Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T13:25:45.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new Ordovician astylospongiid sponge (Porifera) as an erratic from Baltica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2016

F. Rhebergen
F. Rhebergen*
Affiliation:
Slenerbrink 178, 7812 HJ Emmen, The Netherlands. E-mail:, [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Until now hemispherical astylospongiid sponges were invariably referred to as Caryospongia juglans var. basiplana Rauff. Renewed investigations have now shown that part of the material should be assigned to a new genus and species, Tympanospongia vankempeni, which is characterised by a system of very irregular canals. These flat-based sponges originate from the Baltic region and occur in two assemblages of silicified Late Ordovician sponges known exclusively as erratics from The Netherlands and northern Germany. These fossils were transported by the River Eridanos, a former drainage system from the Baltic region that filled the North European Basin during the Miocene to Early Pleistocene. Specimens of Tympanospongia vankempeni gen. et sp. nov. also occur in the Upper Pleistocene of Gotland, Sweden. The new sponge described herein principally differs from other genera of the Astylospongiidae found frequently in the erratic sponge assemblages by its irregular system of apochetes which ramify and anastomose commonly.

Keywords

PoriferaastylospongiidsBalticaerraticsLate Ordoviciannew taxa
Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 83 , Issue 4 , December 2004 , pp. 255 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2004

