Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-k2jvg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-10T04:42:46.981Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VIII.—Variation in Shape of Shell with Respect to Ecological Station. A Review dealing with Recent Unionidæ and Certain Species of the Anthracosiidæ in Upper Carboniferous Times

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2012

R. M. C. Eagar
Get access

Extract

Studies in the variation of the Anthracosiidæ (= Carbonicolidæ) in the South Wales Coalfield by Davies and Trueman (1927) and in the Scottish Coalfields by Leitch (1936, 1940, 1941) have suggested that environmental influence on shell form is confined to changes in thickness of shell and in obesity. Davies and Trueman quoted H. R. Wakefield, who remarked that to-day among the Unionidæ these characters appear to vary according to the station of the shells in a single lake. Leitch referred to the work of Ortmann (1920) on the relation between obesity and distribution of river mussels in a large drainage basin in the U.S.A. The writer, in the course of very detailed work on the most highly variable faunas of the Anthracosiidæ known in the British Coal Measures, found evidence suggesting that certain other changes in shell shape and dimensions may also accompany environmental changes, as far as past environments may be reflected in the lithology of the rocks containing the shells.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 63 , Issue 2 , 1948 , pp. 130 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1948

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

References to Literature

Allen, W. R., 1922. “Studies of the Biology of Freshwater Mussels. III. Distribution and Movement of Winona Lake Mussels”, Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci., 1921, 227.Google Scholar
Alkins, W. E., 1919. “Notes on the Growth and Variation of Unio pictorum (Linné),” Journ. Conchology, XVI, 228.Google Scholar
Alkins, W. E., 1921. “Variation of Sphæria. I. Sphœrium lacustre (Muller)”, Mem. Proc. Manchester Lit. Phil. Soc., LXV, no. 2, 1.Google Scholar
Alkins, W. E., and Cook, M., 1921. “Variation of Sphæria. II. Sphærium corneum (Linné)”, Mem. Proc. Manchester Lit. Phil. Soc., LXV, no. 9, 1.Google Scholar
Alkins, W. E., and Harwood, J., 1921. “Variation of Sphaeria. III. Sphærium pallidum Gray”, Mem. Proc. Manchester Lit. Phil. Soc., LXV, no. 10, 1.Google Scholar
Altnoder, K. Von, 1926. “Beobachtungen über die Biologie von Margaritana margaritifera und über die Okologie ihres Wohnorts”, Arch. Hydrobiol, Stuttgart, XVII, 423.Google Scholar
Baker, F. C., 1922. “The Molluscan Fauna of the Big Vermilion River, Illinois”, Illinois Biol. Mon., V, 1.Google Scholar
Baker, F. C., 1924. “The Fauna of Lake Winnebago Region”, Trans. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. Arts Lit., XXI, 133.Google Scholar
Baker, F. C., 1926. “The Naiad Fauna of the Rock River System: a Study of the Law of Stream Distribution”, Illinois State Acad. Sci., xix, 103.Google Scholar
Baker, F. C., 1927. “Molluscan Associations of White Lake, Michigan: a Study of a Small Inland Lake from an Ecological and Systematic Viewpoint”, Ecology, VIII, no. 3, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, F. C., 1928. “The Influence of Changed Environment in the Formation of New Species and Varieties”, Ecology, IX–X, 271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, G. H., 1922. “Variation in Freshwater Mussels”, Ecology, III, 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boycott, A. E., 1936. “The Habitats of Freshwater Mollusca in Britain”, Journ. Animal Ecology, V, 116.Google Scholar
Bridgeman, J. B., 1875. “A Variety Caused by a Locality”, Quart. Journ. Conchology, 1, 70.Google Scholar
Brown, C. J., Clark, C, and Gleissner, B., 1938. “The Size of Certain Naiades from Western Lake Erie in Relation to Shoal Exposure”, American Midland Naturalist, Notre Dame, XIX, 682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coker, R. E., 1914. “Water-Power Development in Relation to Fishes and Mussels of the Mississippi”, Documents of the Bureau of Fisheries, 805, App. VIII to Report of the U.S. Commissioner of Fisheries for 1913.Google Scholar
Danglade, E., 1914. “The Mussel Resources of the Illinois River”, Documetits of the Bureau of Fisheries, 804, App. VI to Report of the U.S. Commissioner of Fisheries for 1913.Google Scholar
Davies, J. H., and Trueman, A. E., 1927. “A Revision of the Non-Marine Lamellibranchs of the Coal Measures and a Discussion of their Zonal Sequence”, Quart Journ. Geol. Soc., LXXXIII, 210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyk, V., 1942. “Zur Morphologie der Flanitzfluss-Perlmuschel”, Arch. Hydrobiol., Stuttgart, XXXIX, 63.Google Scholar
Eagar, R. M. C., 1946. “The Hinge of Certain Non-Marine Lamellibranchs from the Lenisulcata Zone of the Coal Measures”, Geol. Mag., LXXXIII, no. 1, 1.Google Scholar
Eagar, R. M. C., 1947. “A Study of a Non-Marine Lamellibranch Succession in the Anthraconaia lenisulcata Zone of the Yorkshire Coal Measures”, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond., Ser. B, No. 593, CCXXIII, 1.Google Scholar
Ellis, M. M., 1931 a. “A Survey of Conditions Affecting Fisheries in the Upper Missouri River”, U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Circular 5.Google Scholar
Ellis, M. M., 1931 b. “Some Factors Affecting the Replacement of the Commercial Freshwater Mussels”, U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, Circular 7.Google Scholar
Ellis, M. M., 1936. “Erosion Silt as a Factor in Aquatic Environments”, Ecology, XVII, 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evermann, B. W., and Clark, H. W., 1918. “The Unionidse of Lake Maxinkuckee”, Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci., 1917, 251.Google Scholar
Grier, N. M., 1920. “Morphological Features of Certain Mussel Shells found in Lake Erie, compared with those of Corresponding Species found in the Drainage of the Upper Ohio”, Ann. Carnegie Mus., XIII, 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grier, N. M., and Mueller, J. F., 1926. “Further Studies in the Correlation of Shape and Station in Freshwater Mussels”, Bull. Wagner Free Inst. Sci., 1, 11.Google Scholar
Haas, F., and Schwarz, E., 1913. “Die Unioniden das Gebietes zwischen Mainz und deutschen Donau in Tiergeographischer Hinsicht”, Abhand., König. Bayer. Akad. d. Wissenschaft, Math. Physikal, Klasse 26, Band 7.Google Scholar
Headlee, T. J., and Simonton, A., 1904. “Ecological Notes on the Mussels of Winona Lake, Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci., 1903, 173.Google Scholar
Headlee, T. J., and Simonton, A., 1906. “Ecological Notes on the Mussels of Winona Lake, Pike and Centre Lakes of Koskiusko Co”, Indiana Biol. Bull., XI, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hey, W. C., 1882. “Freshwater Mussels in the Ouse and the Fosse”, Journ. Conchology, III, 263.Google Scholar
Hind, W., 1893. “On the Affinities of Anthracoptera and Anthracomya”, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. Lond., XLIX, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hind, W., 1894–1896. “A Monograph on Carbonicola, Anthracomya, and Naiadites”. Palæont. Soc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iseley, F. B., 1911. “Preliminary Note on the Ecology of the Early Juvenile Life of the Unionidæ”, Biol. Bull., XX, no. 2, 77.Google Scholar
Iseley, F. B., 1913. “Experimental Study of the Growth and Migration of Freshwater Mussels”, Documents of the Bureau of Fisheries, 792, App. III to Report of the U.S. Commissioner of Fisheries for 1912.Google Scholar
Israel, W., 1910. “Die Najadeen des Weidagebietes. Beiträge zur der Mitteleuropäischer Najadeen, no. 4, 49.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. W., 1925. “The Distribution of Margaritana margaritifera in the British Isles”, Journ. Conchology, XVII, 270.Google Scholar
Jeffreys, J. G., 1862. British Conchology, 1.Google Scholar
Leitch, D., 1936. “The Carbonicola Fauna of the Midlothian Fifteen Foot Coal: a Study in Variation” Trans. Geol. Soc. Glasgow, XIX, 390.Google Scholar
Leitch, D., 1940. “A Statistical Investigation of the Anthracomyas of the Basal Similis-Pulchra Zone in Scotland”, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., XCVI, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leitch, D., 1941. ”Naiadites from the Lower Carboniferous of Scotland: a Variation Study”, Trans. Geol. Soc. Glasgow, XX, 208.Google Scholar
March, M. C., 1911. “Studies in the Morphogenesis of Certain Pelecypoda. (1) A Preliminary Note on Variation in Unio pictorum, Unio tumidus, and Anodonta cygnea”, Mem. Proc. Manchester Lit. Phil. Soc., LV, no. 8, 1.Google Scholar
Meek, S. E., and Clark, H. W., 1912. “The Mussels of the Big Buffalo Fork of the White River, Arkansas”, Documents of the Bureau of Fisheries, 759.Google Scholar
Ortmann, A. E., 1909. “A Preliminary List of the Naiades of Western Pennsylvania”, Ann. Carnegie Mus., V, 192.Google Scholar
Ortmann, A. E., 1920. “Correlation of Shape and Station in Freshwater Mussels”, Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc., LIX, 269.Google Scholar
Ortmann, A. E., 1918. “The Naiades (Freshwater Mussels) of the Upper Tennessee Drainage, with Notes on Synonymy and Distribution” Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc., LVII, 522.Google Scholar
Schalie, H. Van Der, 1938. “The Naiad Fauna of the Huron River in Southeastern Michigan”, Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Misc. Pub., XL, 1.Google Scholar
Tonks, L. H., and others, 1931. “The Geology of Manchester and the South-East Lancashire Coalfield”, Mem. Geol. Surv. Great Britain.Google Scholar
Trueman, A. E., 1946. “Stratigraphical Problems in the Coal Measures of Europe and North America. Presidential Address to the Geological Society of London”. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., Cll, Part 2, xlix.Google Scholar
Trueman, A. E., and Weir, J., 1946. “British Carboniferous Non-Marine Lamellibranchia”, Mon. Pal. Soc., Part I.Google Scholar
Twenhofel, W. H., 1932. A Treatise on Sedimentation, London.Google Scholar
Utterback, W. I., 1916. “Naiades of Missouri”, American Midland Naturalist, Notre Dame, IV.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, J., 1945. “A Review of Recent Work on the Permian Non-Marine Lamellibranchs and its Bearing on the Affinities of Certain Non-Marine Genera of the Upper Palaeozoic”, Trans. Geol. Soc. Glasgow, XX, 291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, C. B., and Clark, H. W., 1914. “The Mussels of the Cumberland River and its Tributaries”, Documents of the Bureau of Fisheries, 781.Google Scholar
Wood, A., 1937. “The Non-Marine Lamellibranchs of the North Wales Coalfield”, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., XCIII, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, W. B., and others, 1927. “The Geology of the Rossendale Anticline”, Mem. Geol. Surv. Great Britain.Google Scholar