Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:35:18.880Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shell orientation terminology among the Bivalvia (Mollusca): Problems and proposed solutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Jack Bowman Bailey
Jack Bowman Bailey*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Western Illinois University, Macomb 61455,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Traditional terms used to describe shell orientation in bivalves are unsatisfactory in three important ways: 1) for poorly known bivalve taxa, unbiased and directionally neutral terms are sometimes needed to replace anterior and posterior where data are incomplete; 2) there is a striking absence of simple terms to apply to the long and short ends of the shell; and 3) the term lateral is either incorrectly or inconsistently applied. in the following discussion, I shall explore each of these issues and suggest remediation.

Type
Paleontological Notes
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 83 , Issue 3 , May 2009 , pp. 493 - 495
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

Bailey, J. B. 1983. Middle Devonian Bivalvia from the Solsville Member (Marcellus Formation), central New York State. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 174(3):193–326.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. D. and Bradshaw, M. A. 1971. Functional morphology of some fossil palaeotaxodont bivalve hinges as a guide to orientation. Palaeontology, 14(2):242–249.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, M. A. 1999. Lower Devonian bivalves from the Reefton Group, New Zealand. Association of Australasian Paleontologists, Memoir, 20:1–171.Google Scholar
Cox, L. R. 1969. Orientation and axes. Relation to biologic features, p. N78–N83. In Moore, R. C. and Teichert, C. (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. N, Volume 1, Mollusca 6 Bivalvia. The Geological Society of America, and the University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Dodge, H. 1950. Suggested substitutes for the terms “lunule” and “escutcheon” in Pelecypoda. Journal of Paleontology, 24(4):500–501.Google Scholar
Fischer, P. H. 1886. Manuel de conchyliologie et de paléontologie conchyliologique. Histoire naturelle des mollusques vivants et fossiles, 10:897–1008. (Paris)Google Scholar
Hoare, R. D., Heaney, M. J., and Mapes, R. H. 1989. Bivalves (Mollusca) from the Imo Formation (Mississippian, Chesterian) of North-Central Arkansas. Journal of Paleontology, 63(5):582–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoggarth, M. A. 1987. Determination of anterior-posterior orientation of glochidia by the examination of glochidial valves present within the umbos of juvenile unionid clams (Mollusca: Bivalvia). Ohio Journal of Science, 87(3):93–95.Google Scholar
Jackson, R. T. 1890. Phylogeny of the Pelecypoda. The Aviculidae and their allies. Boston Society of Natural History, Memoir, 4:277–400.Google Scholar
Johnston, P. A. 1993. Lower Devonian Pelecypoda from southeastern Australia. Association of Australasian Paleontologists, Memoir, 14:1–134.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D. and Boyd, D. W. 1975. Parallel evolution in early trigonacean bivalves. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 154(2):53–162.Google Scholar
Peel, J. S. 1991. Functional morphology of the Class Helcionelloida nov., and the early evolution of the Mollusca, p. 157–178. In Simonetta, A. M. and Conway Morris, S. (eds.), The Early Evolution of Metazoa and the Significance of Problematic Taxa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, and Melbourne. 296 p.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. 1970. Relation of shell form to life habits of the Bivalvia (Mollusca). Geological Society of America, Memoir, 125:1–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar