., vol. v, Mem. No. 1, 1913, pl. v, fig. 9.Google Scholar

page 300 note 2 E.g. A. öbergi (Mojsisovics), loc. cit., p. 33, pl. viii, fig. 3. Ceratites concentricus Öberg(“Om Trias-Först. fr. Spitsbergen”: K. Svensha Vet. Akad. Handl., vol. xiv, No. 14, 1877, p. 15,Google Scholar pl. ii, fig. 12) has concentric markings, but Mojsisovics (loc. cit., p. 8), who examined the type, states that they are the result of crushing. To judge by a number of specimens in the Reynolds Collection, this form is a crushed Ptychites of the Daonella Beds.

page 300 note 3 In Hyatt, & Smith, , “The Triassic Ceph. Gen. of America”: Prof. Paper No. 40, U.S. Geol: Surv., 1905, p. 143, pl. xii, figs. 7–9. Dr. C. T. Trechmann lately presented to the British Museum (Nat. Hist.) a very fine series of Triassic Ammonites from California, Nevada, and Idaho, U.S.A., including many topo-types of Hyatt & Smith&s species.Google Scholar

page 300 note 4 “Salt Range Fossils: II. Fossils from the Ceratite Formation”: Mem. Geol. Surv. India, Pal. Indica, ser. XIII, 1895, p. 128, pl. ix, figs. 7–10.Google Scholar

page 301 note 1 Ib., p. 123, pl. ix, fig. 4.Google Scholar

page 301 note 2 Ib., p. 58, pl. v, fig. 2.Google Scholar

page 301 note 3 Loc. cit., 1886, p. 85, pl. xi, figs. 1–6.Google Scholar

page 301 note 4 Loc. cit., 1913, p. 25, pl. iv, fig. 3.Google Scholar

page 301 note 5 Lethœa Geogn.: II. Mesozoic; vol. i, Trias, pt. ii, 1905, pl. xxviii, fig. 2.Google Scholar

page 301 note 6 Loc. cit., 1886, pl. x, fig. 19a–b, p. 80. Öberg's original figure (loc. cit., pl. iii, fig. 6) is much nearer the new form.Google Scholar

page 301 note 7 In Mojsisovics, loc. cit., pl. iii, p. 38. The form figured and described by Diener (“The Cephalopoda of the Muschelkalk”: Mem. Geol. Surv, India, Pal. India, ser. xv, Himalayan Fossils, vol. ii, Trias, pt. ii, 1895, p. 28, pl. v, fig. 7) as Ceratites sp. ind. ex aff. C. middendorfi (Keyserling) from the Muschelkalk, like his Middle Tviassie Sibirites prahlada (ib., p. 37, pi. vii, fig. 5), have nothing to do with the Lower Triassic forms here discussed. There is not one Muschelkalk form found in association with the latter at Spitsbergen.Google Scholar

page 302 note 1 “The Cephalopoda of the Lower Trias”: loc. cit., Himalayan Fossils, vol. ii, pt. i, 1897, pp. 68, 69, pl. vii, figs. 2, 3.Google Scholar

page 302 note 2 Loc. cit., 1905, p. 72, pl. vii, figs. 1–4.Google Scholar

page 302 note 3 Loc. cit., 1886, p. 64, pl. xv, figs. 10–12.Google Scholar

page 302 note 4 Loc. cit., 1905, p. 81, pl. viii, figs. 1–15; pl. lxxiii, figs. 1–30.Google Scholar

page 302 note 5 Prosphingites ali Arthaber (Albania, 1911, pl. xxii, fig. 6) has a similar external lobe, but the saddles and lobes are only about half as high in the Spitsbergen species. Paranannites mediterraneus Arthaber (ib., pl. xviii, fig. 8), on the other hand, has quite a different suture-line.Google Scholar

page 302 note 6 Loc. cit., 1895, p. 32, pl. x, fig. 3.Google Scholar

page 302 note 7 “Triad. Ceph. Fauna d. Ostsibir. Küatenprovinz”: Mém. Com. Géol. St. Pélersb., vol. xiv, No. 3. 1895, p. 15, pl. ii, fig. 6.Google Scholar

page 302 note 8 Loc. cit. (Kashmir, 1913), p. 5, pl. i, fig. 11.Google Scholar

page 302 note 9 Ib., p. 10, pl. ii, fig. 7.Google Scholar

page 302 note 10 Loc. cit., 1895, p. 115, pl. viii, fig. 10.Google Scholar

page 302 note 11 Loc. cit., 1903, p. 116, pl. vii, figs. 26–33.Google Scholar

page 302 note 12 “On the Character of the Boundary of Palæozoic and Mesozoic near Djulfa”: Verh. Russ.-Kais. Min. Ges., ser. II, vol. xlvii, 1909, pp. 86, 87.Google Scholar

page 303 note 1 Loc. cit., (1895, Ostsibir.), pl. i, fig. 7.Google Scholar

page 303 note 2 “Zur Kenntn. d. Arkt. Trias”: N. Jb., vol. i, 1911, p. 122.Google Scholar

page 303 note 3 “Üb. Trias Verstein. v. Bell-Sunde auf Spitzbergen”: Arkiv f. Zool., vol. viii, 1913, No. 2, p. 11, pl. i, figs. 17–19.Google Scholar

page 303 note 4 From Professor Gregory's section I it will be seen that there are 600 feet of black shales and yellow flags (from which these Danubites may have come) between the undoubtedly Lower Triassie “Nodule Bed” (C1) and the probably Middle Triassie “Earthy Limestone” (D1).Google Scholar

page 303 note 5 See Hyatt, & Smith, , loc. cit., 1905, p. 146, pl. xi.Google Scholar

page 303 note 6 Loc. cit., 1911, p. 123, pl. ix, fig. 5.Google Scholar

page 303 note 7 Loc. cit., 1905, p. 165, pl. ix, figs. 4–10.Google Scholar

page 304 note 1 “Notes on some Fish-remains from the Lower Trias of Spitsbergen”: Bull. Geol. Inst. Univ. Upsala, vol. xi, 1912.Google Scholar

page 304 note 2 “Ichthyosaurier a. d. Trias Spitzbergens”: Bull. Geol. Inst. Univ. Upsala, vol. x, 1910–1911, Nos. 19 and 20, p. 127.Google Scholar

page 304 note 3 Loc. cit., 1910, p. 34.Google Scholar

page 304 note 4 Loc. cit., 1911, p. 127.Google Scholar

page 304 note 5 Ib., p. 126.Google Scholar

page 304 note 6 Loc. cit., 1905, p. 49. In 1914 (The Middle Triassic Marine Inrertebr. Faunas of North America, p. 4: Correlation Table) Professor Perrin-Smith put the Spitsbergen Posidonomya “Limestones” as equivalent to the Meekoceras Beds of the Himalayas and the Proptychites Beds of the Ussuri, that is to say, far too low in the Lower Trias. On the other hand, the Sibirian Olenek Beds, probably, like the Slephanites zone of the Salt Range and the Himalayan Hedenstrœmia Beds, can be correlated with the Spitsbergen Posidonomya Shales or at least their lower part (see also Diener, “Das Alter der Olenekschichten Sibiriens”: Centralbl. f. Min, etc., 1908, p. 233).Google Scholar

page 305 note 1 The Lower Triassic fauna of Kčira in Albania, that Diener (Kashmir, 1913, p. 121) considers to be homotaxial with the Hedenstrœmia stage of India, and that, at least in part, corresponds with the Columbites fauna of Idaho, shows a striking resemblance to the apparently contemporaneous fauna here described, but contains many higher (and later ?) types. Arthaber's treatment of this fauna, as his whole classification, is not very fortunateGoogle Scholar (see Spath, L. F., “Notes on Ammonites”: Geological Magazine, Vol. LVII, 1919, p. 224); but the affinities of e.g. some of the forms that Arthaber includes in his heterogeneous Dagnoceras (Arctoceratinœ!) with certain Spitsbergen Ammonites here referred to Anasibirites, Goniodiscus, Prionites, etc., are most interesting. They show that, as mentioned above, the “Meekoceras” and “Xenodiscus” of the Stephanites zone probably are only heterochronous homæomorphs of the lower, true Meekoceras and Xenodiscus. In the case of the latter, the forms of the Ophiceras layer may have to be separated generically both from the Permian type and from the Upper Eotriassic forms, that is to say, there are at least three independent developments that successively take on the “Xenodiscus” characters.Google Scholar