Cambrian chaetognaths recognized in Burgess Shale fossils

• Autorzy: Szaniawski H
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Oesia disjuncta, one of the species of the soft−bodied fauna collected and described by Walcott (1911) from the Middle Cambrian Phyllopod Bed (Burgess Shale, British Columbia, Canada) is recognized as a chaetognath. For anatomical comparisons many specimens of Recent chaetognaths were specially compressed and dried to obtain forms similar to the fossils preserved in shales. The most characteristic features shared by the fossil and Recent specimens include: strongly elongated, transversely striated and very flexible body, large size, and characteristically diversified shape of head, pronounced intestine and horizontally oriented caudal fin. Possible traces of other chaetognath structures—grasping apparatus, lateral fins, seminal vesicles, ventral ganglion, ovaries and anus—are also present but preserved in one specimen only. Among extant genera, those showing the closest similarity to Oesia Walcott, 1911 are the hyperbenthic Archeterokrohnia Casanova, 1986¹, and Heterokrohnia Ritter−Záhony, 1911, which are considered by some authors as evolutionarily most primitive.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Oesia disjuncta; fossil; Burgess Shale; paleobiology; protoconodont; Canada; Cambrian; Chaetognatha; chaetognath

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Palaeontologica Polonica
• Rocznik: 2005
• Tom: 50
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.1-8,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Szaniawski H

• Polish Academy of Sciences, Twarda 51-55, 00-818 Warsaw, Poland

Bibliografia

• Atkins, E.D.T., Dlugosz, J. and Foord, S. 1979. Electron diffraction and electron microscopy of crystalline α−chitin from the grasping spines of the marine worm Sagitta. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 1: 29–32.
• Alvariño, A. 1981. Spadella gaetanoi, a new benthic chaetognath from Hawaii. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 91: 650–657.
• Bieri, R. 1991. Systematics of the Chaetognatha. In: Q. Bone, H. Kapp, and A.C. Pierrot−Bults (eds.), The Biology of Chaetognaths, 122–136. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Bone, Q. and Duvert, M. 1991. Locomotion and buoyancy. In: Q. Bone, H. Kapp, and A.C. Pierrot−Bults (eds.), The Biology of Chaetognaths, 32–44. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Briggs, D.E.G. 1999. Molecular taphonomy of animal and plant cuticles: selective preservation and diagenesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B 354: 7–17.
• Butterfield, N.J. 1990. Organic preservation of non−mineralizing organisms and the taphonomy of the Burgess Shale. Palebiology 16: 272–286.
• Casanova, J.P. 1986. Archeterokrohnia rubra n. gen., n. sp., nouveau Chaetognathe abyssal de l’Atlantique nord−africain: description et position systématique, hypothèse phylogénétique. Bulletin du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris (4 sér.), section A 8 (1): 185–194.
• Casanova, J.P. 1996. A new genus and species of deep−benthic chaetognath from the Atlantic: a probable link between the families Heterokrohniidae and Spadellidae. Journal of Natural History 30: 1239–1245.
• Casanova, J.P. and Duvert, M. 1996. Biodiversity and evolutionary trends in the phylum Chaetognatha. Buletin de la Societé Zoologique de France 12: 77–80.
• Casanova, J.P. and Duvert, M. 2002. Comparative studies and evolution of muscles in chaetognaths. Marine Biology 141: 925–938.
• Casanova, J.P. and Chidgey K.C. 1987. Une nouvelle espèce d’Heterokrohnia (Chaetognathe) des campagnes du ‘Discovery’ dans l’Atlantique nordoriental. Bulletin du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle. Paris (4 sér.) 9: 879–885.
• Chen, J.Y. and Huang, D.Y. 2002. A possible Lower Cambrian Chaetognath (Arrow Worm). Science 298: 187.
• Conant, F.S. 1895. Description on two new chaetognaths. Johns Hopkins University Circular 14: 119.
• Conway−Morris, S. 1977. A description of the Middle Cambrian worm Amiskwia sagittiformis, Walcott from the Burgess Shale of British Columbia. Palaeontologische Zeitschrift 51: 271–287.
• Conway−Morris, S. 1986. The community structure of the Middle Cambrian Phyllopod Bed (Burgess Shale). Palaeontology 29: 423–467.
• Darwin, C. 1844. Observations on the structure and propagation of the genus Sagitta. Annales and Magazine of Natural History, London 13: 1–6.
• Doguzhaeva, L.A, Mutvei, H., and Mapes, R.H. 2002. Chaetognath grasping spines from the Upper Mississipian of Arkansas (USA). Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 47: 421–430.
• Furnestin, M.L. 1965. Variations morphologiques des crochets au cours du développement dans le genre Eukrohnia. Revue des Travaux de l’Institut des Pèche de Castiglione 4: 275–317.
• Ghirardelli, E. 1994. The state of knowledge on Chaetognaths. In: R. Argano, C. Cirotto, E. Grassi Milano, and L. Mastrolia (eds.),Contributions to Animal Biology, 237–244. Halocynthia Association, Palermo.
• Ghirardelli, E. 1995. Chaetognaths: two unsolved problems: the coelom and their affinities. In: G. Lanzavecchia, R. Valvassori, and M.Z. Candia Carnevali (eds.), Body Cavities: Function and Phylogeny, Selected Symposia and Monographs U.Z.I. 8, 167–185. Mucchi, Modena.
• Hagen, W. and Kapp, H. 1986. Heterokrohnia longicaudata, a new species of Chaetognatha from Antarctic waters. Polar Biology 5: 181–183.
• Halanych, K.M. 1996. Testing hypotheses of Chaetognath origins: Long branches revealed by 18S ribosomal DNA. Systematic Biology 45: 223–246.
• Helfenbein, K.G., Fourcade, H.M., Vanjani, R.G., and Boore, J.L. 2004. The mitochondrial genome of Paraspadella getoi is highly reduced and reveals that chaetognaths are sister group to protostomes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the united States of America 101 (29): 10639–10643.
• Kapp, H. 1991. Morphology and anatomy. In: Q. Bone, H. Kapp, and A.C. Pierrot−Bults (eds.), The Biology of Chaetognaths, 5–17. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Kapp, H. and Hagen, W. 1985. Two new species of Heterokrohnia (Chaetognatha) from Antarctic waters. Polar Biology 4: 53–59.
• Kassatkina, A.P. 1980. A new genus Tokiokaispadella and its position in the system of Chaetognatha [in Russian]. Zoologičeskij žurnal 59: 1257–1260.
• Langerhans, P. 1880. Die Wurmfauna von Madeira. Zeitchrift für wissenschaftliche Zoologie 34: 1–136.
• Lochmann, N.H. 1922. Oesia disjuncta Walcott, eine Appendicularie aus dem Kambrium. Mitteilungen aus dem Zoologischen Staatsinstitut in Hamburg 38: 69–75.
• Owre, H.B. and Bayer, F.M. 1962. The systematic position of the Middle Cambrian fossil Amiskwia Walcott. Paleontological Notes 36: 1361–1393.
• Papillon, D., Perez, Y., Caubit, X., and Le Parco, Y. 2004. Identification of chaetognaths as protostomes is supported by the analysis of their mitochondrial genome. Molecular Biology and Evolution doi:10.1093/molbev/msh229.
• Petrovich, R. 2001. Mechanisms of fossilization of the soft−bodied and lightly armored faunas of the Burgess Shale and of some other classical localities. American Journal of Science 301: 683–726.
• Quoy, J.R.C. and Gaimarad, P. 1827. Observations zoologiques faites de “l'Astrolabe” en Mai 1826, dans la Detroit de Gibraltar. Annales de Science naturelle (Zoologie) 10: 5–239.
• Ritter−Záhony, R. 1909. Die Chätognathen der Gazelle Expedition. Zoologischer Anzeiger 34: 783−793.
• Ritter−Záhony, R. 1911. Revision der Chaetognathen. Deutsche Südpolar Expedition 1901–3, 12 (1): 1–72.
• Szaniawski, H. 1980. Fused clusters of paraconodonts. In: H.P. Schönlaub (ed.), Abstract for the 2nd European Conodont Symposium (ECOS II). Abhandlungen der Geologischen Bundesanstalt 35: 211.
• Szaniawski, H. 1982. Chaetognath gasping spines recognized among Cambrian protoconodonts. Journal of Paleontology 56: 806–810.
• Szaniawski, H. 2002. New evidence for the protoconodont origin of chaetognaths. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 47: 405–419.
• Tarlo, L.B. 1960. The invertebrate origins of the vertebrates. Report of the International Geological Congress, XXI Session, Norden, 1960, Part XXII, International Paleontological Union. Copenhagen 1960: 113–123.
• Telford, M.J. 2004. Affinity for arrow worms. Nature 431: 254–256.
• Telford, M.J. and Holland, P.W.H. 1993. The Phylogenetic Affinities of the Chaetognaths: A Molecular Analysis. Molecular Biological Evolution 10: 660–676.
• Telford, M.J. and Holland, P.W.H. 1997. Evolution of 28S Ribosomal DNA in Chaetognaths: Duplicate Genes and Molecular Phylogeny. Journal of Molecular Evolution 44: 135–144.
• Tokioka, T. 1965. The taxonomical outline of chaetognaths. Publications of the Seto Marine Biological Laboratory 12: 335–357.
• Wada, H. and Satoh, N. 1994. Details of the evolutionary history from invertebrates to vertebrates, as deduced from the sequences of 18S rDNA.
• Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 91 (5): 1801–1804.
• Walcott, C.D. 1911. Middle Cambrian annelids. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 57 (2): 109–144.