Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:44:26.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

So-called Salterella from the Cambrian of Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Extract

THE Lower Cambrian genus Salterella, Billings, has lately received a good deal of attention in connection with the problem of the origin of the Cephalopoda. The genus, it may be remembered, was first described by its author as undoubtedly allied to Serpulites i.e. a worm-tube, but it was soon transferred by Billings himself to the pteropods. Barrande and Walcott also considered Salterella to be related to Tentaculites and Hyolithes. Clark (1925), who revised the genus, came to the conclusion that Salterella was a cephalopod, and not by any means a primitive type, but it did not seem to him to be ancestral to any subsequent form. Poulsen (1927) accepted this view, stating that the cephalopod characters were very conspicuous, but his later (1932) restoration of an East Greenland form, identified with S. rugosa from Labrador, is no more convincing than was Clark's restoration of S. conulata. Unfortunately, the genotype species of Salterella (S. rugosa Billings) is still incompletely known and I agree with Teichert (1935) that further investigation is needed before the real nature of Salterella can be held to be established. If the “septal necks” are still a doubtful feature and if the very existence of a “siphuncle” is open to question, as Teichert rightly says, it is clearly as premature to visualize Salterella as a possible forerunner of the holochoanites (Schuchert, in Schindewolf, 1929) as it is to connect the equally doubtful Volborthella with either holochoanites (Teichert and Kobayashi) or orthochoanites (Schindewolf, 1934).

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1936

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

LITERATURE

Clark, T. H., 1925. “On the Nature of Salterella,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, 3rd series, xix, section iv, 2941, 2 plates.Google Scholar
Cobbold, E. S., 1921. “The Cambrian Horizons of Comley (Shropshire) and their Brachiopoda, Pteropoda, Gasteropoda, etc,” Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., lxxvi, 359361.Google Scholar
Foord, A. H., 1890. “Description of Fossils from the Kimberley District, Western Australia,” Geol. Mag., dec., III, VII, 98, pl. IV, Figs. 1, la, b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabau, A. W., 1929. “Terms for the Shell-Elements in the Holochoanites, Bull. Geol. Soc. China, viii, 121.Google Scholar
Hall, J., 1888. “Palaeontology of New York,” v, pt. ii, Supplement, 5, pl. cxiv, fig. 12.Google Scholar
Poulsen, C., 1927. “The Cambrian, Ozarkian and Canadian Faunas of North-west Greenland,” Medd. om Grønl., lxx, 251.Google Scholar
Poulsen, C., 1932. “The Lower Cambrian Faunas of East Greenland,” Medd. om Grønl., lxxxvii.Google Scholar
Schindewolf, O. H., 1929. “Zur Systematik und Stammesgeschichte der ältesten Cephalopoden,” Zeitschr. f. Geschiebef., v, Heft 4, 178.Google Scholar
Schindewolf, O. H., 1934. “Bau und systematische Stellung der Gattung Volborthella Schm.,” Pal. Zeitschr., xvi, 193.Google Scholar
Tate, R., 1892. “The Cambrian Fossils of South Australia, Trans. Roy. Soc. Sth. Austr., xv, pt. ii, 186, pl. ii, figs. 3, 3a, 6.Google Scholar
Teichert, C., 1935. “Structures and Phylogeny of Actinoceroid Cephalopods,” Amer. Jl. Sci., xxix, 21.Google Scholar
Teilhard De Chardin, P., 1931. “On an Enigmatic Pteropod-like Fossil from the Lower Cambrian of Southern Shansi, Biconulites grabaui, nov. gen., nov. sp.Bull. Geol. Soc. China, x, 179184, pls. i–ii.Google Scholar
Wade, A., 1924. “Report on Petroleum Prospects, Kimberley District, Western Australia and Northern Territory,” Parliam. P., Commonw. Austral., 1923–1924 (Melbourne), 44, pl. iv.Google Scholar