Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T12:26:32.524Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ontogenetic and other Variations in Volutospina spinosa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Alan Stuart
Affiliation:
University College, Swansea.

Summary and conclusions

One hundred and thirty-two shells of Athleta (Volutospina) spinosa (L.), have been examined, the majority being well enough preserved to permit of detailed measurements being made. The variation in the breadth/height ratio was found to indicate an increase with the age of the individual, approximately according to the equation B = 0·4444h + 0·00256h + 0·000027h. Spire height expressed as a percentage of the height is greatest in young shells, those less than one centimetre in height having values of thirty-three and thirty-four per cent, whereas fully grown individuals have a mode of twenty-seven per cent.

The variations in ontogeny are not considerable, in only one case have the differences from the normal type been recognized by earlier writers as worthy of specific distinction. It is probable that Athleta (Volutospina) trisulcata (L.) is a variety of Athleta (Volutospina) spinosa.

The correlation between the various ontogenetic factors is small, for example, that for the incidence of the fifth tubercle and its disappearance is only — 0·144. On the whole the variations in each of the several characters are independent of the variations in the other characters.

This series of specimens is clearly a group in which the latitude of variation is small, and may be contrasted with such groups as that of Planorbis multiformis, in which the variation was described by Professor Hickling (9).

I wish to thank Dr. A. E. Trueman for much helpful criticism and advice during the progress of this work, and Professor E. J. Evans, of the Physics department in this college, for the use of apparatus.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1927

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES TO LITERATURE

(1) Alkins, W. E.The Morphogenesis of Brachiopoda”: Manchester Memoirs, vol. lxiv, 1920, No. 2; vol. lxvii, 1923, No. 9.Google Scholar
(2) Buckman, S. S.The ‘Kelloway Rock’ of Scarborough”: Q.J.G.S., vol. lxix, 1913, p. 166.Google Scholar
(3) Carruthers, R. G.The Evolution of Zaphrentis delanouei”: Q.J.G.S., vol. lxvi, 1910, p. 523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4) Cossman, A. E. M. Essais de Paleoconchologie Comparée, vol. iii, 1899, p. 135.Google Scholar
(5) Cossman, A. E. M. and Pissarro, G. Iconographie compléte des Coquilles fossiles de l'éocène des Environs de Paris, tome ii, p1. xliii, figs. 205–7.Google Scholar
(6) Davies, J. H., and Trueman, A. E.A Revision of the Non-Marine Lamellibranchs of the Coal Measures and a Discussion of their Zonal Sequence”: Q.J.O.S., vol. lxxxiii, 1927, p. 210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7) Edwards, F. E. Monograph of the Eocene Mollusca, pt. iii, 1854, p. 162.Google Scholar
(8) Grabau, A. W.The Phylogeny of Fuses and its Allies”: Smith-sonian Misc. Collections, No. 1417, vol. xliv, 1904.Google Scholar
(9) Hickling, G.The Variation of Planorbis multiformis Bronn.Manchester Memoirs, vol. lvii, 1913, No. 10.Google Scholar
(10) Spath, L. F. “Notes on Yorkshire Ammonites”: Hull Museum Pub., No. 143, p. 139. (Reprinted from The Naturalist, 1925 and 1926.)Google Scholar
(11) Thompson, J. McLean. Rep. Brit. Assoc. (See No. 13 below.)Google Scholar
(12) Trueman, A. E.The Species Concept in Palaeontology”: Geol. Mag., 1924, p. 355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13) Trueman, A. E. in “The Conception of a Species”: Joint Discussion, Rep. Brit. Assoc., 1926, p. 356.Google Scholar
(14) Trueman, A. E.The use of Gryphea in the Correlation of the Lower Lias”: Geol. Mag., 1922, p. 256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar