Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
  • Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-s65px Total loading time: 0.641 Render date: 2021-03-08T07:33:31.896Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }
EnglishFrançais
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh

Article contents

A review of the Carboniferous lungfish genus Ctenodus Agassiz, 1838 from the United Kingdom, with new data from an articulated specimen of Ctenodus interruptus Barkas, 1869

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2013

E. L. Sharp  and
J. A. Clack
E. L. Sharp
Affiliation:
Science Museum, Red Bard Gate, Wroughton, Swindon, Wiltshire, SN4 9LT UK
J. A. Clack
Affiliation:
University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge, Downing St., Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK
Get access
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A revision of the Carboniferous lungfish genus Ctenodus is undertaken. Ctenodus is the longest-surviving genus of lungfish from the Carboniferous, and is the only one to cross the Lower–Upper Carboniferous boundary. Five species span the period, with species correlated to stage. Species are distinguished by differences in tooth plate morphology. Ridge number increases from the Tournaisian to the Moscovian, and the length to width ratio decreases. A new, almost complete articulated individual of C. interruptus allows identification of this species from pterygoid tooth plates and other characteristics. These, and new features of the postcranial skeleton, are described for the first time. Ctenodus retains primitive features of the skull roof, such as a pair of C-bones and retention of a D-bone; its contemporaries Conchopoma, Sagenodus and Straitonia show the derived condition of these features. Ctenodus retains primitive features of the lepidotrichia, which are distally segmented and bifurcated. However, it also shows the derived condition of the tail region in having a combined first and second dorsal fin: whether there was a separate caudal fin remains unknown.

Keywords

Dipnoi Loanhead Newsham Straiton Tournaisian Viséan Westphalian
Type
Articles
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 104 , Issue 2 , July 2013 , pp. 169 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Society of Edinburgh 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.
If you should have access and can't see this content please contact technical support.

References

Agassiz, L. 1835–1843. Recherches sur les Poissons Fossiles. Tome III. Neuchâtel: Imprimerie Petitpierre. viii+390 pp.Google Scholar
Ahlberg, P. E. 1991. A re-examination of sarcopterygian interrelationships, with special reference to the Porolepiformes. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 103, 241–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahlberg, P. E., Smith, M. M. & Johanson, J. 2006. Developmental plasticity and disparity in early dipnoan (lungfish) dentitions. Evolution & Development 8, 331–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahlberg, P. E. & Trewin, N. H. 1995. The postcranial skeleton of the Middle Devonian lungfish Dipterus valenciennesi . Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences 85(for 1994), 159–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arratia, G., Schultze, H.-P. & Casciotta, J. 2001. Vertebral column and associated elements in dipnoans and comparison with other fishes: development and homology. Journal of Morphology 250, 101–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atthey, T. 1868. Notes on the various species of Ctenodus obtained from the shales of the Northumberland coal field. Annual Magazine of Natural History 1, 77–87.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1869a. British Coal Fossils. Scientific Opinion 2, 24–25.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1869b. Ctenodus. Scientific Opinion 2, 53–54.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1869c. Ctenodus interruptus. Scientific Opinion 2, 113–14.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1869d. Ctenodus ovatus. Scientific Opinion 2, 557.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1869e. Notes on some curious dentition of coal-measure fishes. Scientific Opinion 2, 479–80.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1869f. Notes on various species of Ctenodus found in the Low Main Coal Shale, Newsham Colliery, Northumberland. Geological Magazine 6, 314–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1870a. Amphisaurus, Strepsodus, Ctenodus, &c. Scientific Opinion 3, 369.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1870b. Ctenodus. English Mechanics and World Science 12, 160.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1870c. Ctenodus obtusus (n. sp.). English Mechanics and World Science 12, 160.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1872. Ctenodus. English Mechanics and World Science 15, 488.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1873a. Illustrated guide to the fish, amphibian, reptilian, and supposed mammalian remains of the Northumberland Carboniferous strata. London: Hutchings. 118 pp.Google Scholar
Barkas, T. P. 1873b. Remains of Ctenodus . English Mechanics and World Science 18, 68.Google Scholar
Barkas, W. J. 1877a. On the genus Ctenodus. Part 1. On the genus Ctenodus, a fish found in the true Coal Measures of Great Britain. Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 10, 99–110.Google Scholar
Barkas, W. J. 1877b. On the genus Ctenodus. Part 2. On the microscopical of the mandibular and palatal teeth of Ctenodus . Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 10, 110–15.Google Scholar
Barkas, W. J. 1877c. On the genus Ctenodus. Part 3. On the vomerine teeth of Ctenodus . Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 10, 115–20.Google Scholar
Barkas, W. J. 1877d. On the genus Ctenodus. Part 4. On the dentary, articular, and pterygo-palatine bones of Ctenodus . Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 10, 120–23.Google Scholar
Barkas, W. J. 1878a. On the genus Ctenodus. Part 5. On the sphenoid, cranial bones, operculum and supposed ear-bones of Ctenodus . Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 11, 51–57.Google Scholar
Barkas, W. J. 1878b. On the genus Ctenodus. Part 6. On the scapula (?), coracoid, ribs, and scales of Ctenodus . Journal of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 11, 58–64.Google Scholar
Bemis, W. E. 1986. Feeding systems of living Dipnoi: anatomy and function. Journal of Morphology, Supplement 1, 81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, I. R. & Foxon, G. E. H. 1968. The mechanism of breathing in the South American lungfish, Lepidosiren paradoxa; a radiological study. Journal of Zoology 154, 263–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, M. J. 1984. The Upper Carboniferous tetrapod assemblage from Newsham, Northumberland. Palaeontology 27, 367–92.Google Scholar
Browne, M. A. E., Dean, M. T., Hall, I. H. S., McAdam, A. D., Monro, S. K. & Chisholm, J. I. 1999. A lithostratigraphical framework for the Carboniferous rocks of the Midland Valley of Scotland. British Geological Survey Research Report RR/99/07. Keyworth, Nottinghamshire: British Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Campbell, K. S. W. & Barwick, R. E. 1987. Paleozoic Lungfishes – a Review. Journal of Morphology, Supplement 1, 93–131.Google Scholar
Clack, J A. 1987. Pholiderpeton scutigerum, an amphibian from the Yorkshire Coal Measures. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 318, 1–107.Google Scholar
Clack, J. A., Sharp, E. L. & Long, J. A. 2011. The fossil record of lungfishes. In Jørgensen, J. M. & Joss, J. (eds) The Biology of Lungfishes, 1–42. Enfield, New Hampshire: USA Science Publishers Inc. 530 pp.Google Scholar
Cloutier, R. 1996. Dipnoi (Akinetia: Sarcopterygii) In Schultze, H.-P. & Cloutier, R. (eds) Devonian fishes and plants of Miguasha, Quebec, Canada, 198–226. Munich: Verlag Dr Friedrich Pfeil. 374 pp.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. 2007. The interrelationships of Devonian lungfishes (Sarcopterygii: Dipnoi) as inferred from neurocranial evidence and new data from the genus Soederberghia Lehman, 1959. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 151, 115–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritsch, A. 1879. Fauna der Gaskohle und der Kalksteine der Permformation Böhemns. Prague: Selbstverlag.Google Scholar
Fritsch, A. 1885–89. Fauna der Gaskohle und der Kalksteine der Permformation Bohems, 2. Stegocephali (Schluß), Dipnoi, Selachii (Angfang). Prague: Selbstverlag. 114 pp.Google Scholar
Gradstein, F. M., Ogg, J. G. & Smith, A. G. 2004. A Geologic Timescale. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 600 pp.Google Scholar
Goodrich, E. S. 1909. Cyclostomes and fishes. In Lankester, R. (ed.) A Treatise on Zoology IX. London: Adam and Charles Black.Google Scholar
Goodrich, E. S. 1930. Studies on the structure and development of vertebrates. London: Macmillan & Co. 837 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, A. & Atthey, T. 1868a. Notes of the various species of Ctenodus obtained from the shales of the Northumberland coal field. Transactions of the Natural History Society of Northumberland and Durham 3, 54–66.Google Scholar
Hancock, A. & Atthey, T. 1868b. Notes on the remains of some reptiles and fishes from the shales of the Northumberland coal field. Transactions of the Natural History Society of Northumberland and Durham 3, 66–120.Google Scholar
Hancock, A. & Atthey, T. 1868c. Notes on the remains of some reptiles and fishes from the shales of the Northumberland coal field. Annual Magazine of Natural History 1, 266–78, 346–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, A. & Atthey, T. 1870. Notes on various species of Ctenodus obtained from the shales of the Northumberland coal field. Transactions of the Natural History Society of Northumberland and Durham 3, 54–66.Google Scholar
Hancock, A. & Atthey, T. 1871. A few remarks on Dipterus and Ctenodus, and on their relationship to Ceratodus forsteri, Krefft. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 7, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, A. & Atthey, T. 1872. A few remarks on Dipterus and Ctenodus, and on their relationship to Ceratodus forsteri, Krefft. Transactions of the Natural History Society of Northumberland and Durham 4, 397–407.Google Scholar
Huxley, T. H. 1880. On the applications of the laws of evolution to the arrangement of the Vertebrata and more particularly of the Mammalia. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1880, 649–62.Google Scholar
Kemp, A. 1986. The biology of the Australian lungfish, Neoceratodus forsteri (Krefft 1870). Journal of Morphology, Supplement 1, 181–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, J. A. 1992. Cranial anatomy of two new Late Devonian lungfishes (Pisces: Dipnoi) from Mount Howitt, Victoria. Records of the Australian Museum 44, 299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, J. A. 1993. Cranial ribs in Devonian lungfishes and the origin of dipnoan air breathing. Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists 15, 199–209.Google Scholar
Long, J. A. & Clement, A. M. 2009. The postcranial anatomy of two Middle Devonian lungfishes (Osteichthyes, Dipnoi) from Mt. Howitt, Victoria, Australia. Memoirs of the Australian Museum 66, 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maples, C. G. & Schultze, H-P. 1989. Preliminary comparisons of the Pennsylvanian assemblage of Hamilton, Kansas, with marine and non-marine contemporaneous assemblages. In Mapes, G & Mapes, R. (eds) Regional geology and paleontology of upper Paleozoic Hamilton Quarry area in southeastern Kansas. Kansas Geological Survey Series 6 (1988), 253–73. Kansas, USA: Kansas Geological Survey.Google Scholar
Miles, R. S. 1977. Dipnoan (Lungfish) skulls and relationships of the group – a study based on new species from the Devonian of Australia. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 61, 1–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, J. 1845. Über den Bau und die Grenzen der Ganoiden, and über dat natürliche System der Fische. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschafen zu Berlin 1844, 117–216.Google Scholar
O'Mara, P. T. & Turner, B. R. 1999. Sequence stratigraphy of coastal alluvial plain Westphalian B coal measures in Northumberland and the southern North Sea. International Journal of Coal Geology 42, 33–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, R. 1867. On the dental characters of genera and species, chiefly of the fishes from the Lower Main seam and shales of coal, Northumberland. Transactions of the Odontological Society of Great Britain 5, 323–75.Google Scholar
Panchen, A. L. 1972. The skull and skeleton of Eogyrinus attheyi Watson (Amphibia: Labyrinthodontia). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London B 263, 279–326.Google Scholar
Rees, J. G. & Wilson, A. A. 1998. Geology of the Country Around Stoke-on-Trent: Memoir for 1:50 000 Geological Sheet 123 (England and Wales). Memoirs of the British Geological Survey. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Romer, A. S. 1955. Herpetichthyes, Amphibioidei, Choanichthyes or Sarcopterygii? Nature 176, 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, A. S. & Smith, H. J. 1934. American Carboniferous dipnoans. Journal of Geology 42, 700–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultze, H. P. 1969. Griphognathus Gross, ein langschnauziger Dipnoer aus dem Oberdevon von Bergisch-Gladbach (Rheinisches Schiefergebirge) und von Lettland. Geologica et Palaeontologica 3, 21–79.Google Scholar
Schultze, H. P. 1975. Die Lungenfisch-Gattung Conchopoma (Pisces, Dipnoi). Senckenbergiana Lethaea 56, 191–231.Google Scholar
Schultze, H. P. 1981. Das Schädeldach eines ceratodontiden lungfisches aus der Trias Süddeutschlands (Dipnoi: Pisces). Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Naturkunde. Ser. B. Geologie und Paläontologie 70, 1–31.Google Scholar
Schultze, H. P. 1992a. Fossilium Catalogus I 131, 175–78Google Scholar
Schultze, H. P. 1992b. A new long-headed dipnoan (Osteichthyes) from the Middle Devonian of Iowa, USA. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 12, 52–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultze, H. P. & Bolt, J. R. 1996. The lungfish Tranodis and the tetrapod fauna from the upper Mississippian of North America. Special Papers in Palaeontology 52, 31–54.Google Scholar
Schultze, H. P. & Chorn, J. 1997. The Permo–Carboniferous genus Sagenodus and the beginning of modern lungfish. Contributions to Zoology 67, 9–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharp, E. 2007. The systematics, taxonomy and phylogeny of the British Carboniferous lungfishes. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Sharp, E. L. & Clack, J. A. 2012. Redescription of the lungfish Straitonia waterstoni from the Viséan of Lothian, Scotland. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 102(for 2011), 179–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smithson, T. R. 1985. Scottish Carboniferous amphibian localities. Scottish Journal of Geology 21, 123–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smithson, T. R., Wood, S. P., Marshall, J. E. A. M. & Clack, J. A. 2012. Earliest Carboniferous tetrapod and arthropod faunas from Scotland populate Romer's Gap. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, 4532–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sowerby, J. de. C. & George, E. J. 1826. Additional observations upon a fossil found in coal shale, and the description of a palate found in coal near Leeds. Zoological Journal 2, 22–24.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. M. 1841. Carboniferous dipnoans from Nova Scotia. American Journal of Science 239, 836–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, M., Williams, M., Monaghan, A., Arkley, S. & Smith, R. 2002. Biostratigraphy and palaeoenvironments of the Ballagan Formation (Lower Carboniferous) in Ayrshire. Scottish Journal of Geology 38, 93–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, K. S. 1965. On the relationships of certain Carboniferous Dipnoi; with descriptions of four new forms. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh Section B (Biology) 69, 221–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1873a. On Phaneropleuron andersoni (Huxley) and Uronemus lobatus (Agassiz). Journal of the Royal Geological Society of Ireland, (n. ser.) 3, 41–47.Google Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1873b. On a new genus of fossil fish of the order Dipnoi. Geological Magazine 10, 552–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1873c. On a new genus of fossil fish of the order Dipnoi. Journal of the Royal Geological Society of Ireland, (n. ser.) 4, 1–4.Google Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1878. On the genus Ctenodus (Agassiz). Nature 18, 483.Google Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1890a. Notice on new and little known fish remains from the Blackband Ironstone of Borough Lee, near Edinburgh. No. VI. Geological Magazine 7, 249–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1890b. List of the fossil Dipnoi and Ganoidei of Fife and the Lothians. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 17, 385–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1903. On the distribution of fossil fish-remains in the Carboniferous rocks of the Edinburgh district. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 40, 687–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traquair, R. H. 1890c. Notes on the Devonian Fishes of Scaumenac Bay and Campbelltown in Canada. Geological Magazine 7, 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, J. 1890. The geological features of the North Staffordshire coal fields, their organic remains, their range and distribution; with a catalogue of the fossils of the Carboniferous system of North Staffordshire. Transactions of the North Staffordshire Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineering 10, 189.Google Scholar
Waters, C. N., Browne, M. A. E., Dean, M. T. & Powell, J. H. 2007. Lithostratigraphical framework for Carboniferous successions of Great Britain (Onshore). British Geological Survey Research Report RR/07/001. 60 pp. (Available as a download from www.bgs.ac.uk/downloads/browse.cfm?sec=1&cat=2)Google Scholar
Watson, D. M. S. & Gill, E. L. 1923. The structure of certain Palaeozoic Dipnoi. Journal of the Linnean Society of London, Zoology 35, 163–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendruff, A. J. & Wilson, M. V. H. 2012. A fork-tailed coelacanth, Rebellatrix diveriacerca, gen. et sp. nov. (Actinistia, Rebellatricidae fam. nov.) from the Lower Triassic of Western Canada. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 32, 499–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westoll, T. S. 1949. On the evolution of the Dipnoi. In Jepsen, G. L., Mayr, E. & Simpson, G. G. (eds) Genetics, paleontology, and evolution, 121–84. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 474 pp.Google Scholar
Whyte, M. A. 2004. Midland Valley Basin. In Cossey, P. J., Adams, A. E., Purnell, M. A., Whiteley, M. J., Whyte, M. A. & Wright, V. P. (eds) British Lower Carboniferous Stratigraphy, Geological Conservation Review Series 29, 13–102. Peterborough, UK: Joint Nature Conservation Committee. 617 pp.Google Scholar
Witzmann, F., Scholz, H., Müller, J. & Kardjilov, N. 2010. Sculpture and vascularization of dermal bones, and the implications for the physiology of basal tetrapods. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 160, 302–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, A. S. 1889. On the tooth of a Carboniferous dipnoan fish: Ctenodus interruptus . Annual Report of the Yorkshire Philosophical Society 1889, 1–2.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. S. 1891. Catalogue of the fossil fishes in the British Museum Part II. London: British Museum of Natural History. 567 pp.Google Scholar

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 16
Total number of PDF views: 88 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 8th March 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

11 Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A review of the Carboniferous lungfish genus Ctenodus Agassiz, 1838 from the United Kingdom, with new data from an articulated specimen of Ctenodus interruptus Barkas, 1869
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

A review of the Carboniferous lungfish genus Ctenodus Agassiz, 1838 from the United Kingdom, with new data from an articulated specimen of Ctenodus interruptus Barkas, 1869
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

A review of the Carboniferous lungfish genus Ctenodus Agassiz, 1838 from the United Kingdom, with new data from an articulated specimen of Ctenodus interruptus Barkas, 1869
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *