Advertisement

Paläontologische Zeitschrift

, Volume 86, Issue 2, pp 135–145 | Cite as

Homeomorphy in Lunostoma, a new Middle Devonian cryptostome bryozoan

  • Andrej Ernst
  • Paul D. Taylor
  • Jan Bohatý
  • Patrick N. Wyse Jackson
Research Paper

Abstract

A new genus and species of rhabdomesine cryptostome bryozoan, Lunostoma pulchra n. gen. n. sp., is described from the Lower Givetian (Middle Devonian) of the Eifel, Germany. It differs from all previously known rhabdomesines in having crescent-shaped structures (“scuta”) on the proximal sides of the apertures. These scuta resemble the lunaria that characterise cystoporate bryozoans, providing yet another example of homeomorphy in the Bryozoa. The function of scuta is unclear as, in contrast to lunaria, they do not project sufficiently from the apertures to constrain the everting lophophores.

Keywords

Devonian Bryozoa Taxonomy Homeomorphy Evolution Eifel (Rhenish Massif, Germany) 

Kurzfassung

Eine neue Gattung und Art einer rhabdomesinen cryptostomen Bryozoe wird als Lunostoma pulchra n. gen. n. sp. aus dem unteren Givetium (Mittel-Devon) der Eifel (Rheinisches Schiefergebirge, Deutschland) beschrieben. Morphologisch unterscheidet sie sich von allen bekannten Rhabdomesina durch halbmondförmige Strukturen („Scuta”) an den proximalen Seiten der Aperturen. Diese Scuta ähneln frappant den für cystoporate Bryozoen charakteristischen Lunarien und liefern damit Beispiel für Homeomorphie bei paläozoischen Bryozoen. Die Funktion der Scuta ist nicht klar, anders als bei Lunaria, da sie nicht weit genug aus den Aperturen hinausragen um die Ausstülpung der Lophophoren einzuschränken.

Schlüsselwörter

Devon Bryozoa Taxonomie Homeomorphie Evolution Eifel (Rheinisches Schiefergebirge, Deutschland) 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Wolfgang Reimers (Kiel) for his assistance in preparing the thin sections, and Ute Schuldt (Kiel) for help with SEM processing. Robert Anstey, East Lansing and Kamil Zágoršek, Prague, are thanked for their helpful and constructive reviews of the manuscript. Most of the studied bryozoan material was collected during the crinoid research project of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG project HE1610/16-1); J.B. gratefully acknowledged the financial support. Also A.E. thanks the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for financial support (DFG project ER 278/4.1 and 2). This paper is a contribution to IGCP 499.

References

  1. Afanas’yeva, G.A. 1977. The term “homeomorphy”. Paleontologicheskiy Zhurnal 11: 505–507.Google Scholar
  2. Anstey, R.L. 1987. Astogeny and phylogeny: evolutionary heterochrony in Paleozoic bryozoans. Paleobiology 13: 20–43.Google Scholar
  3. Astrova, A.A., and I.P. Morozova. 1956. About systematics of the Order Cryptostomata. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 110(4): 661–664.Google Scholar
  4. Bassler, R.S. 1952. Taxonomic notes on genera of fossil and Recent Bryozoa. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science 42: 381–385.Google Scholar
  5. Blake, D.B. 1980. Homeomorphy in Paleozoic bryozoans: a search for explanations. Paleobiology 6: 451–465.Google Scholar
  6. Blake, D.B. 1983. The order cryptostomata. In Treatise on invertebrate paleontology. (Part G) Bryozoa—revised, vol. 1, ed. R.A. Robison. Boulder and Lawrence: Geological Society of America and University of Kansas.Google Scholar
  7. Blake, D.B., and B.S. Kues. 2002. Homeomorphy in the Asteroidea (Echinodermata): a new Late Cretaceous genus and species from Colorado. Journal of Paleontology 76: 1007–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boardman, R.S. 1984. Origin of the Post-Triassic Stenolaemata (Bryozoa): a taxonomic oversight. Journal of Paleontology 58: 19–39.Google Scholar
  9. Boardman, R.S., and F.K. McKinney. 1976. Skeletal architecture and preserved organs of four-sided zooids in convergent genera of Paleozoic Trepostomata (Bryozoa). Journal of Paleontology 50: 25–78.Google Scholar
  10. Bohatý, J. 2006. Über den taxonomischen Status des mitteldevonischen Hexacrinites crispus (Quenstedt, 1861) [Crinoidea, Camerata] aus dem linksrheinischen Schiefergebirge Deutschlands. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und PaläontologieMonatshefte, 2006(8): 471–482.Google Scholar
  11. Bohatý, J., Ausich, W.I., Nardin, E., Nyhuis, C., and Schröder, S. (in press). Coral-crinoid biocoenosis and resulting trace fossils from the Middle Devonian of the Eifel Synclines (Rhenish Massif, Germany). Journal of Paleontology.Google Scholar
  12. Borg, F. 1926. Studies on recent cyclostomatous Bryozoa. Zoologiska Bidrag fran Uppsala 10: 181–507.Google Scholar
  13. Borg, F. 1965. A comparative and phyletic study on fossil and recent Bryozoa of the suborders Cyclostomata and Trepostomata. Arkiv för zoologi Bd 17: 1–91.Google Scholar
  14. Buckman, S.S. 1895. The Bajocian of the mid-Cotteswolds. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 51: 445–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cloud, P.E. 1941. Homeomorphy, and a remarkable illustration. American Journal of Science 239: 899–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ehrenberg, C.G. 1831. Symbolae Physicae, seu Icones et descptiones Corporum Naturalium novorum aut minus cognitorum, quae ex itineribus per Libyam, Aegiptum, Nubiam, Dongalaam, Syriam, Arabiam et Habessiniam, studia annis 1820–1825, redirent. Pars. Zoologica, 4, Animalia Evertebrata exclusis Insectis. Berolini, 10 pls.Google Scholar
  17. Ernst, A. 2008. Non-fenestrate bryozoans from the Middle Devonian of the Eifel (western Rhenish Massif, Germany). Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen 250(3): 313–379.Google Scholar
  18. Ernst, A., and J. Bohatý. 2009. Schischcatella (Fenestrata, Bryozoa) from the Devonian of the Rhenish Massif, Germany. Palaeontology 52(6): 1291–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Evans, D.H. 2007. A Middle Ordovician cephalopod fauna from Cuzco Province, southern Peru and its palaeobiogeographical significance. Geological Journal 42: 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gorjunova, R.V. 1996. Phylogeny of the Paleozoic Bryozoa morphology and system of the Paleozoic bryozoans. Trudy Paleontologischeskogo Instituta Rossijskoj Akademii Nauk 267: 1–161.Google Scholar
  21. Hageman, S.J. 1993. Effects of nonnormality on studies of the morphological variation of a rhabdomesine Bryozoan, Streblotrypa (Streblascopora) prisca (Gabb Horn). The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions 4: 1–13.Google Scholar
  22. Hageman, S.J. 1991. Worthenopora; an unusual cryptostome (Bryozoa) that looks like a cheilostome. Journal of Paleontology 65: 648–661.Google Scholar
  23. Hayward, P.J. and Ryland, J.S. 1979. British Ascophoran Bryozoans. Academic Press, London, pp. v + 312.Google Scholar
  24. Hinds, R.W. 1975. Growth mode and homeomorphism in cyclostome Bryozoa. Journal of Paleontology 49: 875–910.Google Scholar
  25. Hotz, E.E., Kräusel, W. and Struve, W. 1955. Die Kalkmulden von Hillesheim und Ahrdorf. In Krömmelbein, K., Hotz, E. E., Kräusel, W. and Struve, W.: Zur Geologie der Eifelkalkmulden. Beiheft Geologisches Jahrbuch 17: 45–192.Google Scholar
  26. Landing, E., A. English, and J.D. Keppie. 2010. Cambrian origin of all skeletalized metazoan phyla—Discovery of Earth’s oldest bryozoans (Upper Cambrian, Southern Mexico). Geology 38: 547–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kiseleva, A.V. 1969. New bryozoans of the family Girtyporidae the Upper Permian of the Southern maritime territory. Paleontological Journal 1: 79–84.Google Scholar
  28. Lu, L. 1999. Famennian-Tournaisian bryozoans of the Aergati Mt., NW Xinjiang. In Palaeozoic fossils of northern Xinjiang, China, 37–47, 142–186. Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Academia Sinica, Nanjing.Google Scholar
  29. McKinney, F.K., and J.B.C. Jackson. 1989. Bryozoan Evolution. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  30. McKinney, F.K., P.D. Taylor, and V.A. Zullo. 1993. Lyre-shaped hornerid bryozoan colonies: homeomorphy in colony form between Paleozoic Fenestrata and Cenozoic Cyclostomata. Journal of Paleontology 67: 343–354.Google Scholar
  31. Morozova, I.P. 1970. Late Permian Bryozoa. Trudy Paleontologicheskogo Instituta Akademii Nauk SSSR 122: 1–347.Google Scholar
  32. Morozova, I.P. 2001. Bryozoans of the Order Fenestellida. Trudy Paleontologicheskogo Instituta Rossijskoj Akademii Nauk 277: 1–176.Google Scholar
  33. Reyment, R. 1955. Some examples of homeomorphy in Nigerian Cretaceous ammonites. Geologiska Föreningens i Stockholm Förhandlingar 77: 567–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schäfer, P., and E. Fois. 1987. Systematics and evolution of Triassic Bryozoa. Geologica et Paleontologica 21: 173–225.Google Scholar
  35. Schulga-Nesterenko, M.I. 1941. Lower Permian Bryozoa of Urals. Paleontology of the USSR 5: 1–276.Google Scholar
  36. Simpson, G.B. 1895. A handbook of the genera of the North American Paleozoic Bryozoa. 14th Annual Report of the State Geologist (of New York) for the year 1894, pp. 407–608.Google Scholar
  37. Struve, W. 1982. The Eifelian within the Devonian frame, history, boundaries, definitions. In On Devonian Stratigraphy and Palaeontology of the Ardenno-Rhenish Mountains and related Devonian Matters, W. Ziegler and R. Werner, Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg 55: 401–432.Google Scholar
  38. Struve, W. and Werner, R. 1982. The lower/middle Devonian boundary and the Eifelian stage in the “Type Eifelian” region. In Field meeting on Lower and Lower Middle Devonian stages in the Ardenno-Rhenish type area, guidebook, eds G. Plodowski, R. Werner and W. Ziegler, 81–151, figs. 1–6, 2 maps (1:10.000); Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  39. Taylor, P.D. 1985. Polymorphism in melicerititid cyclostomes. In Ordovician to Recent eds. Nielsen, C. and Larwood, G. P. Bryozoa. pp. 311–318, Fredensborg: Olsen and Olsen.Google Scholar
  40. Taylor, P.D., and R.M. Badve. 1995. A new cheilostome bryozoan from the Cretaceous of India and Europe: a cyclostome homeomorph. Palaeontology 38: 627–657.Google Scholar
  41. Taylor, P.D., and F.K. McKinney. 1996. An Archimedes-like cyclostome bryozoan from the Eocene of North Carolina. Journal of Paleontology 70: 218–229.Google Scholar
  42. Utgaard, J. 1968. A revision of North American genera of ceramoporoid bryozoans (Ectoprocta): Part I; Anolotichiidae. Journal of Paleontology 42: 1033–1041.Google Scholar
  43. Utgaard, J.E. 1983. Paleobiology and Taxonomy of the Order Cystoporata. In Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. (Part G) Bryozoa—Revised, vol. 1, ed. R.A. Robison, 327–439. Boulder and Lawrence: Geological Society of America and University of Kansas.Google Scholar
  44. Vine G.R. 1884. Fourth report of the committee consisting of Dr. H. R. Sorby and Mr. G. R. Vine, appointed for the purpose of reporting on fossil Polyzoa. Reports of the 53rd Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement in Sciences, 161–209.Google Scholar
  45. Voigt, E. 1993. Zwei neue Bryozoen-Genera (Cyclostomata) aus dem westfälischen Cenoman. Zitteliana 20: 361–368.Google Scholar
  46. Voigt, E., and F.D. Flor. 1970. Homoeomorphien bei fossilen cyclostomen Bryozoen, dargestellt am Beispiel der Gattung Spiropora Lamouroux 1821. Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Palaeontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg 39: 7–96.Google Scholar
  47. Waeschenbach, A., C.C. Cox, D.T.J. Littlewood, J.S. Porter, and P.D. Taylor. 2009. First molecular estimate of cyclostome bryozoan phylogeny confirms extensive homoplasy among skeletal characters used in traditional taxonomy. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 52(1): 241–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Winston, J.E. 1979. Current-related morphology and behaviour in some Pacific coast bryozoans, pp. In Advances in Bryozoology, ed. G.P. Larwood, and M.B. Abbott, 247–286. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  49. Winter, J. 1965. Das Givetium der Gerolsteiner Mulde (Eifel). Fortschritte in der Geologie von Rheinland und Westfalen 9: 277–322.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrej Ernst
    • 1
  • Paul D. Taylor
    • 2
  • Jan Bohatý
    • 3
  • Patrick N. Wyse Jackson
    • 4
  1. 1.Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für GeowissenschaftenKielGermany
  2. 2.Department of PalaeontologyNatural History MuseumLondonUK
  3. 3.Universität zu Köln, Institut für Geologie und MineralogieKölnGermany
  4. 4.Department of GeologyTrinity CollegeDublin 2Ireland

Personalised recommendations