Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:13:54.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theodenisia and Peracheilus: enigmatic trilobites from laurentia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Harry B. Whittington
Harry B. Whittington*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EQ, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Boulders of late Cambrian age in conglomerates in Quebec and Newfoundland have been intensively collected and have yielded some 18 species which were referred by Ludvigsen et al. (1989) to either Theodenisia Clark, 1948, or to Peracheilus Ludvigsen, 1986. Most specimens are cranidia, rarely having the free cheek in place, and all 3 mm or less in length (sag.). Similar cranidia from strata in Vermont (Clark and Shaw, 1968), Maryland (Rasetti, 1959), Oklahoma (Stitt, 1971), Texas (Winston and Nicholls, 1967) and Alberta (Westrop, 1986) appear to be few and are in need of further study. No even partially complete exoskeleton has been found, so that isolated pygidia cannot confidently be referred to a particular species; no hypostome is known. The cranidium provides a limited basis on which to diagnose a genus, and while each of the species displays distinctive characters, it is difficult to discern one or more related groups among them. The present investigation of the holotypes of type species and material of four additional species shows how problematic is the use of current generic categories. I begin my account by pointing out differences in appearance between individual specimens. Such contrasts are greatest between the external surface of the exoskeleton and a mold of the inner, visceral surface, lesser differences resulting from exfoliation of the laminated outer layer of the exoskeleton (Fig. 1) at different levels. The holotype cranidium of Theodenisia, T. eminens (Clark, 1924) is a unique specimen, none other like it having been recovered, despite the intensive collecting. It has distinctive features, but because of its uniqueness I advocate that the name Theodenisia should only be used for this holotype (Fig. 2.1–2.3, 2.5, 2.6). The holotype and additional specimens of Peracheilus marcoui (Raymond, 1924), the type species of the genus Peracheilus, are described (Fig. 2.4, 2.7–2.15), together with four other species. These show (Figs. 3, 4) part of the range of morphology that exists, but there is little in common between them. For example, not all have S1 and S2 prominent, nor is the glabella widest anteriorly in all. Renewed intensive collecting, including from areas other than Quebec and Newfoundland, is needed in the hope of obtaining more nearly complete knowledge of the exoskeleton. Such knowledge may show whether or not a group, or groups, of related species can be recognized. As a temporary expedient I use Peracheilus? as a genus in which to include, with question, three of the species, and adopt the more recently proposed name Calculites Fortey, 1983 for the type species Acheilus microps Rasetti, 1944. In recording the material examined, I include isolated pygidia associated with cranidia in Rasetti's collection to show that they are present, but not to confirm that I consider they belong to the same species as the cranidium.

Type
Paleontological Notes
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 81 , Issue 5 , September 2007 , pp. 1139 - 1145
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

Clark, M. G. and Shaw, A. B. 1968. Paleontology of northwestern Vermont XVI. Trilobites of the Upper Cambrian Gorge Formation (Upper bed 3). Journal of Paleontology, 42:1014–1026.Google Scholar
Clark, T. H. 1924. The paleontology of the Beekmantown Series at Levis, Quebec. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 10 (41, dated June 25), 134 p.Google Scholar
Clark, T. H. 1948. Theodenisia, new name, replacing Denisia Clark. Journal of Paleontology, 22:643.Google Scholar
Dalingwater, J. E., Siveter, D. J., and Mutvei, H. 1999. Cuticular microstructure of some Silurian homalonotid trilobites from Sweden. Journal of Paleontology, 73:256–262.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A. 1983. Cambrian-Ordovician trilobites from the boundary beds in western Newfoundland and their phylogenetic significance. Special Papers in Palaeontology, Palaeontological Association, 30:179–211.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Chatterton, B. D. E. 1988. Classification of the trilobite Suborder Asaphina. Palaeontology, 31:165–222.Google Scholar
Hupé, P. 1955. Classification des trilobites. Annales de Paléontologie, 41:111–345.Google Scholar
Jell, P. A. and Adrain, J. M. 2003. Available generic names for trilobites. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 48(2):331–551.Google Scholar
Kaesler, R. L. (ed.). 1997. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O, Arthropoda 1, Trilobita 1 (revised). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 530 p.Google Scholar
Kindle, C. H. 1982. The C. H. Kindle collection: Middle Cambrian to Lower Ordovician trilobites from the Cow Head Group, western Newfoundland. Current Research, Pt. C, Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 82–1C, 1–17.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R. 1986. Revision of Acheilus and Theodenisia (late Cambrian, Trilobita). Journal of Paleontology, 60:61–67.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R. and Westrop, S. R. 1983. Trilobite biofacies of the Cambrian-Ordovician boundary interval in northern North America. Alcheringa, 7:301–319.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R., Westrop, S. R., and Kindle, C. H. 1989. Sunwaptan (Upper Cambrian) trilobites of the Cow Head Group, western Newfoundland, Canada. Palaeontographica Canadiana, 6, 175 p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. 1959. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O, Arthropoda 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 560 p.Google Scholar
Neave, S. A. 1939. Nomenclator Zoologicus, Volume 2. The Zoological Society of London, Regent's Park, London NW8, 1,025 p.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1944. Upper Cambrian trilobites from the Lévis conglomerate. Journal of Paleontology, 18:229–258.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1945a. New Upper Cambrian trilobites from the Lévis conglomerate. Journal of Paleontology, 19:462–478.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1945b. Description supplémentaire de trois genres de trilobites Cambriens. Naturaliste Canadien, 72:117–124.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1954. Phylogeny of the Cambrian trilobite family Catillicephalidae and the ontogeny of Welleraspis . Journal of Paleontology, 28:599–612.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1959. Trempealeauian trilobites from the Conococheague, Frederick and Grove limestones of the central Appalachians. Journal of Paleontology, 33:375–398.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1963. Additions to the Upper Cambrian fauna from the conglomerate boulders at Levis, Quebec. Journal of Paleontology, 37:1009–1017.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1924. New Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician trilobites from Vermont. Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, 37 (dated July):389–466, pls. 12–14.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1925. New Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician trilobites from Vermont. Republished from 1924 with amendments in the Fourteenth Biennial Report of the Vermont State Geologist, 1923–1925:137–208.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1938. Nomenclature note. Geological Society of America, Bulletin, supplement 48:xv.Google Scholar
Shaw, A. B. 1952. Paleontology of northwestern Vermont. II. Fauna of the Upper Cambrian Rockledge Conglomerate near St Albans. Journal of Paleontology, 26:458–483.Google Scholar
Stitt, J. H. 1971. Late Cambrian and earliest Ordovician trilobites, Timbered Hills and Lower Arbuckle groups, western Arbuckle Mountains, Murray County, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin, 110, viii + 81 p., 8 pls. Google Scholar
Walcott, C. D. 1911. Cambrian Geology and Paleontology, II(4). Cambrian faunas of China. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57(4):69–108.Google Scholar
Westrop, S. R. 1986. Trilobites of the Upper Cambrian Sunwaptan Stage, southern Canadian Rocky Mountains, Alberta. Palaeontographica Canadiana, 3, 178 p.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 2005. The Upper Cambrian trilobite Stenopilus: Morphology, mode of life. Journal of Paleontology, 79:259–266.Google Scholar
Winston, D. and Nicholls, H. 1967. Late Cambrian and early Ordovician faunas from the Wilberns Formation, central Texas. Journal of Paleontology, 41:66–96.Google Scholar