Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:54:26.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Systematics and paleoecology of Late Cambrian echinoderms from the western United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Colin D. Sumrall ,
James Sprinkle  and
Thomas E. Guensburg
Colin D. Sumrall
Affiliation:
1Department of Geological Sciences, University of Texas, Austin 78712
James Sprinkle
Affiliation:
1Department of Geological Sciences, University of Texas, Austin 78712
Thomas E. Guensburg
Affiliation:
2Physical Science Division, Rock Valley College, Rockford, Illinois 61114
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although echinoderm debris is locally common, articulated specimens are rare in Late Cambrian rocks from the Great Basin and Rocky Mountains of the western United States and are mostly associated with hardgrounds. The fauna, including cornute stylophorans, trachelocrinid eocrinoids, solute homoiosteleans, and rare edrioasteroids, includes several members of the archaic Cambrian Evolutionary Fauna, which had already passed its maximum diversity for echinoderms. In addition to the low diversity, articulated specimen abundance is very low, averaging only about one-tenth that found in overlying Lower Ordovician units. The transition between the Cambrian and Paleozoic Evolutionary Faunas for echinoderms in North America apparently occurred rapidly very close to the Cambrian-Ordovician boundary, because no unequivocal examples of the Paleozoic fauna (such as crinoids, glyptocystitid rhombiferans, asteroids, or echinoids) were found in the Late Cambrian sections.

New taxa include several cothurnocystid stylophorans assigned to Acuticarpus delticus, new genus and species, Acuticarpus? republicensis, new species, and Archaeocothurnus goshutensis, new genus and species; Scotiaecystis? species, a poorly preserved cornute stylophoran with lamellipores; Minervaecystis? species, a fragmentary solute homoiostelean based on several steles; Tatonkacystis codyensis, new genus and species, a well-preserved trachelocrinid eocrinoid with five unbranched arms bearing numerous brachioles; an unnamed, poorly preserved, epispire-bearing eocrinoid; an unnamed, poorly preserved, globular eocrinoid? lacking epispires; and an unnamed, heavily weathered, edrioasterid edrioasteroid. Nearly all holdfasts found in these Upper Cambrian units are single-piece blastozoan types, probably belonging to trachelocrinid and other eocrinoids. Distinctive columnals and thecal plates of several additional undescribed eocrinoids and other echinoderms were locally abundant and are also described.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 71 , Issue 6 , November 1997 , pp. 1091 - 1109
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

Bather, F. A. 1913. Caradocian Cystidea from Girvan. Royal Society of Edinburgh, Transactions 49:359–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, B. M. 1976. A Study of North American Edrioasteroidea. New York State Museum Memoir 21, 446 p.Google Scholar
Bell, G. L. Jr., and Sprinkle, J. 1980. New homoiostelean echinoderms from the Late Cambrian of Alabama. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, 12(7):385.Google Scholar
Billings, E. 1858. On the Asteriadae of the Lower Silurian rocks of Canada. Geological Survey of Canada, Figures and Descriptions of Canadian Organic Remains, Decade III, p. 75–85.Google Scholar
Bockelie, J. F. 1981. The Middle Ordovician of the Oslo region, Norway, 30. The eocrinoid genera Cryptocrinites, Rhipidocystis and Bockia. Norsk Geologisk Tidsskrift, 61:123–147.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., Liddell, W. D., and Derstler, K. L. 1983. Late Cambrian hard substrate communities from Montana/Wyoming: the oldest known hardground encrusters. Lethaia, 16:281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caster, K. E. 1968. Homoiostelea, p. S581–S623. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part S, Echinodermata 1(2). Geological Society of America, New York, and University of Kansas, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Gill, E. D., and Caster, K. E. 1960. Carpoid echinoderms from the Silurian and Devonian of Australia. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 41:7–43.Google Scholar
Grant, R. E. 1965. Faunas and Stratigraphy of the Snowy Range Formation (Upper Cambrian) in southwestern Montana and northwestern Wyoming. Geological Society of America Memoir 96, 171 p.Google Scholar
Guensburg, T. E. and Sprinkle, J. 1992. Rise of echinoderms in the Paleozoic Evolutionary Fauna: significance of paleoenvironmental controls. Geology, 20:407–410.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guensburg, T. E. and Sprinkle, J. 1994a. Echinoderm rapid diversification and faunas across the Cambro-Ordovician boundary. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program, 26(7):A-427.Google Scholar
Guensburg, T. E. and Sprinkle, J. 1994b. Revised phylogeny and functional interpretation of the Edrioasteroidea based on new taxa from the Early Ordovician of western Utah. Fieldiana: Geology, New Series, 29:1–43.Google Scholar
Guensburg, T. E. and Sprinkle, J.In press. Ecologic radiation of Cambro-Ordovician echinoderms. In Zhuravlev, A. Y., and Riding, R. (eds.), Ecology of the Cambrian Radiation. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Jaekel, O. 1901. Über Carpoideen ein neue klasse der Pelmatozoen. Zeitschrift der deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 52:661–677.Google Scholar
Jaekel, O. 1918. Phylogenie und System der Pelmatozoen. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 3:1–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferies, R. P. S. 1968. The subphylum Calcichordata (Jefferies 1967)—primitive fossil chordates with echinoderm affinities. Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History, 16:243–339.Google Scholar
Jefferies, R. P. S. 1986. The Ancestry of the Vertebrates. British Museum (Natural History), London, 376 p.Google Scholar
Jell, P. A., Burrett, C. F., and Banks, M. R. 1985. Cambrian and Ordovician echinoderms from eastern Australia. Alcheringa, 9:183–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, C. R. C. 1968. Notes on cystoids. Geological Magazine, 105:413–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robison, R. A., and Sprinkle, J. 1969. Ctenocystoidea: new class of primitive echinoderms. Science, 166:1512–1514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seproski, J. J. 1981. A factor analytic description of the Phanerozoic marine fossil record. Paleobiology, 5:222–251.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. 1988. Patterns of diversification and extinction in early Palaeozoic echinoderms. Palaeontology, 31:799–828.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B., and Jell, P. A. 1990. Cambrian edrioasteroids from Australia and the origin of starfishes. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 28:715–778.Google Scholar
Sprinkle, J. 1973. Morphology and evolution of blastozoan echinoderms. Harvard University Museum of Comparative Zoology Special Publication, 283 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. 1976. Biostratigraphy and paleoecology of Cambrian echinoderms from the Rocky Mountains. Brigham Young University, Geology Studies, 23:61–73.Google Scholar
Sprinkle, J. 1990. New echinoderm fauna from the Ninemile Shale (Lower Ordovician) of central and southern Nevada. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, 22(7):A219.Google Scholar
Sprinkle, J., and Guensburg, T. E. 1993. Appendix D—Echinoderm biostratigraphy, p. 61–63. In Ross, R. J. Jr., Hintze, L. F., Ethington, R. L., Miller, J. F., Taylor, M. E., and Repetski, J. E., The Ibexian Series (Lower Ordovician) a replacement for “Canadian Series” in North American stratigraphy. U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-598.Google 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
Sprinkle, J., and Wahlman, G. P. 1994. New echinoderms from the Early Ordovician of west Texas. Journal of Paleontology, 68:324–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1963. Cothurnocystis Bather, Phyllocystis Thoral and an undetermined member of the order Soluta (Echinodermata, Carpoidea) in the uppermost Cambrian of Nevada. Journal of Paleontology, 37:1133–1142.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1968. Stylophora, p. S495–S565. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part S, Echinodermata 1(2). Geological Society of America, New York, and University of Kansas, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1994. Échinodermes nouveaux (Stylophora, Eocrinoidea) de l'Ordovicien Inférieur de la Montagne Noire (France). Annales de Paléontologie, 80:107–141.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G., and Robison, R. A. 1985. A new homoiostelean and a new eocrinid from the Middle Cambrian of Utah. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Paper 115:1–24.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G., and Robison, R. A. 1988. Homalozoan echinoderms of the Wheeler Formation (Middle Cambrian) of western Utah. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Paper 120:1–17.Google Scholar
Ulrich, E. O. 1929. Trachelocrinus, a new genus of Upper Cambrian crinoids. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 19:63–66.Google Scholar