Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:28:43.103Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Baltic Ordovician compound sponges as erratics on Gotland (Sweden), in northern Germany and the eastern Netherlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2016

F. Rhebergen
F. Rhebergen*
Affiliation:
Slenerbrink 178, NL- 7812 HJ Emmen, the Netherlands. Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Compound orchocladine sponges are unusual in the Early Palaeozoic. In Europe, silicified material of Late Ordovician age has hitherto been referred to as Aulocopium aurantium Oswald, 1847 and the invalid Aulocopium compositium Conwentz, 1905. An examination of new material has resulted in the recognition of a new genus, Hydraspongia, with two new species, H. polycephala and H. erecta, and a third new species, Perissocoelia megahabra, to which most specimens can now be assigned. These taxa form part of rich erratic sponge assemblages, which originate from unknown source areas in the Baltic, and have been collected in northern and western Europe from fluvial sandy deposits of the Eridanos River system, which drained the Baltic area from the Middle Miocene to Early Pleistocene.

Keywords

Balticaerraticsnew taxaOrdovicianPorifera
Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 86 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 365 - 378
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2007

References

Bergquist, P.R., 1978. Sponges. University of California Press (Berkeley & Los Angeles): 268 pp.Google Scholar
Bijlsma, S., 1981. Fluvial sedimentation from the Fennoscandian area into the northwest European Basin during the Late Cenozoic. Geologie & Mijnbouw 60: 337–345.Google Scholar
Carrera, M.G., 2006. The genus Multispongia (Porifera) in the Early Ordovician limestones of the Argentine Precordillera. Ameghiniana 43: 493–498.Google Scholar
Carrera, M.G. & Rigby, J.K., 1999. Biogeography of Ordovician sponges. Journal of Paleontology 73: 26–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrera, M.G. & Rigby, J.K., 2004. Sponges. In: Webby, B. D., Paris, F., Droser, M.L. & Percival, I.G. (eds): The Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event. Columbia University Press (New York), 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conwentz, H., 1905. Das Westpreussische Provinzial-Museum 1880–1905. Nebst bildlichen Darstellungen aus Westpreussens Natur und vorgeschichtlicher Kunst. Westpreussisches Provinzial-Museum (Danzig): 54 pp., 80 pls.Google Scholar
De Freytas, T.A., 1991. Ludlow (Silurian) lithistid and hexactinellid sponges, Cape Phillips Formation, Canadian Arctic. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 28: 2042–2061.Google Scholar
Eliason, S., 2000. Sunstones and Catskulls. Guide to the fossils and geology of Gotland. Länsmuseet på Gotland (Visby): 166 pp.Google Scholar
Finks, R.M., 1960. Late Paleozoic sponge faunas of the Texas region: the siliceous sponges. American Museum of Natural History Bulletin 120: 1–160.Google Scholar
Gerth, H., 1927, Die Spongien aus dem Perm von Timor. Jaarboek van het Mijnwezen in Nederlands Indië, Verhandelingen 1926 (1): iv + 99–132.Google Scholar
Hartman, W.D. & Reiswig, H., 1973. The individuality of sponges. In: Boardman, R.S., Cheetham, A.H. & Oliver, W.A. Jr. (eds): Animal colonies. Development and function through time. Dowden, Hutchingson and Ross (Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania): 567–584.Google Scholar
Johns, R.A., 1994. Ordovician lithistid sponges of the Great Basin. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, NBMG Open-file Report 94–1: 1–199.Google Scholar
Krul, H., 1954. Zwerfsteenfossielen van Twente. Nederlandse Geologische Vereniging (Zutphen): 125 pp.Google Scholar
