No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Trilobite systematics: The last 75 years
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 May 2016
Abstract
The progress achieved in trilobite systematics over the last 75 years is briefly reviewed. Different approaches to phylogenetics have influenced the way trilobites have been classified. Classical evolutionary taxonomy, the stratigraphical approach, and cladistics have all contributed in different ways to the current classification, which has evolved piecemeal, and is still unsatisfactory is some ways. Nonetheless, progress towards a phylogenetic classification has been made, especially as the result of information from ontogenies provided by well-preserved silificified material. Trilobites are a well-defined clade within a larger arachnomorph group. Agnostida have been excluded from Trilobita, but are perhaps best considered as specialised trilobites, at least until limbs of eodiscids are described. The outstanding problems in classification of each trilobite order are reviewed. Most are concerned with the recognition of the appropriate Cambrian sister taxa, and the discovery of the relevant ontogenies. It is very likely that post-Cambrian clades “root” deeply into the Cambrian. The coherence, or otherwise, of Proetida, Asaphida, Corynexochida and the lichid/odontopleurid groups will be resolved by such studies. The problems of paraphyly in Ptychopariida and Redlichiina may prove more obdurate. The temporal brevity of certain Cambrian family ranges may be partly a taxonomic artefact. The possibility of a late Cambrian gap in the record on some clades should be considered.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Paleontological Society
References
Adrain, J. M.
1994. The lichid trilobite Borealarges n. gen., with species from the Silurian of Arctic Canada. Journal of Paleontology, 68:1081–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adrain, J. M.
1998. Systematics of Acanthoparyphinae (Trilobita) with species from the Silurian of Arctic Canada. Journal of Paleontology, 72:698–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adrain, J. M. and Edgecombe, G. D.
1997. Silurian encrinurine trilobites from the central Canadian Arctic. Palaeontographica Canadiana, 14,109 p., 35 pl.Google Scholar
Adrain, J. M., Fortey, R. A., and Westrop, S. R.
1998. Post-Cambrian trilobite diversity and Evolutionary Faunas. Science, 280:1922–1925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adrain, J. M., Westrop, S. R., Landing, E., and Fortey, R. A.
2001.
Ischyrotoma and related trilobites from the Ordovician of the Great Basin. Journal of Paleontology, 75:xxx–xxx.Google Scholar
Beecher, C. E.
1894. On the mode of occurrence and development of Triarthrus becki
. American Geologist, 13:38–43.Google Scholar
Beecher, C. E.
1897. Outline of a natural classfication of the trilobites. American Journal of Science, 3:89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergström, J.
1972. Appendage morphology of the trilobite Cryptolithus and its implications. Lethaia, 5:85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergström, J.
1973. Organisation life and systematics of trilobites. Fossils and Strata, 2:1–69.Google Scholar
Bergström, J.
1977. Proetida—a disorderly order of trilobites. Lethaia, 10:207–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, D. E. G., and Fortey, R. A.
1989. The early radiation of the Arthropoda. Science, N.Y., 246:241–243.Google Scholar
Bruton, D. L.
1983. Cambrian origins of the odontopleurid trilobites. Palaeontology, 26:875–885.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E.
1971. Taxonomy and ontogeny of Siluro-Devonian trilobites from near Yass, New South Wales. Palaeontographica (Abt. A), 131:1–108.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E.
1980. Ontogenetic studies of Middle Ordovician trilobites from the Esbataottine Formation, Mackenzie Mountains, Canada. Palaeontographica (Abt. A), 171:1–74.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E., and Ludvigsen, R.
1998. Upper Steptoean (Upper Cambrian) trilobites from the McKay Group of southeastern British Columbia, Canada. Memoir of the Paleontological Society, 49:1–43.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E., and Speyer, S.
1997. Ontogeny, p. 173–247. In
Whittington, H. B. et al., (eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology Pt. O (Revised). University of Kansas Press and Geological Society of America.Google Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E., Siveter, D. J., Edgecombe, G. D., and Hunt, A. S.
1990. Larvae and relationships of the Calymenina (Trilobita). Journal of Paleontology, 64:255–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chatterton, B. D. E., Edgecombe, G. E., Vaccari, N. E., and Waisfeld, B. G.
1999. Ontogenies of some Ordovician Telephinidae from Argentina, and larval patterns in the Proetida (Trilobita). Journal of Paleontology, 73:219–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J.-Y., Edgecombe, G. E., and Ramsköld, L.
1997. Morphological and ecological disparity in naraoiids (Arthropoda) from the early Cambrian Chengjiang fauna, China. Records of the Australian Museum, 49:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J.-Y., Zhou, G.-Q., Zhu, M.-Y., and Yeh, K.-Y.
1997. The Chengjiang biota. 222 pp. The National Museum of Science, Taichung, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Cisne, J. L.
1975. Anatomy of Triarthrus and the relationships of the Trilobita. Fossils and strata, 4:45–63.Google Scholar
Clarkson, E. N. K., Taylor, C. M., and Ahlberg, P.
1997. Ontogeny of the trilobite Parabolina spinulosa (Wahlenberg, 1818) from the Upper Cambrian Alum Shales of Sweden. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Earth Sciences, 88:69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotten, T. J.
2001. The phylogeny and systematics of blind Cambrian ptychoparioid trilobites. Palaeontology, 44:167–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtessole, R., and Pillet, J.
1976. Contribution a l'étude des trilobites de l'Ordovicien inferieur de al Montagne Noire; Eulominae et Nileidae. Annales de la Societé Géologique du Nord, 95:251–272.Google Scholar
Edgecombe, G. D.
1992. Trilobite phylogeny and the Cambrian-Ordovician “event”: cladistic reappraisal, p. 144–177. In
Novacek, M. J., and Wheeler, Q. D., (eds.), Extinction and Phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Edgecombe, G. D., and Ramsköld, L. E.
1999. Relationships of Cambrian Arachnata and the systematic position of Trilobita. Journal of Paleontology, 73:263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edgecombe, G. D., Chatterton, B. D. E., Vaccari, N. E., and Waisfeld, B. G.
1998. Ordovician cheirurid trilobites from the Argentine Precordillera. Journal of Paleontology, 73:1155–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eldredge, N.
1972. Systematics and evolution of Phacops rana (Green, 1832) and Phacops iowensis Delo, 1933 (Trilobita) from the Middle Devonian of North America. Bulletins of the American Museum of Natural History, 147:49–113.Google Scholar
Eldredge, N.
1977. Trilobites and evolutionary patterns, p. 305–332. In
Hallam, A. (ed.), Patterns of Evolution. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Foote, M.
1991. Morphologic patterns of diversification: examples from trilobites. Palaeontology, 34:461–485.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A.
1975. The Ordovician trilobites of Spitsbergen. 2. Asaphidae, Nileidae and Telephinidae of the Valkhallfonna Formation. Skrifter Norsk Polarinstitutt, 162:1–125.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A.
1983. Cambrian-Ordovician boundary trilobites from western Newfoundland and their phylogenetic significance. Special Papers in Palaeontology, 30:179–211.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A.
1990. Ontogeny, hypostome attachment and trilobite classification. Palaeontology, 33:529–576.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Chatterton, B. D. E.
1988. Classification of the trilobite suborder Asaphina. Palaeontology, 31:165–222.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Morris, S. F.
1978. Discovery of nauplius-like trilobite larvae. Palaeontology, 21:823–833.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Owens, R. M.
1975. Proetida—a new order of trilobites. Fossils and Strata, 4:227–239.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Owens, R. M.
1979. Enrollment in the classification of trilobites. Lethaia, 12:219–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Owens, R. M.
1990. Trilobites, p. 121–142. In
McNamara, K. J. (ed.), Evolutionary Trends. Belhaven Press, London.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Owens, R. M.
1999. Feeding habits in trilobites. Palaeontology, 42:429–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Seilacher, A.
1997. The trace fossil Cruziana semiplicata and the trilobite that made it. Lethaia, 30:105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Theron, J.
1994. A new Ordovician arthropod Soomaspis and the agnostid problem. Palaeontology, 37:841–861.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Whittington, H. B.
1989. The Trilobita as a natural group. Historical Biology, 2:125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fryer, G.
1998. A defence of arthropod polyphyly, p. 23–34. In
Fortey, R. A. and Thomas, R. M. (eds.), Arthropod Relationships. Kluyer, Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henningsmoen, G.
1951. Remarks on the classification of trilobites. Norsk Geologisk Tiddskrift, 29:174–217.Google Scholar
Henningsmoen, G.
1957. The trilobite family Olenidae. Skrifter Utgitt av det Norske Videnskapsakademie i Oslo. 1. Matematisk-naturvidenskapelig Klasse, 1:1–303.Google Scholar
Hessler, R. R., and Newman, W. A.
1975. A trilobitomorph origin for the Crustacea. Fossils and Strata, 4:437–459.Google Scholar
Hintze, L. F.
1953. Lower Ordovician trilobites from western Utah and eastern Nevada. Utah Geological and Mineralogical Survey Bulletin, 48:1–249.Google Scholar
Hou, X.-G., and Bergström, J.
1997. Artrhropods of the Lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna, Southwest China. Fossils and Strata, 45:1–116.Google Scholar
Hughes, C. P., Ingham, J. K., and Addison, R.
1975. The morphology, classification and evolution of the Trinucleidae (Trilobita). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 272:537–604.Google Scholar
Jaeckel, O.
1909. Uber die Agnostiden. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 61:380–401.Google Scholar
Landing, E., Bowring, S. A., Davidek, K. L., Rushton, A. W. A., Fortey, R. A., and Wimbledon, W. A. P.
2000. Cambrian-Ordovician boundary age and duration of the lowest Ordovician Tremadoc Series based on U-Pb zircon dates from Avalonian Wales. Geological Magazine, 137:485–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, P. D.
1971. British Cheiruridae (Trilobita). Palaeontographical Society, Monograph, 125:1–95.Google Scholar
Lauterbach, K.-E.
1980. Schlüsselereignisse in der Evolution des Grundplans der Arachnata (Arthropoda). Abhandlungen des Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins in Hamburg, 23:163–327.Google Scholar
Lauterbach, K.-E.
1983. Synapomorphien swischen Trilobiten- und Cheliceratenzweig der Arachnata. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 210:213–218.Google Scholar
Lieberman, B. S.
1998. Cladistic analysis of the Early Cambrian Olenelloid trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 72:59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, B. S.
1999. Systematic revision of the Olenelloidea (Trilobita, Cambrian). Peabody Museum of Natural History. Yale University, Bulletin, 45:1–150.Google Scholar
Lochman, C.
1936. New trilobite genera from the Bonneterre Dolomite. Journal of Paleontology, 10:35–43.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, 6:1–175.Google Scholar
Lutke, F.
1990. Contributions to a phylogenetical classification of the subfamily Proetinae Salter, 1864 (Trilobita). Senckenbergiana Lethaea, 71:1–83.Google Scholar
McNamara, K. J.
1978. Paedomorphosis in Scottish olenellid trilobites (early Cambrian). Palaeontology, 21:635–655.Google Scholar
Moore, C. R. (ed.). 1959. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O (Trilobita). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J., and Walossek, D.
1987. Morphology, ontogeny and life habit of Agnostus pisiformis from the Upper Cambrian of Sweden. Fossils and Strata, 19:1–124.Google Scholar
Öpik, A. A.
1979. Middle Cambrian agnostids: systematics and biostratigraphy. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Bulletin, 172:1–188 (2 vol).Google Scholar
Palmer, A. R.
1965a. Biomere—a new kind of stratigraphic unit. Journal of Paleontology, 39:149–153.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. R.
1965b. Trilobites of the Late Cambrian pterocephaliid biomere in the Great Basin. United States Geological Survey, Professional Paper
493:1–105.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. R.
1984. The biomere problem: evolution of an idea. Journal of Paleontology, 58:599–611.Google Scholar
Ramsköld, L.
1991. Pattern and process in the evolution of the Odontopleuridae (Trilobita). The Selenopeltinae and Ceratocephalinae. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Earth Sciences, 82:143–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsköld, L., and Edgecombe, G. D.
1991. Trilobite monophyly revisited. Historical Biology, 4:267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsköld, L., and Werdelin, L.
1991. The phylogeny and evolution of some phacopid trilobites. Cladistics, 7:29–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasetti, F.
1945. New Upper Cambrian trilobites from the Levis Conglomerate. Journal of Paleontology, 19:462–478.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F.
1972. Cambrian trilobite faunas of Sardinia. Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei Memorie, 11:1–100.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F., and Theokrttoff, G.
1967. Lower Cambrian agnostid trilobites of North America. Journal of Paleontology, 41:189–196.Google Scholar
Raw, F.
1927. The ontogenies of trilobites and their significance. American Journal of Science (series 5), 14:7–35.Google Scholar
Resser, C. E.
1938. Cambrian System (restricted) of the southern Appalachians. Geological Society of America, Special Paper
15:1–140.Google Scholar
Richter, R.
1932, Crustacea (Pälaontologie). In
Dittler, R., Joos, G., Korschelt, E., Linek, G., Oltmanns, F., and Schaum, K. (eds.), Hanworterbuch der Naturwissenschaften. Gustav Fischer, Jena.Google Scholar
Robison, R. A.
1967. Ontogeny of Bathyuriscus fimbriatus and its bearing on the affinities of corynexochid trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 41:213–221.Google Scholar
Robison, R. A.
1972b. Mode of life of agnostid trilobites, p. 33–40. In 24th International Geological Congress, Montreal, section 7.Google Scholar
Robison, R. A., and Campbell, D. P.
1974. A Cambrian corynexochid trilobite with only two thoracic segments. Lethaia, 7:273–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, R. J.
1951. Stratigraphy of the Garden City Formation in Northeastern Utah and its trilobite faunas. Peabody Museum of Natural History, Bulletin
6:1–161.Google Scholar
Salter, J. W.
1864. A Monograph of British Trilobites. Palaeontographical Society Monograph
8:1–80. London.Google Scholar
Shergold, J. H.
1991. Protaspid and early meraspid growth stages of the eodiscid trilobite Pagetia ocellata Jell, and their implications for classification. Alcheringa
15:65–86.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B.
1988. Patterns of diversification and extinction in early Palaeozoic echinoderms. Palaeontology, 31:799–828.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B.
1994. Taxonomy and the Fossil Record. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.Google Scholar
Speyer, S. E., and Chatterton, B. D. E.
1989. Trilobite larvae and larval ecology. Historical Biology, 3:27–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speyer, S. E., and Chatterton, B. D. E.
1990. Trilobite larvae, larval ecology and developmental biology. Short courses in Paleontology Number 3, 137–156. Paleontological Society, Knoxville, Tennessee.Google Scholar
Stitt, J. B.
1975. Adaptive radiation, trilobite palaeoecology and extinction, Ptychaspidid Biomere, late Cambrian of Oklahoma. Fossils and Strata, 4:381–90.Google Scholar
St⊘rmer, L.
1933. Are the trilobites related to arachnids? American Journal of Science (series 5), 26:147–157.Google Scholar
St⊘rmer, L.
1942. Studies on trilobite morphology, Pt. 2, the larval development, the segmentation and the sutures, and their bearing on trilobite classification. Norsk geologisk Tiddskrift, 21:49–164.Google Scholar
Strusz, D. L.
1980. The Encrinuridae and related families, with a description of Silurian species from southeastern Australia. Palaeontographica (A), 168:1–68.Google Scholar
Stubblefield, C. J.
1926. Notes on the development of a trilobite, Shumardia pusilla (Sars). Linnean Society of London, Zoological Journal, 36:345–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stubblefield, C. J.
1936. Cephalic sutures and their bearing on current classification of trilobites. Biological Reviews, 11:407–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temple, J. T., and Tripp, R. P.
1979. An investigation of the Encrinurinae (Trilobita) by numerical taxonomic methods. Royal Society of Edinburgh, Transactions, 70:223–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripp, R. P., and Evitt, W. R.
1981. Silicified Lichidae from the Middle Ordovician of Virginia. Geological Magazine, 118:665–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A. T., and Holloway, D. L.
1988. Review of the trilobite suborder Lichida. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 321:179–262.Google Scholar
Westrop, S. R.
1986. Trilobites of the Upper Cambrian Sunwaptan Stage, southern Canadian Rocky Mountains, Alberta. Palaeontographica Canadiana, 3:1–179.Google Scholar
Westrop, S. R.
1991. Intercontinental variation in mass extinction patterns: influence of biogeographic structure. Paleobiology, 17:363–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westrop, S. R.
1995. Sunwaptan and Ibexian (Upper Cambrian-Lower Ordovician) trilobites of the Rabbitkettle Formation, Mountain River Region, northern Mackenzie Mountains, northwest Canada. Palaeontographica Canadiana, 12:1–75.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B.
1941. Silicified Trenton trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 15:492–522.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B.
1956. Silicified Middle Ordovician trilobites: the Odontopleuridae. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, 114:155–288.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B.
1957. The ontogeny of trilobites. Biological Reviews
32:421–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, H. B.
1959. Silicified Middle Ordovician trilobites: Remopleurididae, Trinucleidae, Raphiophoridae, Endymioniidae. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, 121:371–496.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B.
1966. Phylogeny and distribution of Ordovician trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 40:696–737.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B.
1975. Trilobites with appendages from the Middle cambrian Burgess Shale, British Columbia. Fossils and Strata, 4:97–136.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B.
1977. The Middle Cambrian trilobite Naraoia, Burgess Shale, British Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 280:409–443.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B., and Almond, J. E.
1987. Appendages and habits of the Upper Ordovician trilobite Triarthrus eatoni
. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 317:1–46.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B., et al. 1997. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Pt. O (Trilobita) revised. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 530 p.Google Scholar
Wills, M. A., Briggs, D. E. G., Fortey, R. A., and Wilkinson, M.
1998. An arthropod phylogeny based on fossil and Recent taxa, p. 33–106. In
Edgecombe, G. D. (ed.), Arthropod Fossils and Phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Zhang, W.-T.
1980. On the Miomera and the Polymera (Trilobita). Scientia Sinica, 23:223–234.Google Scholar
Zhang, W.-T., Zhang, S.-G, Lin, H.-L., Zhu, Z.-L., Qiang, Y.-Y., Zhou, Z.-Y, Yuan, J.-L., and Lu, Y.-H.
1980. Cambrian Trilobite faunas of Southwestern China. Palaeontologica Sinica, New Series B, 16:1–497.Google Scholar