Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T23:49:15.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Articulate brachiopods from the Richmondian of Tennessee

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2016

Herbert J. Howe
Herbert J. Howe*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Richmondian (Upper Ordovician) strata in the Central Basin of Tennessee yield an abundant and diverse fauna of brachiopods. The section consists in ascending and conformable order of the “Arnheim” and Fernvale Formations.

The following species are described: Austinella kankakensis (McChesney), Diceromyonia tersa Wang, Glyptorthis insculpta maquoketensis Ladd, Hebertella occidentalis (Hall), Onniella meeki (Miller), Paucicrura quadrata (Wang), Pionodema alberstadti n. sp., Plaesiomys bellistriatus Wang, P. proavita (Winchell and Schuchert), Platystrophia acutilirata (Conrad), P. ponderosa Foerste, Rafinesquina sp., Retrorsirostra carleyi (Hall), Strophomena planumbona (Hall), Tetraphalerella neglecta (James), Thaerodonta recedens (Sardeson), and Zygospira modesta (Hall).

Faunal comparisons confirm correlations with the Cape Limestone of southeastern Missouri, the Maquoketa Formation of Iowa, the upper part of the Viola Formation of Oklahoma, the Aleman and Cutter Formations in West Texas, and the standard Richmond section. The fauna in Tennessee connects the provincial Richmond in the Ohio Valley with the western faunas.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , March 1988 , pp. 204 - 218
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

Alberstadt, L. P. 1973. Articulate brachiopods of the Viola Formation (Ordovician) in the Arbuckle Mountains, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin 117, 90 p.Google Scholar
Alberstadt, L. P. 1979. The brachiopod genus Platystrophia. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1066-B, 18 p.Google Scholar
Bancroft, B. B. 1928. On the notational representation of the ribsystem in Orthacea. Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Memoir Proceeding, 72:53–90.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. 1932. The stratigraphy of the Central Basin of Tennessee. Tennessee Division of Geology Bulletin 38, 268 p.Google Scholar
Blainville, H. M. D. 1825. Manuel de malacologie et de conchyliologie. Text, 647 p.Google Scholar
Caster, K. E., Dalve, E. A., and Pope, J. K. 1961. Elementary guide to the fossils and strata of the Ordovician in the vicinity of Cincinnati, Ohio. Cincinnati Museum of Natural History, 47 p.Google Scholar
Conrad, T. A. 1842. Observations on the Silurian and Devonian Systems of the United States, with descriptions of new organic remains. Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 8:228–280.Google Scholar
Cooper, G. A. 1944. Phylum Brachiopoda, p. 277–365. In Shimer, H. W. and Shrock, R. R., Index Fossils of North America. Technology Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Copper, P. 1977. Zygospira and some related Ordovician and Silurian atrypid brachiopods. Palaentology, 20:295–335.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1903. The Cincinnati Group in western Tennessee between the Tennessee River and the Central Basin. Journal of Geology, 11:29–45.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1909. Preliminary notes on Cincinnatian fossils. Bulletin of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 14:209–232.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1910. Preliminary notes on Cincinnatian and Lexington fossils of Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Bulletin of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 16:17–100.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1912. Strophomena and other fossils from Cincinnatian and Mohawkian horizons, chiefly in Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky. Bulletin of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 17:17–173.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1914. Notes on the Lorraine faunas of New York and the province of Quebec. Bulletin of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 17:247–339.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1917. Notes on Richmond and related fossils. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 22:42–55.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1924. Upper Ordovician faunas of Ontario and Quebec. Canadian Geological Survey Memoir 138, 255 p.Google Scholar
Gill, T. 1871. Arrangement of the families of molluscs prepared for the Smithsonian Institution. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 227:1–49.Google Scholar
Greger, D. K., and Born, K. E. 1936. Stratigraphy and fauna of the Fernvale Formation (Illinois). Washington University Studies, new ser., Science and Technology, 6:67–77.Google Scholar
Hall, D. D. 1962. Dalmanellidae of the Cincinnatian. Palaeontographica Americana, 4:131–165.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1847. Descriptions of the organic remains of the Lower Division of the New York System. Palaeontology of New York, 1, 338 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1860. Contributions to palaeontology, 1858 and 1859. In Thirteenth Annual Report of the Regents on the State Cabinet, p. 55–128.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1862. Observations upon a new genus of Brachiopoda. New York State Cabinet Fifteenth Annual Report, p. 154–155.Google Scholar
Hall, J., and Clarke, J. M. 1892. An introduction to the study of the genera of Paleozoic Brachiopoda, Pt. 1. Palaeontology of New York. New York Geological Survey, 8, 367 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J., and Clarke, J. M. 1894. An introduction to the study of the genera of Paleozoic Brachiopoda, Pt. 2. Palaeontology of New York. New York Geological Survey, 8, 394 p.Google Scholar
Howe, H. J. 1965a. Dalmanellidae from the Montoya Group (Ordovician) of Trans-Pecos Texas. Journal of Paleontology, 39:235–247.Google Scholar
Howe, H. J. 1965b. Plectambonitacea, Strophomenacea, and Atrypacea from the Montoya Group (Ordovician) of Trans-Pecos Texas. Journal of Paleontology, 39:647–656.Google Scholar
Howe, H. J. 1966. Orthacea from the Montoya Group (Ordovician) of Trans-Pecos Texas. Journal of Paleontology, 40:241–257.Google Scholar
Howe, H. J. 1969. Rhynchonellacean brachiopods from the Richmondian of Tennessee. Journal of Paleontology, 43:1331–1350.Google Scholar
Howe, H. J. 1972. Morphology of the brachiopod genus Thaerodonta. Journal of Paleontology, 46:440–446.Google Scholar
Howe, H. J. 1979. Middle and Late Ordovician plectambonitacean, rhynchonellacean, syntrophiacean, and trimerellacean brachiopods from Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1066-C, Contributions to the Ordovician Paleontology of Kentucky and Nearby States, p. C1-18.Google Scholar
Imbrie, John. 1956. Biometrical methods in the study of invertebrate fossils. American Museum of Natural History Bulletin, 108:211–252.Google Scholar
James, U. P. 1881. Contributions to paleontology: fossils of the Lower Silurian formation, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky. Paleontologist, 5:33–44.Google Scholar
Jones, O. T. 1928. Plectambonites and some allied genera. Geological Survey Great Britain, Memoir Palaeontology, I, 5:367–527.Google Scholar
King, W. 1846. Remarks on certain genera belonging to the class Palliobranchiata. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 18:26–42.Google Scholar
King, W. 1850. A monograph of the Permian fossils of England. Palaeontographical Society, 3, 258 p.Google Scholar
Ladd, H. S. 1929. The stratigraphy and paleontology of the Maquoketa Shale of Iowa, Pt. 1. In Annual Report, 1928, Iowa Geological Survey Report, 34:309–448.Google Scholar
Macomber, R. W. 1970. Articulate brachiopods from the Upper Bighorn Formation (Late Ordovician) of Wyoming. Journal of Paleontology, 44:416–450.Google Scholar
McChesney, J. H. 1861. Descriptions of new fossils from the Paleozoic rocks of the western states. Transactions of the Chicago Academy of Sciences, p. 77–95.Google Scholar
McChesney, J. H. 1868. Descriptions of fossils from the Paleozoic rocks of the western states, with illustrations. Transactions of the Chicago Academy of Sciences, p. 1–57.Google Scholar
McEwan, E. D. 1919. A study of the brachiopod genus Platystrophia. U.S. National Museum Proceedings, 56:383–448.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. 1873. Descriptions of invertebrate fossils of the Silurian and Devonian Systems. Ohio Geological Survey, 1, 243 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1875. Monograph of the class Brachiopoda of the Cincinnati Group. The Cincinnati Quarterly Journal of Science, 2:6–62.Google Scholar
Öupik, A. A. 1930. Brachiopoda Protremata der estländischen Ordovizischen Kukruse-Stufe. Acta et Commentationes. Tartu University, ser. A, 17, 262 p.Google Scholar
Öupik, A. A. 1934. Über Klitamboniten. Acta et Commentationes. Tartu University, ser. A, 26, 239 p.Google Scholar
Ross, R. J. Jr. 1957. Ordovician fossils from wells in the Williston Basin Eastern Montana. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, 1021-M:439–510.Google Scholar
Sardeson, R. W. 1892. The range and distribution of the Lower Silurian fauna of Minnesota with descriptions of some new species. Minnesota Academy of Natural Sciences Bulletin, 3:326–343.Google Scholar
Sardeson, R. W. 1897. Nomenclature of the Galena and Maquoketa Series. American Geologist, 19:330–336.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C. 1893. A classification of the Brachiopoda. American Geologist, 11:141–167.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C. 1896. Brachiopoda, p. 291–343. In von Zittel, K. A. (translated and edited by Eastman, C. R.), Text-book of Palaeontology, I, 1st ed.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C. 1913. Class 2. Brachiopoda, p. 355–420. In von Zittel, K. A. (translated and edited by Eastman, C. R.), Text-book of Palaeontology, I, 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C., and Le Vene, C. M. 1929. Brachiopoda (Generum et genotyporum index et bibliographia). Fossilium Catalogus, 1, Animalia, Pars 42, 140 p.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C., and Cooper, G. A. 1931. Synopsis of the brachiopod genera of the suborders Orthoidea and Pentameroidea, with notes on the Telotremata. American Journal of Science, 22:241–251.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C., and Cooper, G. A. 1932. Brachiopod genera of the suborders Orthoidea and Pentameroidea. Yale University Peabody Museum of Natural History Memoir 4, Pt. 1, 270 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, G. G., Roe, A., and Lewontin, R. C. 1960. Quantitative Zoology (revised ed.). Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., New York, 440.Google Scholar
Waagen, W. H. 1883. Salt Range fossils, Pt. 4, Brachiopoda. Memoir Geological Survey of India, ser. 13, 1:391–546.Google Scholar
Waagen, W. H. 1884. Salt Range fossils, Pt. 4, Brachiopoda. Memoir Geological Survey of India, ser. 13, 1:547–610.Google Scholar
Walcott, C. D. 1908. Cambrian geology and paleontology, number 4. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 53:138–165.Google Scholar
Walker, L. G. 1982. The brachiopod genus Hebertella, Dalmanella, and Heterothina from the Ordovician of Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1066-M, 17 p.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. 1949. Maquoketa Brachiopoda of Iowa. Geological Society of America Memoir 42, 55 p.Google Scholar
Williams, A., et al. 1965. Brachiopoda. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. H. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 927 p.Google Scholar
Wilson, C. W. Jr. 1949. Pre-Chattanooga stratigraphy in central Tennessee. Tennessee Division Geology Bulletin, 56, 407 p.Google Scholar
Winchell, N. H., and Schuchert, C. 1892. Preliminary descriptions of new Brachiopoda from the Trenton and Hudson River Groups of Minnesota. American Geologist, 9:284–294.Google Scholar
Winchell, N. H., and Schuchert, C. 1895. The Lower Silurian Brachiopoda of Minnesota. Geological and Natural History Survey of Minnesota, 1895-1892, Vol. 3, Pt. 1, Paleontology, p. 333–474.Google Scholar