Taphonomy of Lower Carboniferous crinoids from the Hook Head Formation, Ireland

Ausich, William I.; Sevastopulo, George D.

doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.1994.tb01418.x

Cited by 40 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Again these are related to rapid burial related to storm events in shelf environments ranging from the transition zone to offshore (e.g. Ausich & Sevastopulo ; Twitchett et al . ; Zatoń et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The origin of echinoid shell beds in siliciclastic shelf environments: three examples from the Miocene of Sardinia, Italy

Mancosu

Nebelsick

Kroh

et al. 2015

LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three mass accumulations of sea urchins from the Miocene of Sardinia show a number of taphonomic features which set them apart from previously described echinoid\ud assemblages from the Cenozoic in which they represent: (1) monotypic assemblages;\ud (2) include very well-preserved remains of either regular or spatangoid echinoids; and\ud (3) originate in deeper water environments. These accumulations are compared using a detailed sedimentological and taphonomic analysis including preservational fabrics, taphonomic signatures, size frequency distributions, density of occurrences and preferred orientations. The possible role of gregarious behaviour contributing to mass occurrences and the specific sedimentary events leading to the excellent preservation are discussed. The interpreted depositional environment of all three deposits is that of a storm-dominated, siliciclastic shelf environment. A phymosomatid assemblage represents rapid burial through obrution of a highly dense, freshly dead community. A Brissopsis-dominated spatangoid assemblage represents a mixed accumulation of\ud parautochthonous and transported skeletons. The third assemblage consisting of regular echinoid spines and rare tests represents a composite tempestite. Differences in the depositional environments are related to their position along onshore offshore gradient with the first two beds originated in a deeper setting than that of the spine accumulation. This study shows that the preservation of assemblages containing complete regular echinoids and spatangoids is higher in deeper water settings than in\ud shallow water environments

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The origin of echinoid shell beds in siliciclastic shelf environments: three examples from the Miocene of Sardinia, Italy

Mancosu

Nebelsick

Kroh

et al. 2015

LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Herein, we report on two new genera recognized from among previously described species: Glamorganocrinus gen. nov. and Mendipocrinus gen. nov., and describe a new species, Mespilocrinus wrighti sp. nov. All three new taxa are from the Ivorian Substage of the Tournaisian Stage, being close in age to the Hook Head crinoid fauna (Ausich and Sevastopulo 2001), but possibly slightly younger (Mitchell et al . 1986).…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Mendipocrinus differs from true Pachylocrinus Kirk, 1942 (Kammer and Ausich 1993) by having primibrachial 1 axillary, rather than primibrachial 2; primibrachial 1 is unusually elongate; the brachials are rectangular, rather than subcuneate or cuneate; the arms closely abut; the isotomous arm branching is very regular rather than uneven; and the basals are not bulbous and larger than the radials. Mendipocrinus is more similar to Dinotocrinus Kirk, 1941 and Borucrinus Ausich and Sevastopulo, 2001 (like Dinotocrinus , except first branching is higher on the A ray), but both of these genera have subcuneate brachials and narrow arms that do not closely abut. Aphelecrinus Kirk, 1944 differs in having a cone‐shaped cup, clearly visible infrabasals and subcuneate arms that do not closely abut.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

NEW CLADID AND FLEXIBLE CRINOIDS FROM THE MISSISSIPPIAN (TOURNAISIAN, IVORIAN) OF ENGLAND and WALES

Kammer

Ausich

2007

Palaeontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The modern study of fossil crinoids began with J. S. Miller who, in 1821, described specimens from southern England, nearby Wales and other regions, and named several common Early Carboniferous genera. Later, in 1950-60, James Wright monographed all known Early Carboniferous crinoids from the British Isles. In spite of such previous scrutiny, we recognize here two new genera among species already described: Glamorganocrinus gen. nov. (type species: Ophiurocrinus gowerensis Wright, 1960) from South Wales and Mendipocrinus gen. nov. (type species: Poteriocrinus latifrons Austin and Austin, 1847) from southern England. These new genera increase the number of advanced cladid genera in the Ivorian Substage of the Tournaisian in western Europe to 18, and the total number of crinoid genera to 36. A review of species assigned to Mespilocrinus has led to the recognition of M. granulifer De Koninck and LeHon, 1854 as a nomen dubium. A new species of Mespilocrinus, M. wrighti sp. nov., is described from the Ivorian of South Wales; this is the most highly derived species of the genus, as based on a phylogenetic analysis including ten species and 13 characters, with Pycnosaccus as the outgroup. A single, well-ordered tree resulted from this analysis. Interpretation of this tree suggests that the centre of evolution for Mespilocrinus was North America, where three species appeared during the Kinderhookian (early Tournaisian), rapidly achieving morphological disparity within the genus. This radiation event was part of the overall explosive radiation of crinoids following the Late Devonian mass extinction event when crinoid diversity was at a global minimum during the Frasnian. Recovery began during the Famennian, followed by an explosive radiation in the Tournaisian.

show abstract

“…These studies were applied in many ways to establish preservational constraints and to expand extractable information from the fossil record: 1) to delineate burial conditions for complete crinoid preservation and to recognize that tempestites are one of the most common agents of crinoid preservation (Lewis, 1980;Taylor and Brett, 1996; and many others); 2) definition of preservational expectations among major clades and taphonomic facies that follow (Meyer et al, 1989;Ausich and Sevastopulo, 1994); 3) delineation of crinoid deposit types (Ausich, 1997;Brett et al, 1997); and 4) determination of soft-tissue types and characteristics in Mesozoic and Paleozoic crinoids (Baumiller and Ausich, 1992;Ausich and Baumiller, 1993;and others).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The study of crinoids during the 20th century and the challenges of the 21st century

Ausich¹,

Kammer²

2001

J. Paleontol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT-Development of a phylogenetic classification has been a primary pursuit of crinoid paleontologists during the 20th century. Wachsmuth and Springer and Bather vigorously debated crinoid classification during the waning years of the 19th century, and although tremendous progress has been made a comprehensive phylogenetic classification is still the primary objective for crinoid research during the early 21st century. Twentieth century crinoid studies are divisible into four periods. The direct influence of Frank Springer and Francis Bather continued until approximately 1925. Descriptive studies dominated the period of 1926-1943 and culminated in a comprehensive classification of Paleozoic crinoids that was a combination of the ideas of Wachsmuth and Springer and Bather. The end of the third period, 1944-1978, was marked by publication of the Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. The Treatise compilation brought together classification ideas for the entire class into a truly comprehensive classification, although problems remained with the phylogenetic underpinnings of the Treatise classification. During the third period, pioneering work on crinoid paleobiology laid the foundation for significant paleobiology advances for the fourth, 1979-1999, period. This last period also witnessed significant advances in the taxonomy of crinoid faunas at critical intervals, the taxonomy of crinoids from new geographic areas, and working toward the solution to the origin and early evolution of the Crinoidea.Continued work on crinoids in the 21st century promises to provide significant advances both for understanding the evolutionary history of crinoids and for understanding the history of epifaunal benthic communities through time. Immediate challenges include completion of a comprehensive phylogenetic classification, which will open the door for evolutionary paleoecologic and paleobiologic studies; utilization of computerized morphometric techniques in the analysis of functional morphology; systematic studies of new faunas in critical intervals; discovery of faunas in new geographic areas to better constrain knowledge of crinoid biogeography; and modern systematic revision of classic North American and European faunas.

show abstract

Taphonomy of Lower Carboniferous crinoids from the Hook Head Formation, Ireland

Cited by 40 publications

References 8 publications

The origin of echinoid shell beds in siliciclastic shelf environments: three examples from the Miocene of Sardinia, Italy

The origin of echinoid shell beds in siliciclastic shelf environments: three examples from the Miocene of Sardinia, Italy

NEW CLADID AND FLEXIBLE CRINOIDS FROM THE MISSISSIPPIAN (TOURNAISIAN, IVORIAN) OF ENGLAND and WALES

The study of crinoids during the 20th century and the challenges of the 21st century

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About