Conodont Pearls?

Glenister, Brian F.; Klapper, Gilbert; Chauff, Karl M.

doi:10.1126/science.193.4253.571

Cited by 19 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Phosphatic spheres found associated with conodont elements have been attributed to the conodont animal and have been coined`conodont pearls' (Glenister et al 1976(Glenister et al , 1978. Glenister et al further proposed that the structures represented the animal's response to irritation, whether by detritus or parasitic invasion.…”

Section: The Rest Of the Conodont Skeletonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth and patterning in the conodont skeleton

Donoghue

1998

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B

108

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in our understanding of conodont palaeobiology and functional morphology have rendered established hypotheses of element growth untenable. In order to address this problem, hard tissue histology is reviewed paying particular attention to the relationships during growth of the component hard tissues comprising conodont elements, and ignoring a priori assumptions of the homologies of these tissues. Conodont element growth is considered further in terms of the pattern of formation, of which four distinct types are described, all possibly derived from a primitive condition after heterochronic changes in the timing of various developmental stages. It is hoped that this may provide further means of unravelling conodont phylogeny. The manner in which the tissues grew is considered homologous with other vertebrate hard tissues, and the elements appear to have grown in a way similar to the growing scales and growing dentition of other vertebrates.

show abstract

Section: The Rest Of the Conodont Skeletonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth and patterning in the conodont skeleton

Donoghue

1998

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B

108

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These dimpled lamellar apatite spheres are also prevalent in our other conodont collections from Middle and lower Upper Devonian rocks in central Nevada. Apatite spheres associated with conodonts have been reported from Cambrian through Carboniferous rocks; Glenister, Klapper, and Chauff ( 1976) were the first to suggest that these are pearls secreted by the conodont-bearing animal.…”

Section: Biostratigraphymentioning

confidence: 99%

Devonian and Mississippian rocks of the northern Antelope Range, Eureka County, Nevada

Hose¹,

Armstrong²,

Harris³

et al. 1982

Professional Paper

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, based on overall characteristics and morphology, Glenister et al . () argued that these micro‐spherules are in essence pearls, presumably secreted by conodont animals in response to irritants – i.e. mimicking the formation of mollusc pearls.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Glenister et al . ; and references therein). Moreover, ‘conodont pearls’ have never been found beyond the stratigraphical range of conodonts (Cambrian–Triassic).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…() analysed Late Devonian phosphatic micro‐spherules fitting the description of ‘conodont pearls’ sensu Glenister et al . (), and compared their chemistry with that of coeval conodonts and acanthodian/actinopterygian fish teeth. The analytical results indicated that the overall chemistry of the putative pearls was more similar to that of fish teeth than to that of conodont elements.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Palaeozoic ‘conodont pearls’ and other phosphatic micro-spherules

Lindskog

Eriksson

Bergström

et al. 2017

LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sub‐millimetre‐sized phosphatic spherules are often found in acetic acid‐insoluble residues produced for microfossil extraction. As they are typically associated with conodont elements and have a similar chemical composition, they are informally known as ‘conodont pearls’. Still, the origin of these micro‐spherules has been controversial, and authors have disagreed regarding their mode of formation, or if they are biogenic or not. In this study, an assortment of micro‐spherules from several localities and stratigraphical levels were analysed using multiple methods, in an effort to shed light on the origin of these enigmatic objects: ocular investigation with a stereomicroscope, chemical analyses employing energy‐dispersive mass spectrometry, imaging through scanning electron microscope, and synchrotron radiation X‐ray tomographic microscopy. Collectively, the techniques employed allow for near‐complete characterization and description of the study specimens. At least five different groups, or morphotypes, of spherules can be discerned, which differ both in morphological and chemical details. Most specimens are notably spherical and display concentric layers of growth. Several of the specimens have a central nucleus, sometimes with one or more objects located closely together. Internal details and chemistry suggest that the phosphatic spherules probably are of different origin. Thus, the term ‘conodont pearl’ encompasses confusingly similar objects deriving from different organisms and/or processes, and only careful analysis can reveal their individual origin. The only organisms unequivocally associated with (in situ) phosphatic micro‐spherules are ceramoporid bryozoans, and the conodonts Cordylodus and Westergaardodina, but the possible function and significance of these objects remain enigmatic.

show abstract

Conodont Pearls?

Cited by 19 publications

References 8 publications

Growth and patterning in the conodont skeleton

Growth and patterning in the conodont skeleton

Devonian and Mississippian rocks of the northern Antelope Range, Eureka County, Nevada

Palaeozoic ‘conodont pearls’ and other phosphatic micro-spherules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About