References

Bassler, R.S., 1927. A new Ordovician sponge fauna. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science 17: 390–394.Google Scholar
Bijlsma, S., 1981. Fluvial sedimentation from the Fennoscandian area into the north-west European Basin during the Late Cenozoic. Geologie & Mijnbouw 60: 337–345.Google Scholar
De Freitas, T.A., 1991. Ludlow (Silurian) lithistid and hexactinellid sponges, Cape Phillips Formation, Canadian Arctic. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 28: 2042–2061.Google Scholar
De Laubenfels, M.W., 1955. Porifera. In: Moore, R.C. (ed). Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part E. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press (Lawrence, Kansas): 21–112.Google Scholar
Dendy, A., 1924. Porifera 1. Non-Antarctic Sponges. British Antarctic (‘Terra Nova’) Expedition, 1910, Zoology 6: 269–392.Google Scholar
Duncan, P.M., 1879. On some spheroidal lithistid Spongida from the Upper Silurian Formation of New Brunswick. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (5), 4: 84–91.Google Scholar
Eichwald, E., 1830. Phytozoen. In: Naturhistorische Skizze von Lithauen, Volhynien und Podolien. (Wilna): 186–191.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
Finks, R.M. & Rigby, J.K., 2004. Paleozoic Demosponges. 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): 1–173.Google Scholar
Goldfuss, A., 1826. Petrefacta Germaniae oder Abbildungen und Beschreibungen der Petrefacten Deutschlands und der angrenzenden Länder, 1, 1 (Düsseldorf): 1–76.Google Scholar
Grant, R.E., 1836. Animal Kingdom. In: Todd, R.B. (ed): The Cyclopaedia of Anatomy and Physiology, 1. Sherwood, Gilbert & Piper (London): 107–118.Google Scholar
Hinde, G.J., 1883. Catalogue of the fossil sponges in the Geological Department of the British Museum (Natural History). British Museum (Natural History) (London): 248 pp.Google Scholar
Hinde, G.J., 1887-1912. A monograph of the British fossil sponges. Parts I and II. Palaeontographical Society (London): 188 pp.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
Klöden, K.F., 1834. Die Versteinerungen der Mark Brandenburg, insonderheit diejenigen, welche sich in den Rollsteinen und Blöcken der südbaltischen Ebene finden. Lüderitz (Berlin): 381 pp.Google Scholar
Krueger, H.H., 1994. Die nordische Geröllgemeinschaft aus der Lausitz (Miozän) und deren Vergleich mit Sylt. Brandenburger geowissenschaftliche Beiträge 1: 84–89.Google Scholar
Laban, C., 1995. The Pleistocene glaciations in the Dutch sector of the North Sea. A synthesis of sedimentary and seismic data. Ph D Thesis, University of Amsterdam: 194 pp.Google Scholar
Lévi, C., 1953. Sur une nouvelle classification des Démosponges. Académie des Sciences (Paris), Comptes Rendus des séances 236: 853–855.Google Scholar
Lindström, G., 1888. List of the Fossil Faunas of Sweden. I. Cambrian and Lower Silurian. 24 pp.; II. Upper Silurian. 29 pp. (Stockholm).Google Scholar
McKerrow, W.S., Dewey, J.F. & Scotese, C.R., 1991. The Ordovician and Silurian Development of the Iapetus Ocean. Special Papers in Palaeontology 44: 165–178.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., 1889. Class Porifera. In: North American Geology and Paleontology. (Cincinatti): 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: 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
Quenstedt, F.A., 1878. Petrefactenkunde Deutschlands 5. Korallen (Schwämme). Fues’s Verlag (Leipzig): 558 pp.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
Rhebergen, F. & Von Hacht, U., 1996. De Ordovicische sponzenfauna uit Nederland en het Duitse grensgebied en de vergelijking ervan met de sponzen van Sylt, de Lausitz en Gotland. Grondboor & Hamer 50: 83–94.Google Scholar
Rhebergen, F. & Von Hacht, U., 2000a. Schismospongia syltensis gen. n. sp. n. (Porifera), ein neuer Geschiebeschwamm aus plio/pleistozänen Kaolinsanden von Sylt (Nordwest-Deutschland). Archiv für Geschiebekunde 2: 797–804.Google Scholar
Rhebergen, F. & Von Hacht, U., 2000b. Ordovician erratic sponges from Gotland, Sweden. GFF 122: 339–349.Google Scholar
Rhebergen, F., Eggink, R.G., Koops, T. & Rhebergen, B., 2001. Ordovicische zwerfsteensponzen. Staringia 9 (Grondboor en Hamer 55, 2): 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): 1–8.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., 1848. Über eine neue Art der Gattung Blumenbachium (König) und mehrere unzweifelhafte Spongien in obersilurischen Kalkschichten der Grafschaft Decatur im Staate Tennessee in Nord-Amerika. Neues Jahrbuch Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie 1848: 680–686.Google Scholar
Roemer, F., 1860. Die silurischen Fauna des westlichen Tennessee. Eine palaeontologische Monographie. Edward Trewent Verlag (Breslau): 97 pp.Google Scholar
Roemer, F. 1861. Die fossile Fauna der Silurischen Diluvial-Geschiebe von Sadewitz bei Oels in Nieder-Schlesien. (Breslau): xvi + 82 pp.Google Scholar
Schlüter, C.A., 1884. Über Astylospongia Gothlandica sp. n. Verhandlungen des Naturhistorischen Vereines der preussischen Rheinlande und Westfalens, 41 (5) 1: 79–80.Google Scholar
Schmidt, O., 1870. Grundzüge einer Spongien-Fauna des atlantischen Gebietes. (Jena. Leipzig): iv + 88 pp.Google Scholar
Sollas, W.J., 1875. Sponges. Encyclopedia Brittanica, 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., 1978. Anthaspidellid sponges from the Early Paleozoic of Europe and Australia. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen 156: 305–337.Google Scholar
Van Kempen, T.M.G., 1989. On a new anthaspidellid sponge from the Baltic Early Paleozoic. Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg 68: 131–157.Google Scholar
Van Kempen, T.M.G., 1990. Two Baltic Ordovician chiastoclonellids (Porifera) from the island of Sylt (NW Germany). In: Von Hacht, U., (ed): von Sylt, Fossilien III. von Hacht, Verlag I.-M. (Hamburg): 151–178.Google Scholar
Von Hacht, U., 1981. Syltrochos pyramidoidalis, eine neue oberordovizische Spongie aus der Braderuper Serie der Kaolinsande von Sylt. Grondboor en Hamer 35: 154–155.Google Scholar
Von Hacht, U., 1985. Sedimentärgeschiebe im Kaolinsand von Sylt unter besonderer Berücksichtigung verkieselter Spongien. In: Von Hacht, U. (ed): Fossilien von Sylt. Verlag I.-M. von Hacht (Hamburg): 25–42.Google Scholar
Von Hacht, U., 1994. Sponzentelling op Sylt. Grondboor en Hamer 48: 76–80.Google Scholar
Von Hacht, U., & Rhebergen, F., 1996. Sponzentelling van Sylt II. Grondboor en Hamer 50: 12–16.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
Wiman, C., 1901. Über die Borkholmer Schicht im Mittelbaltischen Silurgebiet. Bulletin of the Geological Institution of the University of Upsala 5, 2 (1902): 149–221.Google Scholar
Zandstra, J.G., 1971. Geologisch onderzoek in de stuwwal van de oostelijke Veluwe bij Hattem en Wapenveld. Mededelingen van de Rijks Geologische Dienst 22: 215–260.Google Scholar
Zittel, K.A., 1877. Beiträge zur Systematik der fossilen Spongien. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie 1877 (1): 337–378.Google Scholar