Mehl-Janussen, D., 1999. Die frähe Evolution der Portiera. Phylogenie und Evolutionsökologie der Poriferen im Paläozoikum mit Schwerpunkt der desmentragenden Demospongiae (‘Lithistide’). Münchner geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen. A. Geologie und Paläontologie, 37: 1–72.Google Scholar
Miller, S.A., 1889. Class Porifera. In: North American Geology and Palaeontology. Published by the author (Cincinnati): 152–167.Google Scholar
Oswald, F., 1847. Ueber die Petrefacten von Sadewitz. Uebersicht der Arbeiten und Veränderungen der Schlesischen Gesellschaft für vaterländische Kultur im Jahre 1846 (Breslau): 56–65.Google Scholar
Overeem, I., Weltje, G.J., Bishop-Kay, C. & Kroonenberg, S.B., 2001. The Late Cenozoic Eridanos delta system in the southern North Sea Basin: a climate signal in sediment supply? Basin Research 13: 293–312.Google Scholar
Pisera, A., 2002. Fossil ‘Lithistids’: an overview. In: Hooper, J.N.A. & Van Soest, R.W.M. (eds): Systema Porifera: A guide to the classification of sponges. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers (New York): 388–402.Google Scholar
Rauff, H., 1893–1894. Palaeospongiologie. Erster oder allgemeiner Theil und Zweiter Theil, erste Hälfte. Palaeontographica 40, 1–346; 41: 347–395.Google Scholar
Raymond, P.E. & Okulitch, V.J., 1940. Some Chazyan sponges. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College 86: 197–214.Google Scholar
Reid, R.E.H., 2003. Class Demospongia: General morphology and classification. In: Kaesler, R.L. (ed.): Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part E, Porifera revised, 2. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas (Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas): E15–62.Google Scholar
Rhebergen, F., Eggink, R.G., Koops, T. & Rhebergen, B., 2001. Ordovicische zwerfsteensponzen. Staringia 9: 1–144.Google Scholar
Rigby, J.K., 2004. Classification. In: Kaesler, R.L. (ed.): Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part E, Porifera revised, 3. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas (Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas): E1–8.Google Scholar
Rigby, J.K. & Chatterton, B.D.E., 1989. Middle Silurian Ludlovian and Wenlockian sponges from Baillie-Hamilton and Cornwallis Islands, Arctic Canada. Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 391: 1–37.Google Scholar
Rigby, J.K. & Webby, B.D., 1988. Late Ordovician sponges from the Malongulli Formation of central New South Wales, Australia. Palaeontographica Americana 56: 1–147.Google Scholar
Roemer, F., 1861. Die fossile Fauna der schlesischen Diluvialgeschiebe von Sadewitz bei Oels in Nieder-Schlesien. R. Nischkowsky (Breslau): xvi + 82.Google Scholar
Schmidt, O., 1870. Grundziige einer Spongien-Fauna des atlantischen Gebietes. W. Engelmann (Leipzig): iv + 88 pp.Google Scholar
Sollas, W.J., 1875. Sponges. Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th ed. Adam & Charles Black (Edinburgh): 427–446.Google Scholar
Ulrich, E.O. & Everett, O., 1890. Lower Silurian Sponges. Illinois Geological Survey (Paleontology of Illinois, 2, 5), Bulletin 8: 255–282.Google Scholar
Van Kempen, T.M.G., 1982. Aulocopium compositum Conwentz: Geen misvorming maar een aggregatie. Grondboor en Hamer 36: 79–81.Google Scholar
Van Kempen, T.M.G., 1983. The biology of aulocopiid lower parts (Porifera – Lithistida). Journal of Paleontology 57: 363–376.Google Scholar
Von Hacht, U., 1982. Aulocopium compositum Conwentz – Eine Fehlentwicklung? Grondboor en Hamer 36: 24–30.Google Scholar
Von Hacht, U., 1990. Fossile Spongien von Sylt. In: Von Hacht, U. (ed.): Fossilien von Sylt III. Verlag Inge – Maria von Hacht (Hamburg): 103–141.Google Scholar
Von Hacht, U. & Rhebergen, F., 1997. Ordovizische Geschiebespongien Europas. In: Zwanzig, M. & Löser, H. (eds): Berliner Beiträge zur Geschiebeforschung. CPress Verlag (Dresden): 51–63.Google Scholar
Wood, R., Zhuravlev, A. & Debrenne, F., 1992. Functional biology and ecology of Archaeocyatha. Palaios 7: 131–156.Google Scholar