Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T17:58:54.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Devonian Dentalium martini Whitfield, 1882, is not a mollusk but a worm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Ellis L. Yochelson  and
Ronald Goodison
Ellis L. Yochelson
Affiliation:
Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC 20560-0121
Ronald Goodison
Affiliation:
Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC 20560-0121
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dentalium martini Whitfield, 1882, is a calcareous worm tube, not a mollusk, and is placed in synonymy of Coleolus crenatocinctum Hall, 1879. The growth of D. martini mimics logarithmic curvature in the holotype, but in other specimens shape varies from irregularly curved to straight. A prime reason for reassignment is variation of the wall thickness around the circumference in D. martini, which in late Paleozoic and Recent scaphopods of the same size is of uniform thickness.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 73 , Issue 4 , July 1999 , pp. 634 - 640
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

Clarke, J. M., and Ruedemann, R. 1903. Catalogue of type specimens of Paleozoic fossils in the New York State Museum. New York State Museum Bulletin, 65, 847 p.Google Scholar
Fisher, D. 1962. Small conoidal shells of uncertain affinities, p. W98–W143. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part W, Miscellanea. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Grabau, A. W., and Shimer, H. 1909. North American Index Fossils: Invertebrates, Volume 1. A. G. Seiler and Sons, New York, 851 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, James. 1879. Natural History of New York, Palaeontology, Volume 5, Pt. II—Containing Descriptions of the Gasteropoda, Pteropoda, and Cephalopoda of the Upper Helderberg, Hamilton, Portage, and Chemung Groups. Albany, New York, 492 p.Google Scholar
Ludbrook, N. H. 1960. Scaphopoda, p. 137–140. In Moore, R. C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part I, Mollusca (1). Geological Society of American and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1889. North American Geology and Palaeontology for the use of Amateurs, Students, and Scientists. Western Methodist Book Concern, Cincinnati, Ohio, 664 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, W. A. Jr. 1954. Stratigraphy of the Onondaga Limestone (Devonian) in central New York State. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 65:621–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peck, J. E. Jr., and McFarland, H. B. 1954. Whitfield collection types at the University of California. Journal of Paleontology, 28:297–309.Google Scholar
Stauffer, C. D. 1909. The Middle Devonian of Ohio. Geological Survey of Ohio, 4th series, Bulletin 10, 204 p.Google Scholar
Walcott, C. D. 1884. Paleontology of the Eureka [Nevada] District. U.S. Geological Survey, Monograph 8, 298 p.Google Scholar
Wells, J. W., 1947. Provisional paleoecological analysis of the Devonian rocks of the Columbus region. Ohio Journal of Science, 47:119–126.Google Scholar
Whitfield, R. P. 1882. Description of some new species of fossils from Ohio, with remarks on some of the geological formations in which they occur. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2:193–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitfield, R. P. 1890. Contributions to invertebrate paleontology. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 5:505–568.Google Scholar
Whitfield, R. P. 1893. Contributions to the palaeontology of Ohio, p. 407–515. In Report of the Geological Survey of Ohio, Volume 7.Google Scholar
Whitfield, R. P. 1899. List of fossils, types, and figured specimens used in the paleontological work of R. P. Whitfield, showing where they are probably to be found at the present time. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 12:139–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitfield, R. P., and Hovey, E. O. 1900. Catalogue of the types and figured specimens in the palaeontological collections of the geological department, American Museum of Natural History: Part III, beginning with the Oriskany Sandstone. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 11:190–356.Google Scholar
Whitfield, R. P., and Hovey, E. O. 1901. Catalogue of the types and figured specimens in the palaeontological collections of the geological department, American Museum of Natural History: Part 4, Lower Carboniferous to Pleistocene, inclusive. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 11:357–500.Google Scholar
Yochelson, E. L. 1979. Early Radiation of Molluscs and Mollusc-like groups, p. 323–358. In House, M. R., (ed.), The Origin of Major Invertebrate Groups. Systematics Association Special Volume No. 12. Academic Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
Yochelson, E. L. 1986. Middle Devonian Styliolina obtusa (Hall) (Incertae Sedis) and Styliolina spica (Hall) (“Vermes”) from western New York, reconsidered. Journal of Paleontology, 60:680–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar