Advertisement

Geobotany pp 173-193 | Cite as

North American Primitive Paleozoic Charophytes and Descendents

  • James E. Conkin
  • Barbara M. Conkin

Abstract

North American primitive Paleozoic charophytes consist of three orders: Chovanellales (proposed herein), Sycidiales, and Trochiliscales, disposed in three families (Chovanellaceae, Sycidiaceae, and Trochiliscaceae) and three genera, Chovanella, Sycidium, and Moellerina with seven species generically allocated as follows: Chovanella (1), Moellerina (4), and Sycidium (2). The fourth, and evolutionarily advanced order of charophytes, Charales, is represented in the Paleozoic by the sinistrally spiralled Middle Devonian Eochara (Family Eocharaceae) which gave rise to the Pennsylvanian Palaeochara (Palaeocharaceae) which subsequently gave rise to the Stellatocharaceae, new family, the ancestral stock of the clavatoraceids, and through the clavatoraceids to the lagynophoraceids. The porocharaceids, also derived from Eochara, are the stem from which the Mesozoic and Cenozoic charoideid and nitelloideid charophytes evolved.

A new family, Stellatocharaceae, is proposed to include those genera previously placed in the subfamily Stellatocharoideae (nonutricled, but with apical beak). The gyrogonite of Catihlochara Peck and Eyer, 1963 has heretofore been inverted, and it is herein considered to be a junior synonym of Stomochara Grambast, 1961. Stomochara is placed in the family Porocharaceae, for not only is the apical pole of Stomochara different from that of Stellatochara Horn of Rantzien, 1954, but also the shapes of the gyrogonites and the geologic ranges of the two genera are different: Stomochara ranged from the Pennsylvanian to Triassic, but Stellatochara is a Mesozoic form known from the Triassic.

A fundamental dichotomy of the porocharaceid stock into nitelloideids (with a double tier of crown cells) and charoideids (chareids) (with a single tier of crown cells) occurred in the Late Jurassic and both groups became co-dominant in the Quaternary. The raskyellaceids (Late Cretaceous-Late Oligocene) branched from the chareid stock in the Late Cretaceous; these forms close their large apical pore by means of an apical operculum (surrounded by a circular dihescent suture). The gyrogonids (with peripheral modifications and nodose ornamentation of the apical zones) branch from the chareid stock in the Early Paleocene and persisted until the Late Oligocene. The chareid characeans persist until the present day, and are probably represented in the Late Eocene by Chara (or Charites, the organ genus in which the gyrogonite is indistinguishable from Chara). In the chareids there is progressive diminution (and finally essential disappearance) of the apical opening.

The scheme of orientation of the gyrogonites presented by Conkin, et al. (1970, 1972, and 1974) is consistent with the orientation of oogonia of modern charophytes and has resulted in the suppression of Karpinskya (Croft, 1952) Grambast, 1962, the correct orientation of Devonian and/or Mississippian Moellerina, Chovanella, and Sycidium, as well as a number of Pennsylvanian, Permian, and Mesozoic genera, and clarification of evolution within the charophytes. An evolutionary lineage within the genus Moellerina Ulrich, 1886, emend. Conkin, et al., 1974, based on progressive prominence of the cage superstructure, permits recognition of charophyte zones within the Middle and Upper Devonian and Lower Mississippian. Further, the usefulness of Moellerina greenei for precise age determination and correlation within the Middle Devonian of eastern North America is demonstrated.

Keywords

Middle Devonian Late Eocene Lower Devonian Junior Synonym Apical Opening 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Bell, W. A. 1922. A new genus of Characeae and new Merostomata from the Coal Measures of Nova Scotia. Roy. Soc. Canada Proc. and Trans. 16: 159–168.Google Scholar
  2. Choquette, G. 1956. A new Devonian charophyte. Jour. Paleont. 30: 1371–1374.Google Scholar
  3. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin 1972. Guide to the rocks and fossils of Jefferson County, Kentucky, southern Indiana, and adjacent areas. Univ. of Louisville Printing Service, Louisville, Kentucky.Google Scholar
  4. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin 1973a. The paracontinuity and the determination of the Devonian-Mississippian boundary in the type Lower Mississippian area of North America. Univ. of Louisville Stud. in Paleont. and Strat. No. 1. Univ. of Louisville Reprod. Serv. Louisville, Kentucky.Google Scholar
  5. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin 1973b. The Amphipora ramose Zone and its significance in Middle Devonian stratigraphy of east-central North America. Earth Science 1: 31–40.Google Scholar
  6. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin 1974. Supplement and Index to Guide to the rocks and fossils of Jefferson County, Kentucky, southern Indiana, and adjacent areas. Univ. of Louisville Reprod. Serv. Louisville, Kentucky.Google Scholar
  7. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin 1975a. The Devonian-Mississippian and Kinderhookian-Osagean boundaries in the east-central United States are paracontinuities. Univ. of Louisville Stud. in Paleont. and Strat. No. 4. Louisville, Kentucky.Google Scholar
  8. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin 1975b. Middle Devonian bone beds and contact in central Ohio. Bull. Amer. Paleont. 67: 99–122.Google Scholar
  9. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin 1976. Guide to the Rocks and Fos- sils of Jefferson County, Kentucky, southern Indiana, and adjacent areas, Second and Revised Edition. Univ. of Louisville Reprod.Serv. Louisville, Kentucky.Google Scholar
  10. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin, G. S. Gregory, and A. L. Hotchkiss. 1974. Revision of the charophyte genus Moellerina Ulrich, 1886 and suppression of the genus Karpinskya (Croft, 1952) Grambast, 1962. University of Louisville Stud. in Paleont. and Strat. No. 3. Louisville, Kentucky.Google Scholar
  11. Conkin, J. E., and B. M. Conkin, T. Sawa, and J. M. Kern. 1970. Middle Devonian Moellerina greenei Zone and suppression of the genus Weikkoella Summerson, 1958. Micropaleont. 16: 399–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Conkin, J. E., T. Sawa, T. C. Coy, and A. M. Salman. 1972. The charophyte genus Sycidium in the Upper Devonian of Iowa. Micropaleont. 18: 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Croft, W. N. 1952. A new Trochiliscus (Charophyta) from the Downtonian of Podolia. Brit. Mus. ( Nat. Hist.) Bull. 1: 180–222.Google Scholar
  14. Grambast, L. 1962. Classification de l’embranchement des Charo- phytes. Naturalia Monspeliensia, Ser. Bot. 14: 63–86.Google Scholar
  15. Harris, T. M. 1939. British Purbeck Charophyta. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist. ). London.Google Scholar
  16. Hornaf Rantzien, H. 1954. Middle Triassic Charophyta of South Sweden. Opera Bot. 1: 2: 5–83.Google Scholar
  17. Kesling, R. V., and R. F. Boneham. 1966. Trochiliscus bellatuZus Peck from the Middle Devonian Limestone of northwestern Ohio. Cont. Mus. Paleont., Univ. Mich. 20: 179–194.Google Scholar
  18. Kidston, R., and W. H. Lang. 1921. On Old Red Sandstone plants, showing structure, from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire; Part V, Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, Trans. 52: 855–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Meek, F. B. 1871. Descriptions of new species of invertebrate fossils from the Carboniferous and Devonian rocks of Ohio. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, Proc. 23: 57–93.Google Scholar
  20. Peck, R. E. 1934. The North American trochiliscids, Paleozoic Charophytes. Jour. Paleont. 8: 83–119.Google Scholar
  21. Peck, R. E. 1936. Structural trends of the Trochiliscaceae. Jour. Paleont. 10: 764–768.Google Scholar
  22. Peck, R. E. 1946. Fossil Charophyta. The American Midland Naturalist. 36: 275–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Peck, R. E. 1953. Fossil charophytes. The Bot. Review. 19 (4): 209–227.Google Scholar
  24. Peck, R. E. and J. A. Eyer 1963a. Representatives of Chovanella, a Devonian charophyte, in North America. Micropaleont. 9: 97–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peck, R. E. and J. A. Eyer. 1963b. Pennsylvanina, Permian, and Triassic Charophyta of North America. Jour. Paleont. 37: 835–844.Google Scholar
  26. Peck, R. E. and J. A. Eyer, and G. A. Morales 1966. The Devonian and Lower Mississippian charophytes of North America. Micropaleont. 12: 303–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reitlinger, E. A., and M. V. Yartseva 1958. Nouye Kharofity verkhnefamenskikh otlozhenii Russkoi Platformy. Acad. Nauk S. S. S. R., Doklady. 123: 113–116.Google Scholar
  28. Stauffer, C. R. 1909. The Middle Devonian of Ohio. Geol. Surv. Ohio, Bull. 10.Google Scholar
  29. Swartz, C. K. 1907. The relations of the Columbus and Sandusky Formations of Ohio. John Hopkins Univ. Circ., N. S. 7: 56–65.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • James E. Conkin
    • 1
  • Barbara M. Conkin
    • 2
  1. 1.University of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  2. 2.Jefferson Community CollegeLouisvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations