Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:44:18.371Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contribution of Morphometrics to the Systematics of the Ordovician Genus Neseuretus (Calymenidae, Trilobita) from the Armorican Massif, France

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2015

Damien Gendry ,
Philippe Courville ,
Thomas Saucède ,
Rémi Laffont  and
Florentin Paris
Damien Gendry
Affiliation:
5 rue des Lilas F-35370 Argentré du Plessis, France,
Philippe Courville
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 6118, Géosciences, Université Rennes 1, 263 avenue du Général Leclerc F-35000 Rennes, France,
Thomas Saucède
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 5561, Biogéosciences, Université de Bourgogne, 6 boulevard Gabriel F-21000 Dijon, France,
Rémi Laffont
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 5561, Biogéosciences, Université de Bourgogne, 6 boulevard Gabriel F-21000 Dijon, France,
Florentin Paris
Affiliation:
UMR CNRS 6118, Géosciences, Université Rennes 1, 263 avenue du Général Leclerc F-35000 Rennes, France,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The genus Neseuretus Hicks, 1873 is the most abundant trilobite of the Ordovician siltite succession of the Andouillé and Traveusot Formations in the French Armorican massif. The systematics of some species of Neseuretus is still unclear. Armorican and Iberian domains formed part of a distinctive paleobiogeographical province in the Ordovician and, while five Neseuretus species were defined in Iberia that follow each other through time, from the Middle to the Upper Ordovician, only one Neseuretus species, N. tristani, has been identified in the Armorican massif so far. The discovery of new fossil deposits in the Ménez-Belair syncline has led to the identification and re-description of three Neseuretus taxa: Neseuretus avus Hamman, 1977 from the early-middle Darriwilian, Neseuretus tristani (Brongniart in Desmarest, 1817) from the late–middle Darriwilian to late Darriwilian and Neseuretus tardus (Hammann, 1983) from the Darriwilian–Sandbian boundary and early Sandbian. Morphological characters of the cephalon and pygidium were determined that can definitively distinguish the three identified taxa. These results stem from both traditional and geometric (outline and landmark-based) morphometric analyses. The three taxa follow each other through time and constitute a morphological sequence that contributes to improving the stratigraphy of the Middle and Upper Ordovician.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 87 , Issue 3 , May 2013 , pp. 456 - 471
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

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

Babin, C., Arnaud, A., Blaise, J., Cavet, P., Chauvel, J.-J., Deunff, J., Henry, J.-L., Lardeux, H., Melou, M., Nion, J., Paris, F., Plaine, J., Quete, Y., and Robardet, M. 1976. The Ordovician of the Armorican Massif (France), p. 359–385. InBassett, M. G.(ed.), The Ordovician System: Proceedings of a Palaeontological Association symposium, Birmingham, September 1974, 696 p.Google Scholar
Bailey, R. C. and Byrnes, J. 1990. A new, old method for assessing measurement error in both univariate and multivariate morphometric studies. Systematic Zoology, 39 (2):124–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bancroft, B. B. 1949. Upper Ordovician trilobites of zonal value in south-east Shropshire. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 136 (883):291–315.Google ScholarPubMed
Bates, D. E. B. 1969. Some early Arenig brachiopods and trilobites from Wales. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology, 18:1–28.Google Scholar
Beckly, A. J. 1989. A new Arenig trilobite fauna from the Bangor area, North Wales. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology, 45:1–20.Google Scholar
Bergeron, J. 1890. Sur une forme nouvelle de trilobite de la famille des Calymenidae (genre Calymenella). Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, 18:365–371.Google Scholar
Bookstein, F. L. 1991. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data. Cambridge, New York, 435p.Google Scholar
Brongniart, A. 1822. Les trilobites, p. 1–65. InBrongniart, A. and Desmarest, A.-G., Histoire naturelle des crustacés fossiles, sous les rapports zoologiques et géologiques. Paris(Levrault), VII, 154 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chestnut, A. J. 2008. Using morphometrics, phylogenetic systematic and parsimony analysis to gain insight into the evolutionary affinities of the Calymenidae Trilobita. PhD thesis. Wright State University, 108p.Google Scholar
