Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:42:49.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Crinoids from the Nada Member of the Borden Formation (Lower Mississippian) in eastern Kentucky

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Kevin G. Lee ,
William I. Ausich  and
Thomas W. Kammer
Kevin G. Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, 155 South Oval Mall, The Ohio State University, Columbus 43210, and
William I. Ausich
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, 155 South Oval Mall, The Ohio State University, Columbus 43210, and
Thomas W. Kammer
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geography, West Virginia University, Morgantown 26506-6300,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Thirty-four crinoid species, including four new species, are reported from the Nada Member of the Borden Formation in eastern Kentucky. The dominant crinoid group is monobathrids (18 species), but diplobathrids, disparids, cladids, and flexibles are also present. The four new species are the camerates Blairocrinus protuberatus, Uperocrinus acuminatus, and Aorocrinus nodulus, and the cladid Atelestocrinus kentuckyensis. The majority of the species in this fauna were previously known from what has traditionally been considered the “upper part” of the Burlington Limestone in the Mississippi River Valley and what is now recognized as the Burlington Pelmatozoan Assemblage III. The current study confirms the conclusion of Lane and DuBar (1983) that the Nada is middle Osagean in age, being deposited earlier than the well-documented Borden delta crinoid assemblages of north-central Kentucky and Indiana. The middle Osagean age of the fauna indicates a previously unrecognized unconformity between the Nada and the overlying Meramecian-age Renfro Member of the Slade Formation. In addition, this is the first well-documented middle Osagean fauna from a siliciclastic facies in North America. The dominance by camerate crinoids is enigmatic, but may be related to either a low rate of sedimentation or greater larval dispersal abilities.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 79 , Issue 2 , March 2005 , pp. 337 - 355
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

Angelin, N. P. 1878. Iconographia crinoideorum in stratis Sueciae Siluricus fossilium. Samson and Wallin, Holmiae, 62 p.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1997. Regional encrinites: a vanished lithofacies, p. 509–519. In Brett, C. E. and Baird, G. C. (eds.), Paleontological Events Stratigraphic, Ecological, and Evolutionary Implications. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1998. Early phylogeny and subclass division of the Crinoidea (Phylum Echinodermata). Journal of Paleontology, 72:499–510.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 1990. Systematics and phylogeny of the late Osagean and Meramecian crinoids Platycrinites and Eucladocrinus from the Mississippian stratotype region. Journal of Paleontology, 64:759–778.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Lane, N. G. 1980. Platform communities and rocks of the Borden Siltstone delta (Mississippian) along the south shore of Monroe Reservoir, Monroe County, Indiana, p. 36–67. In Shaver, R. H. (ed.), Field Trips 1980 from the Indiana University Campus, Bloomington. Indiana University, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Lane, N. G. 1982. Crinoids from the Edwardsville Formation (Lower Mississippian) of southern Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 56:1343–1461.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Meyer, D. L. 1990. Origin and composition of carbonate buildups and associated facies in the Fort Payne Formation (Lower Mississippian, south-central Kentucky): an integrated sedimentologic and paleoecologic analysis. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 102:129–146.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Sevastopulo, G. D. 1994. Taphonomy of Lower Carboniferous crinoids from the Hook Head Formation, Ireland. Lethaia, 27:245–256.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Sevastopulo, G. D. 2001. The Tournaisian Crinoids from Hook Head, County Wexford, Ireland. Palaeontolographical Association, London, 617, 136 p.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Kammer, T. W., and Baumiller, T. K. 1994. Demise of the Middle Paleozoic crinoid fauna: a single extinction event or a rapid faunal turnover? Paleobiology, 20:345–361.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Kammer, T. W., and Lane, N. G. 1979. Fossil communities of the Borden (Mississippian) delta in Indiana and northern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 53:1182–1196.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Kammer, T. W., and Meyer, D. L. 1997. Middle Mississippian disparid crinoids from the midcontinental United States. Journal of Paleontology, 71:131–148.Google Scholar
Austin, T. Sr., and Austin, T. Jr. 1842. Proposed arrangement of the Echinodermata, particularly as regards the Crinoidea, and a subdivision of the class Adelostella (Echinidae). Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 1, 11:195–207.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. 1938. Pelmatozoan Palaeozoica, p. 1–194. In Quenstedt, W. (ed.), Fossilium Catalogus, I: Animalia. W. Junk, s'Gravenhage.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S., and Moodey, M. W. 1943. Bibliographic and faunal index of Paleozoic pelmatozoan echinoderms. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 45, 734 p.Google Scholar
Bather, F. A. 1890. British fossil crinoids II: the classification of the Inadunata Fistulata. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 6, 5:373–388, 485–486.Google Scholar
Bather, F. A. 1899. A phylogenetic classification of the Pelmatozoa. British Association for the Advancement of Science Report, 1898:916–923.Google Scholar
Baturin, G. N. 1982. Phosphorites on the sea floor: origin, composition, and distribution. Developments in Sedimentology, Number 33, 343 p.Google Scholar
Baumiller, T. K. 1994. Patterns of dominance and extinction in the record of Paleozoic crinoids, p. 193–198. In David, B., Guille, A., Féral, J. P., and Roux, M. (eds.), Echinoderms Through Time. Balkema Press, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Broadhead, T. W. 1981. Carboniferous camerate crinoid subfamily, Dichocrininae: Palaeontographica, Abt. A, 176:81–157.Google Scholar
Bronn, H. G. 1849. Index palaeontologicus, unter Mitwirkung der Herren Prof. H. R. Göppert und H. von Meyer. Handbuch einer Geschichte der Natur, Nomenclator paleontologicus, 5(2):776–1381.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1965. The genus Steganocrinus. Journal of Paleontology, 39:773–793.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1967. The actinocrinitid genera Abactinocrinus, Aacocrinus, and Blairocrinus. Journal of Paleontology, 41:675–705.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1987. The relations between allometry, phylogeny, and functional morphology in some calceocrinid crinoids. Journal of Paleontology, 61:999–1032.Google Scholar
Casseday, S. A., and Lyon, S. S. 1862. Description of two new genera and eight new species of fossil Crinoidea from the rocks of Indiana and Kentucky. American Academy of Arts and Sciences Proceedings, 5:16–31.Google Scholar
Chaplin, J. R. 1980. Stratigraphy, trace fossil associations, and depositional environments in the Borden Formation (Mississippian), northeastern Kentucky. Annual Field Conference Guidebook, Geological Society of Kentucky, 1980. Kentucky Geological Survey, Lexington, 114 p.Google Scholar
Collinson, C., Rexroad, C. B., and Thompson, T. L. 1971. Conodont zonation of the North American Mississippian. Geological Society of America Memoir, 127, p. 353–394.Google Scholar
de Koninck, L. G., and Lehon, H. S. 1854. Recherches sur les crinoïdes du terrain carbonifère. Royal Academy Belgique Memoir, 28, 217 p.Google Scholar
Ehlers, G. M., and Kesling, R. V. 1963. Two new crinoids from Lower Mississippian rocks in southeastern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 37:1028–1041.Google Scholar
Ettensohn, F. R., Rice, C. L., Dever, G. R. Jr., and Chesnut, D. R. 1984. Slade and Paragon formations—new stratigraphic nomenclature for Mississippian rocks along the Cumberland Escarpment in Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, 1605, 37 p.Google Scholar
Gahn, F. J. 2002. Crinoid and blastoid biozonation and biodiversity in the Early Mississippian (Osagean) Burlington Limestone. Iowa Department of Natural Resources Geological Survey Guidebook, 23:53–74.Google Scholar
Gahn, F. J., and Kammer, T. W. 2002. The cladid crinoid Barycrinus from the Burlington Limestone (Early Osagean) and the phylogenetics of Mississippian botryocrinids. Journal of Paleontology, 76:123–133.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1858. Report on the Geological Survey of Iowa, embracing the results of investigations made during portions of the years 1855, 1856, 1857. Geological Survey of Iowa, 1, Pt. 2, Paleontology, 724 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1859. Contributions to the palaeontology of Iowa, being descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and other fossils. Geological Report of Iowa, 1, Pt. 2, supplement, 1–92 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1860. Observations upon a new genus of Crinoidea: Cheirocrinus, p. 121–124. In Contributions to Palaeontology, 1858 and 1859, Thirteenth Annual Report of the Regents of the University of the State of New York, on the Condition of the State Cabinet of Natural History, and the Historical Antiquarian Collection Annexed thereto, Appendix F, State of New York Senate Document 89.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861a. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 7:261–328.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861b. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea; from investigations of the Iowa Geological Survey. Preliminary notice. C. van Benthuyen, Albany, New York, 18 p.Google Scholar
Harris, L. C., and Whiting, B. M. 2000. Sequence-stratigraphic significance of Miocene to Pliocene glauconite-rich layers, on- and offshore of the US Mid-Atlantic margin. Sedimentary Geology, 134:129–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaekel, O. 1918. Phylogenie und system der Pelmatozoen. Paläeontologische Zeitschrift, 3:383–385.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. 1984. Crinoids from the New Providence Shale Member of the Borden Formation (Mississippian) in Kentucky and Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 58:115–130.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. 2001. Phenotypic bradytely in the Costalocrinus–Barycrinus lineage of Paleozoic cladid crinoids. Journal of Paleontology, 75:383–389.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1987. Aerosol suspension feeding and current velocities: distributional controls for late Osagean crinoids. Paleobiology, 13:379–395.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1993. Advanced cladid crinoids from the Middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: intermediate-grade calyces. Journal of Paleontology, 67:614–639.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1996. Primitive cladid crinoids from Upper Osagean–Lower Meramecian (Mississippian) rocks of east-central United States. Journal of Paleontology, 70:835–866.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Gahn, F. J. 2003. Primitive cladid crinoids from the early Osagean Burlington Limestone and the phylogenetics of Mississippian species of Cyathocrinites. Journal of Paleontology, 77:121–138.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., Baumiller, T. K., and Ausich, W. I. 1997. Species longevity as a function of niche breadth: evidence from fossil crinoids. Geology, 25:219–222.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., Baumiller, T. K., and Ausich, W. I. 1998. Evolutionary significance of differential species longevity in Osagean–Meramecian (Mississippian) crinoid clades. Paleobiology, 24:155–176.Google Scholar
Khetani, A. B., and Read, J. F. 2002. Sequence development of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic high-relief ramp, Mississippian, Kentucky, U.S.A. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 72:657–672.Google Scholar
Kidwell, S. M. 1989. Stratigraphic condensation of marine transgressive records: origin of major shell deposits in the Miocene of Maryland. Journal of Geology, 97:1–29.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1929. The fossil crinoid genus Vasocrinus Lyon. Proceedings of the U.S. National Museum, 74:1–16.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1940. Seven new genera of Carboniferous Crinoidea Inadunata. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 30:321–334.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1943. A revision of the genus Steganocrinus. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 33:259–265.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1944. Cytidocrinus, a new name for Cyrtocrinus Kirk. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 34:85.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1945. Holcocrinus, a new inadunate crinoid genus from the Lower Mississippian. American Journal of Science, 234:517–521.Google Scholar
Lane, H. R., and Brenckle, P. L. 2001. Type Mississippian subdivisions and biostratigraphic succession, p. 83–107. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Stratigraphy and Biostratigraphy of the Mississippian Subsystem (Carboniferous System) in its type region, the Mississippi River Valley of Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa. IUGS Subcommission on Carboniferous Stratigraphy. Department of Geosciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1958. The monobathrid camerate crinoid family: Batocrinidae. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kansas, Lawrence, 259 p.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1971. Crinoids and reefs. Proceedings of the North American Paleontological Convention, Part J:1430–1443.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1973. Paleontology and paleoecology of the Crawfordsville fossil site (Upper Osagean: Indiana). California University Publications in the Geological Sciences, Number 99, 141 p.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G., and DuBar, J. R. 1983. Progradation of the Borden delta: new evidence from crinoids. Journal of Paleontology, 57:112–123.Google Scholar
Lyon, S. S., and Casseday, S. A. 1859. A synonymic list of the Echinodermata of the Palaeozoic rocks of North America. American Academy of Arts and Sciences Proceedings, 4:282–304.Google Scholar
McChesney, J. H. 1860. Description of fossils from the Palaeozoic rocks of western states, with illustration. Transactions of the Chicago Academy of Sciences, 1:1–57.Google Scholar
McIntosh, G. 1984. Devonian cladid inadunate crinoids: Family Botryocrinidae Bather, 1899. Journal of Paleontology, 58:1260–1281.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. 1872. Preliminary list of the fossils collected by Dr. Hayden's exploring expedition of 1871, in Utah and Wyoming Territories, with descriptions of new fossils, p. 373–377. In Hayden, F. V. (ed.), Preliminary Report of the United States Geological Survey of Montana and Portions of Adjacent Territories, Preliminary Report (fifth annual), 1871.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1860. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea and Echinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of Illinois, and other western states. Philadelphia Academy of Sciences Proceedings, series 2, 4:379–397.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1861. Descriptions of new Paleozoic fossils from Illinois and Iowa. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Proceedings, series 1, 13:128–146.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1865. Description of new species of Crinoidea from the Paleozoic rocks of Illinois and some of the adjoining states. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Proceedings, 17:143–155.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1866. Descriptions of invertebrates from the Carboniferous System. Illinois Geological Survey, 2:143–411.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1868. Remarks on some types of Carboniferous Crinoidea with descriptions of new genera and species of the same, and of one echinoid. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Proceedings, 20:335–359.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1869. Descriptions of new Crinoidea and Echinoidea from the Carbonifeous rocks of the western states with a note on the genus Onycaster. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Proceedings, 21:67–83.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1870. Descriptions of new Carboniferous fossils from the western states. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Proceedings, 22:137–172.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B., and Worthen, A. H. 1873. Paleontology. Descriptions of invertebrates from the Carboniferous System. Illinois Geological Survey, 5(2):323–619.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. L., and Ausich, W. I. 1997. Morphologic variation within and among populations of the camerate crinoid Agaricocrinus (Lower Mississippian, Kentucky and Tennessee) breaking the spell of the mushroom. Journal of Paleontology, 71:896–917.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. L., Ausich, W. I., and Terry, R. E. 1990. Comparative taphonomy of echinoderms in carbonate facies: Fort Payne Formation (Lower Mississippian) of Kentucky and Tennessee. Palaios, 4:533–552.Google Scholar
Miller, J. S. 1821. A Natural History of the Crinoidea or Lily-shaped Animals, With Observation on the Genera Asteria, Euryale, Comatula, and Marsupites. Bryan & Co., Bristol, 150 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1883. The American Palaeozoic Fossils: a catalogue of the genera and species, with names of authors, dates, places of publications, groups of books in which found, and the etymology and signification of the words, and an introduction devoted to the stratigraphical geology of Palaeozoic rocks, Echinodermata (second edition). Published by the author, Cincinnati, Ohio, 334 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1889. North American Geology and Paleontology. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati, Ohio, 664 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1891a. Palaeontology: Advance sheets. Indiana Department of Geology and Natural Resources, 17th Annual Report, 103 p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., 1891b. A description of some Lower Carboniferous crinoids. Geological Survey of Missouri Bulletin, 4:1–40.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1892. North American Geology and Paleontology, first appendix. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati, Ohio, p. 665–718.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., and Gurley, W. F. E. 1897. New species of crinoids, cephalopods, and other Palaeozoic fossils. Illinois State Mueum of Natural History Bulletin, 12, 69 p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. 1952. Crinoids, p. 604–652. In Moore, R. C., Lalicker, C. G., and Fischer, A. G. (eds.), Invertebrate Fossils. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., and Laudon, L. R. 1943. Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 46, 153 p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., and Teichert, C. (eds.). 1978. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2. Geological Society of America and The University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 1027 p.Google Scholar
Münster, G. G. zu. 1839. Beschreibung einiger neuer Crinoideen aus der Übergangsformation. Beiträge zur Petrefaktenkunde, 1:1–124.Google Scholar
Owen, D. D., and Shumard, B. F. 1850. Descriptions of fifteen new species of Crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous limestone of Iowa. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, series 2, 2:57–70.Google Scholar
Owen, D. D., and Shumard, B. F. 1852. Descriptions of seven new species of Crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous limestone of Iowa and Illinois. Journal of the Philadelphia Academy of Sciences, series 2, 2:89–94.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. 1836. Illustration of the Geology of Yorkshire, or a description of the strata and organic remains, Pt. 2, The Mountain Limestone Districts. John Murray, London, 253 p.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. 1841. Figures and Descriptions of the Palaeozoic Fossils of Cornwall, Devon, and West Somerset; observed in the course of the ordinance geological survey of that district. Longmans, Brown, Green, and Longmans, London, 232 p.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. 1843. Taxocrinus, p. 59. In Morris, J. (ed.), A Catalogue of British Fossils. Comprising all the genera and species hitherto described; with reference to their geological distribution and to the localities in which they have been found (first edition). John Van Voorst, London.Google Scholar
Porrenga, D. H. 1967. Glauconite and chamosite as depth indicators in the marine environment, p. 495–502. In Hallam, A. (ed.), Depth Indicators in Marine Sedimentary Rocks. Marine Sedimentary Geology, Special Issue 5, no. 5/6.Google Scholar
Posamentier, H. W., and Allen, G. P. 1999. Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigraphy—Concepts and Applications. SEPM Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology, No. 7, 210 p.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. G. 2003. Sedimentology, sequence stratigraphy, and miospore zonation of the Lower Mississippian (Osage) Borden Formation in Kentucky and adjacent states. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Roemer, F. A. 1855. Erste Periode, Kohlen-Gebirge, 788 p. In Bronn, H. G. (ed.), Lethaea Geognostica (third edition), 2. E. Schweizerbart, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Roeser, E. W. 1986. A Lower Mississippian (Kinderhookian–Osagian) crinoid fauna from the Cuyahoga Formation of northeastern Ohio. Unpublished , , 322 p.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R. 1900. New species of crinoids, blastoids, and cystoids from Missouri. American Geologist, 25:65–75.Google Scholar
Rowley, R. R., and Hare, S. J. 1891. Description of some new species of crinoids and blastoids from the Sub-carboniferous rocks of Pike and Marion Counties, Mo., and Scott County, Ia. Kansas City Scientist, 5(8):113–118.Google Scholar
Sable, E. G., and Dever, G. R. Jr. 1990. Mississippian rocks in Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 1503, 125 p.Google Scholar
Schultze, L. 1867. Monographie der Echinodermen des Eifler Kalkes. Kaiserlich Akademie der Wissenschaften Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Classe, Wien, 26:113–230.Google Scholar
Shumard, B. F. 1855. Description of new species of organic remains. Missouri Geological Survey, 2:185–208.Google Scholar
Shumard, B. F. 1858. Description of new fossil Crinoidea from the Palaeozoic rocks of the western and southern portions of the United States. Transactions of the St. Louis Academy of Sciences (1857), 1:71–80.Google Scholar
Springer, F. 1913. Crinoidea, p. 173–243. In von Zittel, K. A. (ed.), Textbook of Paleontology (second edition). Macmillan and Company, London, England.Google Scholar
Springer, F. 1926. Unusual forms of fossil crinoids. U.S. National Museum Proceedings, 67, Article 9, 137 p.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1953. Classe des Crinoïdes, p. 658–773. In Piveteau, J. (ed.), Traité de paléontologie, 3. Masson and Cie, Paris.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978a. Skeletal morphology of fossil crinoids, p. 58–216. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. T, Crinoidea. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978b. Suborder Compsocrinina Ubaghs, new suborder, p. 440–452. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. T, Echinodermata 2. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Ulrich, E. O. 1886. Remarks upon the names Cheirocrinus and Calceocrinus, with descriptions of three new generic terms and one new species. Minnesota Geology and Natural History Survey Annual Report, 14:104–113.Google Scholar
Van Sant, J. F., and Lane, N. G. 1964. Crawfordsville (Indiana) crinoid studies. The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Article 7, University of Kansas, Lawrence, 136 p.Google Scholar
von Zittel, K. A. von. 1895. Grundzüge der Palaeontologie (Palaeozoologie) (first edition). R. Oldenbourg, München, 971 p.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1878. Transitional forms in crinoids, and description of five new species. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 224–266.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1880. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea, Pt. I, The families Ichthyocrinidae and Cyathocrinidae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 226–378.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1881. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea, Pt. II, Family Sphaeroidocrinidae, with the sub-families Platycrinidae, Rhodocrinidae, and Actinocrinidae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, p. 177–411.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1885. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea, Pt. 3, section 1. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, p. 223–364.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1886. Revision of the Paleocrinoidea, Pt. 3, section 2. Proceeding of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, p. 140–302.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1890. New species of crinoids and blastoids from the Kinderhook Group of the Lower Carboniferous rocks at LeGrand, Iowa, and a new genus from the Niagaran Group of Western Tennessee. Illinois Geological Survey, 8:155–208.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F. 1897. The North American Crinoidea Camerata. Harvard College Museum of Comparative Zoology Memoir, 20, 897 p.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 2003. Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids 1981–1985. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 363(CD).Google Scholar
Weir, G. W., Lee, K. Y., and Cassity, P. E. 1971. Geologic map of the Bighill quadrangle, east-central Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Quadrangle Map, GQ-900.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1862. Description of new species of fossils from the Devonian and Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 9:8–33.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1863. Observations on the summit structure of Pentremites, the structure and arrangement of certain parts of crinoids, and descriptions of new species from the Carboniferous rocks of Burlington, Iowa. Boston Society Natural History Journal, 7:481–506.Google Scholar
Whitfield, R. P. 1881. Description of a new species of crinoid from the Burlington Limestone, at Burlington, Iowa. American Museum of Natural History Bulletin, 1:7–11.Google Scholar
Work, D. M., and Mason, C. E. 2003. Mississippian (Middle Osagean) ammonoids from the Nada Member of the Borden Formation, Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 77:593–596.Google Scholar