Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T23:10:10.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Geometric models of lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct modular organisms: An addendum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

George R. McGhee Jr.  and
Robert W. Starcher
George R. McGhee Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, Wright-Rieman Laboratories, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903
Robert W. Starcher
Affiliation:
Hatch Mott MacDonald, 27 Beeker Street, Millburn, New Jersey 07041
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Geometric models for the reconstuction of soft-tissue lophophore shape and arrangement have been designed for extinct fenestrate bryozoans (Starcher and McGhee, 2000) and for extinct fenestrate graptolites (Starcher and McGhee, 2003). We wish to add the material given in the following three tables as an addendum to our paper in the March 2003 issue of the Journal of Paleontology. These tables will enable other researchers to characterize quickly and quantitatively the geometry of lophophore shapes and arrangements in the colonial meshworks of extinct organisms, and will add quantitative measures of soft-tissue characteristics of extinct modular organisms to the already existing morphometric characterizations of hard-tissue skeletal aspects of colonial meshworks (Hageman, 1991; Holdener, 1994; Hageman et al., 1998).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 80 , Issue 6 , November 2006 , pp. 1227 - 1228
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

Hageman, S. J. 1991. Approaches to systematic and evolutionary studies of perplexing groups: An example using fenestrate Bryozoa. Journal of Paleontology, 65:630–647.Google Scholar
Hageman, S. J., Bock, P. E., Bone, Y., and McGowran, B. 1998. Bryozoan growth habits: Classification and analysis. Journal of Paleontology, 72:418–436.Google Scholar
Holdener, E. J. 1994. Numerical taxonomy of fenestrate bryozoans: Evaluation of methodologies and recognition of intraspecific variation. Journal of Paleontology, 68:1201–1214.Google Scholar
Starcher, R. W., and McGhee, G. R. Jr. 2000. Fenestrate theoretical morphology: Geometric constraints on lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct Bryozoa. Paleobiology, 26:116–136.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starcher, R. W., and McGhee, G. R. Jr. 2003. Fenestrate graptolite theoretical morphology: Geometric constraints on lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct hemichordates. Journal of Paleontology, 77:362–369.Google Scholar