Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:36:34.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sponges and associated fossils from the Pennsylvanian Carbondale Formation of northwestern Illinois

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

J. Keith Rigby  and
Peter von Bitter
J. Keith Rigby
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Room S389, Eyring Science Center, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602-4606,
Peter von Bitter
Affiliation:
Department of Paleobiology, Royal Ontario Museum and Department of Geology, University of Toronto, 100 Queen's Park, Toronto M5S 2C6, Canada,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The two new sponges, Diagonodictya crusta n. gen. and sp., a small steeply obconical, dictyospongiid hexactinellid, and Pohlispongia monosphaera n. gen and sp., a spheroidal, single-chambered, monaxonid demosponge—along with several isolated hexactinellid spicules—are described from low-energy, low pH, black shales within the Pennsylvanian Desmoinesian Carbondale Formation from northwestern Illinois, from the Illinois Basin. They are associated with a variety of small fossils, which range from radial and spheroidal to lobate obconical, here identified only as forms A and B, that are possible spore-bearing organs of plants. Some of these latter forms occur as core debris associated with fine hexactine-derived sponge spicules and bivalve? fragments in fecal pellets. The described assemblage may have lived as pelagic organisms in a protected environment and may have been deposited under swamp “flotants” in anoxic shallow water conditions. Alternatively, the assemblage may have lived as part of an open water pelagic biota, ending up in death in anoxic, deeper water environments.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 79 , Issue 3 , May 2005 , pp. 460 - 468
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

Collinson, C., Avcin, M. J., Norby, R. D., and Merrill, G. K.. 1972. Pennsylvanian conodont assemblages from LaSalle County, northern Illinois. Illinois State Geological Survey Guidebook Series, 10:10–37.Google Scholar
Dawson, J. W. 1889. New species of fossil sponges from the Siluro-Cambrian at Little Métis on the lower St. Lawrence. Royal Society of Canada Transactions, 7(4):31–55.Google Scholar
Evans, J. K. 1967. Depositional environments of a Pennsylvanian black shale (Heebner) in Kansas and adjacent states. Ph.D. dissertation, Rice University, Houston, Texas, 162 p.Google Scholar
Finks, R. M., and Rigby, J. K.. 2004. Paleozoic demosponges, p. 9–173. In Kaesler, R. L. (ed.), Part E, Porifera (revised), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, 3. Geological Society of America and The University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Fries, E. M. 1849. Summa vegetabilium Scandanaviae, Pt. 2, p. 259–572. E. Typographia Academica, Uppsala.Google Scholar
Hall, J., and Clarke, J. M.. 1899. A memoir of the Paleozoic reticulate sponges constituting the family Dictyospongidae. New York State Museum Memoir, 2, 350 p.Google Scholar
Halle, T. G. 1933. The structure of certain spore-bearing organs believed to belong to the Pteridosperms. Kunglige Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar, Stockholm, series 3, 12(6), 103 p.Google Scholar
Heckel, P. H. 1977. Origin of phosphatic black shale facies in Pennsylvanian cyclothems of Mid-Continent North America. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 61(7):1045–1068.Google Scholar
Lévi, C. 1953. Sur une nouvelle classification des Démosponges. Académie des Sciences (Paris), C. R. des Séances, 236:853–855.Google Scholar
Rauff, H. 1894. Palaeospongiologie. Zweiter Theil; Erste Hälfte. Palaeontologie, 41:233–346.Google Scholar
Reid, R. E. H. 1958. A monograph of the Upper Cretaceous Hexactinellida of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, Pt. 1, p. i–xlvi.Google Scholar
Rigby, J. K. 1986a. Sponges of the Burgess Shale (Middle Cambrian), British Columbia. Palaeontographica Canadiana Monograph, 2, 105 p.Google Scholar
Rigby, J. K. 1986b. The sponge fauna of the Mississippian Heath Formation of central Montana, p. 344–349. In Dutro, J. T and Pfefferkorn, H. W. (eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Congress on Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, Paleontology, Paleoecology, Paleogeography. Southern Illinois Press, C. R., 5.Google Scholar
Rigby, J. K., and Harris, D. A.. 1979. A new Silurian sponge from northern British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Paleontology, 53:968–980.Google Scholar
Rigby, J. K., and Maher, B. J.. 1995. Age of the hexactinellid beds of the Roberts Mountains Formation, Snake Mountains, Elko County, Nevada, and additions to the sponge fauna. Journal of Paleontology, 69:1020–1029.Google Scholar
Rigby, J. K., and Pollard-Bryant, T. L.. 1979. Fossil sponges of the Mississippian Fort Payne Chert in northeastern Alabama. Journal of Paleontology, 53:1005–1012.Google Scholar
Rogers, W. S., Jackson, M., and Mckinney, K. H.. 1964. A new genus of sponge from the Middle Ordovician. Journal of Paleontology, 38:135–137.Google Scholar
Schenk, P. E. 1967. Facies and phases of the Altamont Limestone and Megacyclothem (Pennsylvanian), Iowa to Oklahoma. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 78:1369–1383.Google Scholar
Schmidt, O. 1870. Grundzüge einer Spongien-fauna des atlantischen Gebietes. Wilhelm Engelmann, Leipzig, 88 p.Google Scholar
Schrammen, A. 1924. Die Kieselspongien der oberen Kreide von Nordwestdeutschland, III und lezter Teil. Monograph für Geologie und Palaeontologie, Soergel, W., ed., series 1, Heft 2, 159 p.Google Scholar
Schulze, F. E. 1887. Report on the Hexactinellida collected by H.M.S. Challenger during the years 1873–1876. Reports on the Scientific Results of the Voyage of H.M.S. Challenger, Zoology (London, Edinburgh & Dublin), 21, 513 p.Google Scholar
Smith, W. H., Nance, R. B., Hopkins, M. E., Johnson, R. G., and Shabica, C. W.. 1970. Depositional environments in parts of the Carbondale Formation, western and northern Illinois: Frances Creek and Mazon Creek biota. Illinois Geological Survey Guidebook Series, 8, 119 p.Google Scholar
Sollas, W. J. 1885. Classification of the sponges. Annals of Natural History, series 5, 16:395.Google Scholar
Taylor, T. N. 1988. Pollen and pollen organisms of fossil gymnosperms; phylogeny and reproductive biology, p. 177–213. In Beck, C. B. (ed.), Origin and Evolution of Gymnosperms. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
von Bitter, P. H., and Merrill, G. K.. 1998. Apparatus composition and structure of the Pennsylvanian conodont genus Gondolella based on assemblages from the Desmoinesian of northwestern Illinois. Journal of Paleontology, 72(1):112–132.Google Scholar
Zangerl, R., and Richardson, E. S.. 1963. The paleoecological history of two Pennsylvanian black shales. Fieldiana: Geology Memoirs, 4, 352 p.Google Scholar
Zittel, K. A. von. 1878. Studien über fossile Spongien, Zweite Abteilung Lithistidae; Dritte Abteilung, Monactinellidae, Tetractinellidae und Calcispongiae. Abhandlungen der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Mathematisch-Physikalischen Klasse, 2, 138 p.Google Scholar