Clarke, K. R. 1993. Non-parametric multivariate analysis of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology, 18:117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cocks, L. R. M. and Torsvik, T. H. 2002. Earth geography from 500 to 400 million years ago: A faunal and palaeomagnetic. Journal of the Geological Society of London, 159:631–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabard, M. P., Loi, A., and Paris, F. 2007. Relationship between phosphogenesis and sequence architecture: Sequence stratigraphy and biostratigraphy in the Middle Ordovician of the Armorican Massif (NW France). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 248:339–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delabroye, A. and Cronier, C. 2008. Ontogeny of an Ordovician trinucleid (Trilobita) from Armorica, France: A morphometric approach. Journal of Paleontology, 82:800–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delgado, J. F. N. 1892. Fauna Silurica de Portugal. Descripção de una forma nova de Trilobite, Lichas (Uralichas) Ribeiroi. Commissao das Trabalhos geologiços de Portugal, Lisbon, 31p.Google Scholar
Delo, D. M. 1935. A revision of the phacopid trilobites. Journal of Paleontology, 9:402–420.Google Scholar
Desmarest, A. G. 1817. Crustacés fossiles. InBiot, J. B.et al., Nouveau dictionnaire d'histoire naturelle, 8:495–519. Deterville, Paris.Google Scholar
Dommergues, C. H. 2001. CDFT complex discrete Fourier transform (MATLAB package), Version 2.7. Biogéosciences-Dijon, UMR CNRS 5561.Google Scholar
Dommergues, C. H., Dommergues, J.-L., and Verrecchia, E. P. 2007. The discrete cosine transform, a Fourier-related method for morphometric analysis of open contours. Mathematical Geology, 39:749–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryden, I. L. and Mardia, K. V. 1998. Statistical Shape Analysis. John Wiley and Sons Ltd., Hoboken, New Jersey, 376p.Google Scholar
Edwards, H. M. 1840. Histoire naturelle des Crustacés, comprenant l'anatomie, la physiologie et la classification de ces animaux, vol. 3. Roret, Paris, 638p.Google Scholar
Eisenack, A. 1931. Neue Mikrofossilen des baltischen Silurs. Naturwissenschaften, 18 (42):880–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenack, A. 1939. Chitinozoen und Hystrichosphaerideen im Ordovizium des Rhenischen Schiefergebirges. Senckenbergiana, 21:135–152.Google Scholar
El-Khayal, A. A. and Romano, M. 1985. Lower Ordovician trilobites from the Hanadir Shale of Saudi Arabia. Palaeontology, 28:401–412.Google Scholar
Foerste, A. F. 1910. Preliminary notes on Cincinnati and Lexington fossils of Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Bulletin of the Scientific Laboratories of Denison University, 16:17–87.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A. and Morris, S. F. 1982. The Ordovician trilobite Neseuretus from Saudi Arabia, and the palaeogeography of the Neseuretus fauna related to Gondwanaland in the earlier Ordovician. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology, 36:63–75.Google Scholar
Gil Cid, D. 1971. Nota sobre algunos Calymenaceos (Trilobites) del Ordovicico de los Montes de Toledo. Estudios Geologicos, 27:311–316.Google Scholar
Hammann, W. 1977. Neue Calymenacea (Trilobita) aus dem Ordovizium von Spanien. Senckenbergiana Lethaea, 58:91–97.Google Scholar
Hammann, W. 1983. Calymenacea (Trilobita) aus dem Ordovizium von Spanien. Abhandlungen der Senckenbergischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft, 542:1–177.Google Scholar
Hammann, W. 1985. Life habits and enrolment in Calymenacea (Trilobita) and their significance for classification. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Earth Sciences, 76:307–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. A. T., and Ryan, P. D. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, 4 (1), 9p.Google Scholar
Hawle, I. and Corda, A. J. C. 1847. Prodom einer monographie der böhmischen Trilobiten. Abhandlungen Koeniglichen Boelmischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften. J. G. Clave, Prague. (In Czechoslovakian)Google Scholar
Henry, J.-L. 1968. Crozonaspis struvei n. gen. n. sp, Zelliszkellinae (Trilobita) de l'Ordovicien moyen de Bretagne. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 49:367–381.Google Scholar
Henry, J.-L. 1970. Quelques Calymenacea (Trilobites) de l'Ordovicien de Bretagne. Annales de Paléontologie, 56:3–23.Google Scholar
Henry, J.-L. 1976. Kerfornella nov. gen., trilobite Homalonotidae de l'Ordovicien armoricain et ibérique. Geobios, 9:665–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, J.-L. 1980. Trilobites ordoviciens du Massif Armoricain. Mémoires de la Société Géologique et Minéralogique de Bretagne, 22:1–250.Google Scholar
Henry, J.-L. 1989. Paléoenvironnements et dynamique de faunes de trilobites dans l'Ordovicien (Llanvirn supérieur-Caradoc basal) du Massif Armoricain (France). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 73:139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, J.-L., Nion, J., Paris, F., and Thadeu, D. 1974. Chitinozoaires, ostracodes et trilobites de l'Ordovicien du Portugal (serra de Buçaco) et du Massif Armoricain: Essai de comparaison et signification paléogéographique. Comunicações dos Serviços Geológicos de Portugal, 57:303–362.Google Scholar
Hicks, H. 1873. On the Tremadoc rocks in the neighbourhood of St. David's, Pembrokeshire, with special reference to those of the Arenig and Llandeilo groups and their fossil contents. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 29:39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunda, B. R. and Hughes, N. C. 2007. Evaluating paedomorphic heterochrony in trilobites: The case of the trilobite Flexicalymene retrorsa minuens from the Cincinnatian Series (Upper Ordovician), Cincinnati region. Evolution and Development, 9:483–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hupe, P. 1955. Classification des trilobites. Annales de Paléontologie, 41:91–304.Google Scholar
Klingenberg, C. P. 2008. MorphoJ: An integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources, 11:53–357.Google Scholar
Kuhl, F. P. and Giardina, C. R. 1982. Elliptic Fourier features of a closed contour. Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 18:236–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loi, A. and Dabard, M.-P. 2002. Controls of sea level fluctuations on the formation of Ordovician siliceous nodules in terrigenous offshore environments. Sedimentary Geology, 153:65–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loi, A., Dabard, M.-P., Chauvel, J.-J., Le Herisse, A., Pleiber, G., and Cotten, J. 1999. Les nodules silico-alumineux: Une expression de la condensation sédimentaire sur une plateforme distale. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, sciences de la terre et des planètes, 328:599–605.Google Scholar
Oehlert, D. 1895. Sur les Trinucleus de l'Ouest de la France. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France 3è série, 23:299–338.Google Scholar
Oulebsir, L. and Paris, F. 1993. Nouvelles espèces de chitinozoaires dans l'Ordovicien inférieur et moyen du sud-est du Sahara algérien. Revue de Micropaléontologie, 36:257–280.Google Scholar
Paris, F. 1972. L'Ordovicien du Synclinorium du Ménez-Bélair (Synclinorium median armoricain). Ses caractères et sa place dans la paléogéographie centre-armoricaine. Annales de la Société géologique du Nord, 91 (4):241–251.Google Scholar
Paris, F. 1981. Les Chitinozoaires dans le Paléozoïque du sud-ouest de l'Europe (cadre géologique-étude systématique-biostratigraphie). Mémoire de la Société Géologique et Minéralogique de Bretagne, 26, 496p.Google Scholar
Paris, F. 1990. The Ordovician chitinozoan biozones of the Northern Gondwana domain. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 66:181–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paris, F. 1998. Early Palaeozoic palaeobiogeography of northern Gondwana regions. Acta Universitatis Carolinae–Geology, 42:473–483.Google Scholar
Paris, F. and Robardet, M. 1977. Paléogéographie et relations ibéro-armoricaines au Paléozoïque anté-Carbonifère. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, série 7, 19:1121–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paris, F. and Robardet, M. 1990. Early Paleozoic palaeobiogeography of the Variscan regions. Tectonophysics, 177: 93–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perner, J. 1918. Die Trilobiten der Zone D-d1γ von Prag und Umgebung. Palaeontographica Bohemiae, 9:1–55.Google Scholar
Pillet, J. 1977. Une faunule trilobitique du Llanvirn dans le synclinal d'Angers – Saint-Julien-de-Vouvantes (Sud-Est du Massif Armoricain). Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, série 7, 19:149–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pompeckj, J. F. 1898. Über Calymene Brongniart. Neues Jahrbüch für Mineralogie, 1:187–250.Google Scholar
Rabano, I. 1989. Trilobites del Ordovicio Medio del sector meridional de la zona Centroiberica espanola. Parte III: Calymenina y Cheirurina. Boletin Geologico y Minero, 100:767–841.Google Scholar
Reed, F. R. C. 1918. Notes on the genus Homalonotus. Geological Magazine, 6:263–276, 314–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robardet, M. 2003. The Armorica “microplate”: Fact or fiction? Critical review of the concept and contradictory palaeobiogeographical data. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 195:125–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romano, M., Brenchley, P. J., and McDougall, N. D. 1986. New information concerning the age of the beds immediately overlying the Armorican Quartzite in central Portugal. Geobios, 19:421–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouault, M. 1846. Extrait du Mémoire sur les Trilobites du département d'Ille-et-Vilaine. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, série 2, 4:309–319.Google Scholar
Sadler, P. M. 1974. Trilobites from the Gorran Quartzites, Ordovician of South Cornwall. Palaeontology, 17:71–93.Google Scholar
Salter, J. W. 1864. A monograph of the British trilobites from the Cambrian, Silurian, and Devonian formations. Part 1. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society, 16:1–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salter, J. W. 1965. A monograph of the British trilobites from the Cambrian, Silurian, and Devonian formations. Part 2. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society, 17:81–128.Google Scholar
Salter, J. W. 1867. A monograph of British Trilobites from the Cambrian, Silurian, and Devonian formations. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 4:1–224.Google Scholar
Sdzuy, K. 1957. Bemerkung zur Familie Homalonotidae. Senckenbergiana Lethaea, 38 (5–6):275–290.Google Scholar
Sheets, H. D., Kim, K., and Mitchell, C. E. 2004. A combined landmark and outline-based approach to ontogenetic shape change in the Ordovician trilobite Triarthrus becki, p. 67–82. InElewa, A. M. T.(ed.), Morphometrics: Applications in Biology and Paleontology. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taugourdeau, P. 1961. Chitinozoaires du Silurien d'Aquitaine. Revue de micropaléontologie, 6:135–154.Google Scholar
Thadeu, D. 1949. Calimenideos portugueses. Boletim da Sociedade Geologica de Portugal, 8:129–137.Google Scholar
Thadeu, D. 1956. Note sur le Silurien beiro-durien. Boletim da Sociedade Geologica de Portugal, 12:1–48.Google Scholar
Turvey, S. T. 2002. Phylogeny of the Reedocalymeninae (Trilobita): Implications for Early Ordovician biogeography of Gondwana, p. 53–68. InCrame, J. A. and Owen, A. W.(eds.), Palaeobiogeography and Biodiversity Change: The Ordovician and Mesozoic-Cenozoic Radiations. Geological Society, London, Special Publication 194.Google Scholar
Turvey, S. T. 2005. Reedocalymenine trilobites from the Ordovician of Central and Eastern Asia and a review of species assigned to Neseuretus. Palaeontology, 48:549–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Verneuil, E. and Barrande, J. 1855. Description des fossiles trouvés dans les terrains silurien et dévonien d'Almaden, d'une partie de la Sierra Morena et des montagnes de Tolède. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, série 2, 12:964–1025.Google Scholar
Vogdes, A. W. 1925. Palaeozoic Crustacea. Part II. An alphabetical list of the genera and subgenera of the Trilobita. Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History, 4:89–115.Google Scholar
Walch, J. E. I. 1771. Die Naturgeschichte der Versteinerungen, Dritter Theil. Paul Jonathan Felstecker, 1–235.Google Scholar
Webster, M. 2011. The structure of cranidial shape variation in three early ptychoparioid trilobite species from the Dyeran–Delamaran (traditional “lower–middle” Cambrian) boundary interval of Nevada, U.S.A. Journal of Paleontology, 85:179–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittard, W. F. 1960. The Ordovician trilobites of the Shelve Inlier, West Shropshire. Part 4. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society, 113 (487):117–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittington, H. B. and Hughes, C. P. 1972. Ordovician Geography and Faunal Provinces Deduced from trilobite distribution. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 263:235–278.Google Scholar