Substrate is a poor ichnotaxobase: a new demonstration

Short contribution


Substrate is a poor ichnotaxobase, yet it has been widely used for distinguishing the clavate (club-shaped) borings commonly produced by bivalves. A chert nodule from the Upper Cretaceous of Morocco encloses the external mould of a clast of unknown composition (rock? wood?) which had been extensively bored, producing both small cylindrical and large clavate pits. Numerous small, short borings are referred to Oichnus isp. cf. O. simplex Bromley; Oichnus is otherwise commonly limited to shelly substrates. More significantly, the clavate borings may either be Gastrochaenolites turbinatus Kelly and Bromley, considered confined to rock and shelly substrates, or be Teredolites clavatus Leymerie, thought to be limited to wood. These borings are morphologically indistinguishable, only being differentiated by substrate, and thus, they are considered to be synonymous herein. Gastrochaenolites clavatus (Leymerie) has priority and is the type species of Teredolites Leymerie, now considered a junior synonym of Gastrochaenolites Leymerie. Thus, the clavate borings of this specimen are identified as Gastrochaenolites clavatus (Leymerie).


Ichnosystematics Taphonomy Oichnus Gastrochaenolites Teredolites Apectoichnus 



We thank Professor A. Uchman (Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland) for comments on an earlier version of this paper, and Dr. M. Munt (Dinosaur Isle Museum, Isle of Wight, Hampshire, UK) and Mr. K. Martyn (Moussa Direct Ltd, Cambridge, UK) for specimen acquisition and helpful discussions relating to the specimen locality and stratigraphy. We thank an anonymous reviewer, and Dr. J.W.M. Jagt (Natuurhistorisch Museum Maastricht, Netherlands) and Dr. E.A. Jagt-Yazykova (Uniwersytet Opolski, Poland), for their supportive reviews.


  1. Bertling, M., Braddy, S. J., Bromley, R. G., Demathieu, G. R., Genise, J., Mikuláš, R., et al. (2006). Names for trace fossils: a uniform approach. Lethaia, 39, 265–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blissett, D. J., & Pickerill, R. K. (2007). Systematic ichnology of microborings from the Cenozoic White Limestone Group, Jamaica, West Indies. Scripta Geologica, 134, 77–108.Google Scholar
  3. Bromley, R. G. (1981). Concepts in ichnotaxonomy illustrated by small round holes in shells. Acta Geològica Hispànica, 16, 55–64.Google Scholar
  4. Bromley, R. G. (1990). Trace Fossils: Biology and Taphonomy. London: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  5. Bromley, R. G. (2004). A stratigraphy of marine bioerosion. In D. McIlroy (Ed.), The Application of Ihnology to Palaeoenvironmental and Sratigraphic Analysis. Geological Society, London, Special Publication, 228, 455–479.Google Scholar
  6. Bromley, R. G., & D’Alessandro, A. (1987). Bioerosion of the Plio-Pleistocene transgression of southern Italy. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 93, 379–422.Google Scholar
  7. Donovan, S. K. (2002). A new ichnospecies of Gastrochaenolites Leymerie from the Pleistocene Port Morant Formation of southeast Jamaica and the taphonomy of calcareous linings in clavate borings. Ichnos, 9, 61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Donovan, S. K. (2010). Cruziana and Rusophycus: trace fossils produced by trilobites… in some cases? Lethaia, 43, 283–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Donovan, S. K. (2011). Aspects of ichnology of Chalk and sandstone clasts from the beach at Overstrand, north Norfolk. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Norfolk, 60  (for 2010), 37–45.Google Scholar
  10. Donovan, S. K. (2018) A new ichnogenus for Teredolites longissimus Kelly and Bromley. Swiss Journal of Palaeontology, 137, 4 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Donovan, S. K., & Pickerill, R. K. (2002). Pattern versus process or informative versus uninformative ichnotaxonomy: reply to Todd and Palmer. Ichnos, 9, 85–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Donovan, S. K., & Pickerill, R. K. (2017). The invalidity of the trace fossil Tremichnus Brett. Geological Journal, 52, 828–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Edinger, E. N., & Risk, M. J. (1994). Oligocene-Miocene extinction and geographic restriction of Caribbean corals: roles of turbidity, temperature, and nutrients. Palaios, 9, 576–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ekdale, A. A., & Bromley, R. G. (2001). Bioerosional innovation for living in carbonate hardgrounds in the Early Ordovician of Sweden. Lethaia, 34, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Häntzschel, W. (1975). Trace fossils and problematica. Second edition, revised and enlarged, xxi + 269. In C. Teichert (Ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part W, Miscellanea, Supplement 1. Boulder and Lawrence: Geological Society of America and University of Kansas.Google Scholar
  16. Höpner, S., & Bertling, M. (2017). Holes in bones: ichnotaxonomy of bone borings. Ichnos, 24, 259–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kelly, S. R. A., & Bromley, R. G. (1984). Ichnological nomenclature of clavate borings. Palaeontology, 27, 793–807.Google Scholar
  18. Kleemann, K. (2009). Gastrochaenolites hospitium isp. nov., trace fossil by a coral-associated boring bivalve from the Eocene and Miocene of Austria. Geologica Carpathica, 60, 339–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leymerie, A. (1842) Suite de mémoire sur le terrain Crétacé du departement de l’Aube. Mémoires de la Société Géologique de France, 4, 291–364. (Not seen.) Google Scholar
  20. Osgood, R. G., Jr. (1975). The history of invertebrate ichnology. In R. W. Frey (Ed.), The Study of Trace Fossils: A Synthesis of Principles, Problems, and Proceedures in Ichnology (pp. 3–12). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pickerill, R. K. (1994). Nomenclature and taxonomy of invertebrate trace fossils. In S. K. Donovan (Ed.), The Palaeobiology of Trace Fossils (pp. 3–42). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  22. Pickerill, R. K., & Donovan, S. K. (1998). Ichnology of the Pliocene Bowden shell bed, southeast Jamaica. Contributions to Tertiary and Quaternary Geology, 35, 161–175.Google Scholar
  23. Uchman, A. (1995). Taxonomy and palaeoecology of flysch trace fossils: the Marnoso-arenacea Formation and associated facies (Miocene, northern Apennines, Italy). Beringeria, Würzburger geowissenschaftliche Mitteilungen, 15, 1–115.Google Scholar
  24. Wilson, M. A., & Palmer, T. J. (1998). The earliest Gastrochaenolites (early Pennsylvanian, Arkansas, U.S.A.): an Upper Paleozoic bivalve boring? Journal of Paleontology, 72, 769–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wisshak, M., Kroh, A., Bertling, M., Knaust, D., Nielsen, J. K., Jagt, J. W. M., et al. (2015). In defence of an iconic ichnogenus—Oichnus Bromley, 1981. Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae, 85, 445–451.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akademie der Naturwissenschaften Schweiz (SCNAT) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Taxonomy and Systematics GroupNaturalis Biodiversity CenterLeidenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Earth SciencesUniversity of New BrunswickFrederictonCanada
  3. 3.Department of Earth SciencesThe Natural History MuseumLondonEngland

Personalised recommendations