Part H, Brachiopoda, vol. 1 &amp; 2, ch. 6, p. 632-728

Boucot, A. J.; Pitrat, Charles W.; Johnson, J. G.; Staton, R. D.

doi:10.17161/dt.v0i0.5548

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alvarez et al (1980) thereby assigned the authorship of Athyridae to Davidson (1881), who was the first to include Athyris in the family Athyridae. As in Boucot et al (1964, 1965), however, Alvarez et al (1980) and Alvarez and Brunton (1993) recommended the use of Athyrididae instead of Athyridae.…”

Section: Systematic Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Boucot et al (1964) recognized that the family name Athyridae Phillips, 1841, used for a group of Leptaena species known at that time, was invalid because the genus Athyris M’Coy, 1844 was established later and, therefore, the family name could not have been derived from the genus Athyris . Boucot et al (1964, 1965) accordingly assigned the authorship of the Athyridae to M’Coy (1844), but changed the family name to Athyrididae without any explanation. Later, Alvarez et al (1980) identified the error in Boucot et al (1964) (i.e., although M’Coy [1844] erected the genus Athyris , he assigned it to the family Delthyridae, but retained Phillips’ use of Athyridae for Leptaena and “ Producta ”).…”

Section: Systematic Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nikiforova and Rzhonsnitskaya (1960) combined the superfamily “Athyracea” under Incerti Ordinis, somewhere between spiriferides and terebratulides (in that sense, they should be accredited with raising the athyrides to ordinal status because nearly all of the families they assigned are recognized as true athyrides today). Under the suborder Athyridoidea, Boucot et al (1964;=suborder Athyrididina in Boucot et al, 1965), however, excluded many groups that are recognized as athyrides today, such as the Athyrisinoidea, Retzioidea, Dayioidea, Anoplothecidae, and Kayseriidae. Thus the “Incerti Ordinis” of Nikiforova and Rzhonsnitskaya (1960) matches more closely the order Athyrida as defined herein.…”

Section: Systematic Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such complex jugal structures and accessory lamellae are unknown or have not been described in athyrides of Late Ordovician and earliest Silurian (Rhuddanian) age, and did not become common until Wenlock–Ludlow time. Modzalevskaya (1979) also pointed out that the subfamily Protathyridinae Boucot, Johnson, and Staton, 1965 represents a junior synonym of the Athyrinae. Grunt (1989, fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Early athyride brachiopod evolution through the Ordovician-Silurian mass extinction and recovery, Anticosti Island, eastern Canada

Copper¹,

Jin²

2017

J. Paleontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-The subfamily Hindellinae is an early group of athyride brachiopods, characterized by a simple jugum that connects the laterally directed spiralia, which are disjunct from the crura. Four genera (Hindella, Cryptothyrella, Koigia, and Hyattidina) are reexamined on the basis of their internal structures, such as the crura and their connection to the hinge, the jugum, and spiralia. The internal brachidium and shell of the Aeronian genus Cryptothyrella differ substantially from those of Hindella. Elkanathyris pallula n. gen. n. sp. is recognized as a posteriorly ribbed hindellide of Aeronian age. These genera are transferred from the Meristellinae to the subfamily Hindellinae (family Hindellidae). On Anticosti Island, Hindella is confined to the Hirnantian (latest Ordovician): it became extinct at the end Ordovician during the last of several mass extinction events that also extinguished the Laframboise reefs at the top of the Ellis Bay Formation. Post-extinction recovery of athyrides was pioneered by small-shelled Koigia, which are abundant in the basal Silurian Becscie Formation. Hyattidina, with a simple brachidium, is abundant in the Aeronian and Telychian of Anticosti, but absent earlier. True meristellines, as envisioned here, first appeared in the Aeronian Gun River Formation. The revised taxonomy and stratigraphic ranges of these earliest athyrides shed light on the nature of the Ordovician-Silurian mass extinction and recovery, and help refine the biostratigraphy of the O-S boundary interval.

show abstract

Section: Systematic Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Systematic Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Systematic Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Early athyride brachiopod evolution through the Ordovician-Silurian mass extinction and recovery, Anticosti Island, eastern Canada

Copper¹,

Jin²

2017

J. Paleontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…How are all the spire-bearing brachiopods related to one another? There is still no consensus on this issue, despite much research directed toward its resolution (Boucot et al, 1965;Wright, 1979;Grunt, 1982;Carter et al, 1994;Copper and Gourvennec, 1996). Are thecideides actually derived spire-bearers (Baker, 1990;Jaecks and Carlson, in press)?…”

Section: Current Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ghosts of the past, present, and future in brachiopod systematics

Carlson¹

2001

J. Paleontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three historical phases can be distinguished in the study of brachiopod systematics over the past 75 years. Prior to 1956, systematic neontologists and paleontologists struggled to reconcile differences in perceived evolutionary patterns (and thus classifications) based largely on static morphological differences observed separately among living brachiopods and among fossil brachiopods. Following 1956, patterns of morphological distribution began to be interpreted relative to the processes by which they were formed, and a more dynamic view of brachiopod phylogeny and classification resulted. Over the past decade, newer methodologies (phylogenetic systematics) have allowed older phylogenetic hypotheses to be tested and evaluated. The major challenges that brachiopod systematists now face are not unique to brachiopods; they concern improving the methods of phylogeny (and classification) reconstruction so that all the sources of data available to paleontologists can be utilized more effectively. In the future, I predict that more intensified, global fossil collecting, together with further investigation of the embryology and development of brachiopods, and molecular systematic research, will play an increasingly larger role in revising the classification currently in use.

show abstract

Brachial supporting structure of Spiriferida (Brachiopoda)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The filter-feeding organ of some extinct brachiopods is supported by a skeletal apparatus called the brachidium. Although relatively well studied in Atrypida and Athyridida, the brachidial morphology is usually neglected in Spiriferida. To investigate the variations of brachidial morphology in Spiriferida, 65 species belonging to eight superfamilies were analyzed. Based on the presence/absence of the jugal processes and normal/modified primary lamellae of the spiralia, four types of brachidium are recognized. Type-I (with jugal processes) and Type-II (without jugal processes), both having normal primary lamellae, could give rise to each other by losing/re-evolving the jugal processes. Type-III, without jugal processes, originated from Type-II through evolution of the modified lateral-convex primary lamellae, and it subsequently gave rise to Type-IV by evolving the modified medial-convex primary lamellae. The evolution of brachidia within individual evolutionary lineages must be clarified because two or more types can be present within a single family. Type-III and Type-IV are closely associated with the prolongation of the crura, representing innovative modifications of the feeding apparatus in response to possible shift in the position of the mouth towards the anterior, allowing for more efficient feeding on particles entering the mantle cavity from the anterior gape. Meanwhile, the modified primary lamellae adjusted/regulated the feeding currents. The absence of spires in some taxa with Type-IV brachidium might suggest that they developed a similar lophophore to that in some extant brachiopods, which can extend out of the shell.

show abstract

Part H, Brachiopoda, vol. 1 & 2, ch. 6, p. 632-728

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Early athyride brachiopod evolution through the Ordovician-Silurian mass extinction and recovery, Anticosti Island, eastern Canada

Early athyride brachiopod evolution through the Ordovician-Silurian mass extinction and recovery, Anticosti Island, eastern Canada

Ghosts of the past, present, and future in brachiopod systematics

Brachial supporting structure of Spiriferida (Brachiopoda)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About