Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:49:12.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Significance of ultrastructural features in etched conodonts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Richard D. Burnett  and
Jack C. Hall
Richard D. Burnett
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
Jack C. Hall
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of North Carolina, Wilmington, 28403
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Acid etching combined with scanning electron microscopy (S.E.M.) accentuates a variety of conodont microstructural patterns as compared to unetched specimens. External and internal organic layers surrounding apatitic lamellae are found with internal organic layers apparently thinner than their external counterparts. This may imply partial removal of the outermost organic layer prior to secretion of the next lamella. Etching also provides evidence of internally preserved striate ornament. Polygonal etch artifacts and zones of crystallites aligned in small areas are interpreted as possible sites for apatite biomineralization.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 66 , Issue 2 , March 1992 , pp. 266 - 276
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

Barnes, C. R., Sass, D. B., and Monroe, E. A. 1970. Preliminary studies of the ultrastructure of selected Ordovician conodonts. Life Science Contribution, Royal Ontario Museum, 76:1–24.Google Scholar
Barnes, C. R., and Poplawski, M. L. S. 1973. Conodont ultrastructure; the family Panderodontidae. Life Science Contribution, Royal Ontario Museum, 90:1–36.Google Scholar
Burnett, R. D. 1988a. Physical and chemical changes in conodonts from contact metamorphosed limestones. Irish Journal of Earth Sciences, 9:79–118.Google Scholar
Burnett, R. D. 1988b. Polygonal ornament in the conodont Siphonodella: an internal record. Lethaia, 21:411–415.Google Scholar
Burnett, R. D., and Smith, M. P. 1987. Some aspects of the application of scanning electron microscopy in conodont studies, p. 146–152. In Austin, R. L. (ed.), Conodonts: Investigative Techniques and Applications. British Micropalaeontological Society Series, Ellis Harwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Clark, D. L., Sweet, W. C., Bergström, S. M., Klapper, G., Austin, R. L., Rhodes, F. H. T., Müller, K. J., Ziegler, W., Lindström, M., Miller, J. F., and Harris, A. G. 1981. Part W, Miscellanea Supplement 2, Conodonta. In Robison, R. A. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 202 p.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S., and Harper, E. 1988. Genome size in conodonts (Chordata): infered variations during 270 million years. Science, 241:1230–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, A. G., Epstein, J. B., and Harris, L. D. 1977. Conodont color alteration—an index to organic metamorphism. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 995, 27 p.Google Scholar
Fahraeus, L. E., and Fahraeus-Van Ree, G. E. 1987. Soft tissue matrix of decalcified pectiniform elements of Hindeodella confuluens (Conodonta, Silurian), p. 105–110. In Aldridge, R. J. (ed.), Palaeobiology of Conodonts. British Micropalaeontological Society Series, Ellis Harwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Fitz-Gerald, B. 1983. Observations on surface ornamentation in fossil Ostracoda. Journal of Micropalaeontology, 2:111–117.Google Scholar
Hall, J. C. 1989. The form and packing of crystallites in conodonts. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Program, 21(3):19.Google Scholar
Hall, J. C. 1990. The Conodontophorida, p. 81–85. In Carter, J. G. (ed.), Skeletal Biomineralization: Patterns, Processes, and Evolutionary Trends, Vol. II, Atlas and Index. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Hassler, S. E., and Hall, J. C. 1989. Variations in crystallite orientation in the lamellae of the Conodontphorida. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Program, 21(3):20–21.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J., and Nogami, V. 1971. Uber den Feinbau der Conodonten. Memoirs of the Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Geology and Mineralogy Series B, 38:1–87.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J., and Nogami, Y. 1972. Entoeken und Bohrspuren bei den Conodontophorida. Palaeontologische Zeitschrift, 46:68–84.Google Scholar
Orchard, M. J., and Forster, P. J. L. 1988. Permian conodont biostratigraphy of the Harper Ranch Beds, near Kamloops, south-central British Columbia. Geological Survey of Canada Paper 88-8, 27 p.Google Scholar
Pierce, R. W., and Langenheim, R. L. 1970. Surface patterns on selected Mississippian conodonts. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 81:3225–3236.Google Scholar
Pietzner, H., Vahl, J., Werner, H., and Ziegler, W. 1968. Zur chemischen Zusammensetzung und mikromorphologie der Conodonten. Palaeontographica, 128;115–152.Google Scholar
Rejebian, V. A., Harris, A. G., and Huebner, J. S. 1987. Conodont color and textural alteration: an index to regional metamorphism, contact metamorphism, and hydrothermal alteration. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 99:471–479.Google Scholar
Smith, M. M. 1989. Distribution and variation in enamel structure in the oral teeth of Sarcopterygians: its significance for the evolution of a protoprismatic enamel. Historical Biology, 3:97–126.Google Scholar
Szaniawski, H. 1987. Preliminary structural comparisons of protoconodont, paraconodont, and euconodont elements, p. 35–47. In Aldridge, R. J. (ed.), Paleobiology of Conodonts. British Micropalaeontological Society Series, Ellis Harwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
Telford, P. G. 1973. Lamellar rods of Devonian platform conodonts from Australia and southern Ontario. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Program, 5(4):357.Google Scholar
Vallier, T. L., and Brooks, H. C. 1986. Geology of the Blue Mountains region of Oregon, Idaho, and Washington: geologic implications of Paleozoic and Mesozoic paleontology and biostratigraphy, Blue Mountains Province, Oregon and Idaho. U.S. Geology Survey Professional Paper 1435, 93 p.Google Scholar