Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:26:09.097Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The evolutionary history of shell geometry in Paleozoic ammonoids

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

W. Bruce Saunders ,
David M. Work  and
Svetlana V. Nikolaeva
W. Bruce Saunders
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania 19010. E-mail: [email protected]
David M. Work
Affiliation:
Maine State Museum, 83 State House Station, Augusta, Maine 04333. E-mail: [email protected]
Svetlana V. Nikolaeva
Affiliation:
Paleontological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Profsoyuznaya 123, Moscow 117647, Russia. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tracking the geometry of all 597 ammonoid genera from the Lower Devonian into the Lower Triassic, a 145–Myr period that spans three mass extinctions, shows that Paleozoic ammonoid shell geometries were strongly biased for a few combinations of whorl expansion (W), whorl overlap (D), and whorl shape (S). Just three modal combinations accommodated approximately 432 genera (72% of total) and just one combination accommodated 239 genera (40%). All three primary modal forms have similar low expansion rates (W ≈ 1.75) and differ only in coiling tightness (D). These geometries resulted in long body chambers (≈400°) with Nautilus-like static in-life aperture orientations (≈30°) for the great majority (>80%) of Paleozoic ammonoids. The ancestral clade Agoniatitida included a unique spectrum of openly coiled geometries that went extinct at the Frasnian/Famennian boundary (and were not seen again until the Triassic). The Devonian/Mississippian extinction terminated the brief, explosive radiation of the Clymeniida (64 genera). The dominant Paleozoic clade, the Goniatitida (ca. 130 Myr, 374 genera [64% of total]), survived both the F/F and D/M extinctions, but began declining well before the Permian/Triassic crisis. The long-lived Prolecanitida (40 genera [7%]) appeared shortly after the D/M extinction, persisted as a low-diversity clade through the Carboniferous, and gave rise to the Ceratitida in the mid-Permian, from which were derived all Mesozoic ammonoids. After each major extinction event the phylogenetic composition of ammonoid stocks was fundamentally reordered and geometries were recanalized. Without external disturbances, as the relatively uninterrupted Mississippian through Permian record shows, the history of ammonoid shell geometry would probably have been a record of much greater constancy, perhaps tied much more closely to the Lower Devonian geometric landscape.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , Winter 2004 , pp. 19 - 43
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

Literature Cited

Arkell, W. J., Furnish, W. M., Kummel, B., Miller, A. K., Moore, R. C., Schindewolf, C. H., Sylvester-Bradley, P. C., and Wright, C. W. 1957. Mollusca 4, Cephalopoda, Ammonoidea. Part L ofMoore, R. C., ed. Treatise on invertebrate paleontology. Geological Society of America, New York, and University of Kansas, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S. 1979. Geometrical form of the shells of fossils cephalopods and its biological significance. Pp. 16–18in Osnovnye napravleniya primeneniya matematicheskikh metodov v paleontologii. Kishinev. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S. 1988. Morphofunctional analysis of the coiled cephalopod shell. Pp. 139–159in Sovremennaya paleontologiya. Nedra Press, Moscow. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S. 1989. Morphogenesis and ecogenesis of Paleozoic cephalopods. Moscow University Press, Moscow. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Bayer, U., and McGhee, G. R. Jr. 1984. Iterative evolution of Middle Jurassic ammonite faunas. Lethaia 17:1–16.Google Scholar
Becker, R. T. 1993a. Anoxia, eustatic changes, and Upper Devonian to lowermost Carboniferous global ammonoid diversity. Pp. 115–163in House, M. R., ed. The Ammonoidea: environment, ecology, and evolutionary change. Clarendon, Oxford.Google Scholar
Becker, R. T. 1993b. Analysis of ammonoid palaeobiogeography in relation to the global Hangenberg (terminal Devonian) and Lower Alum Shale (Middle Tournaisian) events. Annales de la Société Géologique de Belgique 115:459–473.Google Scholar
Becker, R. T., and House, M. R. 1994. Kellwasser Events and goniatite successions in the Devonian of the Montagne Noire with comments on possible causations. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg 169:45–77.Google Scholar
Bogoslovsky, B. I. 1969. Devonskie Ammonoidei. I. Agoniatity. Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskogo Instituta, Trudy 124:1–341.Google Scholar
Bogoslovsky, B. I. 1971. Devonskie Ammonoidei. II. Goniatity. Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskogo Instituta, Trudy 127:1–228.Google Scholar
Bogoslovsky, B. I. 1981. Devonskie Ammonoidei. III. Klimenii (Podotryad Gonioclymeniina). Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskogo Instituta, Trudy 191:1–122.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1980. Motor performance and jet propulsion in Nautilus: implications for cephalopod paleobiology and evolution. Bulletin of the American Malacological Union 1980.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1981. Hydromechanical design of fossil cephalopods. Pp. 289–336in House, and Senior, 1981. The Ammonoidea: the evolution, classification, mode of life and geological usefulness of a major fossil group. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Crick, R. E. 1983. The practicality of vertical cephalopod shells as paleobathymetric markers. Geological Society of America Bulletin 94:1109–1116.Google Scholar
Dommergues, J.-L., Laurin, B., and Meister, C. 1996. Evolution of ammonoid morphospace during the Early Jurassic radiation. Paleobiology 22:219–240.Google Scholar
Erben, H. K. 1960. Primitive Ammonoidea aus dem Unterdevon Frankreichs und Deutschlands. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie 110:1–128.Google Scholar
Erben, H. K. 1964. Die Evolution der ältesten Ammonoidea (Lieferung 1). Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie 120:107–212.Google Scholar
Erben, H. K. 1965. Die Evolution der ältesten Ammonoidea (Lieferung 2). Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie 122:275–312.Google Scholar
Foote, M. 1992. Rarefaction analysis of morphological and taxonomic diversity. Paleobiology 18:1–16.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1989. Wonderful life. W.W. Norton, New York.Google Scholar
House, M. R. 1971. On the origin of the clymenid ammonoids. Palaeontology 13:664–674.Google Scholar
House, M. R. 1981. On the origin, classification and evolution of the early Ammonoidea. Pp. 3–36in House, and Senior, 1981.Google Scholar
House, M. R. 1985. Correlation of mid-Paleozoic ammonoid evolutionary events with global sedimentary perturbations. Nature 313:17–22.Google Scholar
House, M. R. 1993. Fluctuations in ammonoid evolution and possible environmental controls. Pp. 13–34in House, M. R., ed. The Ammonoidea: environment, ecology, and evolutionary change. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
House, M. R., and Senior, J. R., eds. 1981. The Ammonoidea: the evolution, classification, mode of life and geological usefulness of a major fossil group. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Korn, D. 2000. Morphospace occupation of ammonoids over the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary. Paläontologische Zeitschrift 74:247–257.Google Scholar
Korn, D., and Klug, C. 2003. Morphological pathways in the evolution of Early and Middle Devonian ammonoids. Paleobiology 29:329–348.Google Scholar
Kullmann, J. 2000. Ammonoid turnover at the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary. Revue de Paléobiologie, Genève, special volume 8:169–180.Google Scholar
Mutvei, H., and Reyment, R. A. 1973. Buoyancy control and siphuncle function in ammonoids. Palaeontology 16:623–636.Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, S. V. 1999. Morphological diversity of ammonoids from the lower Namurian of Central Asia. Pp. 295–313in Olóriz, and Rodríguez-Tovar, , eds. Advancing research in living and fossil cephalopods. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, S. V., and Barskov, I. S. 1994. Morphogenetic trends in the evolution of Carboniferous ammonoids. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie 193:401–418.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1966. Geometric analysis of shell coiling: general problems. Journal of Paleontology 40:1178–1190.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1967. Geometric analysis of shell coiling: coiling in ammonoids. Journal of Paleontology 41:43–65.Google Scholar
Ruzhencev, V. E., and Bogoslovskaya, M. F. 1978. Namurian time in ammonoid evolution: late Namurian ammonoids. Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskogo Instituta, Trudy 167:1–336. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., and Ramsbottom, W. H. C. 1986. The mid-Carboniferous eustatic event. Geology 14:208–212.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, W. B., and Shapiro, E. A. 1986. Calculation and simulation of ammonoid hydrostatics. Paleobiology 12:64–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, W. B., and Swan, A. R. H. 1984. Morphology and morphologic diversity of mid-Carboniferous ammonoids. Paleobiology 10:195–228.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., and Work, D. M. 1996. Shell morphology and suture complexity in Upper Carboniferous ammonoids. Paleobiology 22:189–218.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., and Work, D. M. 1997. Evolution of shell morphology and suture complexity in Paleozoic prolecanitids, the root-stock of Mesozoic ammonoids. Paleobiology 23:301–325.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., Work, D. M., and Nikolaeva, S. V. 1999. Evolution of complexity in Paleozoic ammonoid sutures. Science 286:760–763.Google Scholar
Spinosa, C., Furnish, W. M., and Glenister, B. F. 1975. The Xenodiscidae, Permian ceratitoid ammonoids. Journal of Paleontology 49:239–283.Google Scholar
Swan, A. R. H., and Saunders, W. B. 1987. Function and shape in Late Paleozoic (mid-Carboniferous) ammonoids. Paleobiology 13:297–311.Google Scholar
Tozer, E. T. 1981a. Triassic Ammonoidea: classification, evolution and relationship with Permian and Jurassic forms. Pp. 65–100in House, and Senior, . 1981.Google Scholar
Tozer, E. T. 1981b. Triassic Ammonoidea: geographic and stratigraphic distribution. Pp. 397–431in House, and Senior, 1981.Google Scholar
Tozer, E. T. 1994. Canadian Triassic ammonoid faunas. Geological Survey of Canada Bulletin 467:1–663.Google Scholar
Ward, P. D. 1980. Comparative shell shape distributions in Jurassic-Cretaceous ammonites and Jurassic-Tertiary nautilids. Paleobiology 6:32–43.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1996. Ammonoid life and habitat. in Landman, N. H., Tanabe, K., and Davis, R. A., eds. 1996. Ammonoid paleobiology. Topics in Geobiology 13:607–707. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar