Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T01:45:01.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Systematics, hinge, and internal morphology of the Devonian bivalve, Nuculoidea corbuliformis (Hall and Whitfield)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

J. Bowman Bailey
J. Bowman Bailey*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Western Illinois University, Macomb 61455
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although Nuculoidea corbuliformis (Hall and Whitfield) is the most widespread Devonian nuculid species in North America, the hinge and internal morphology have not been adequately described. A newly excavated hinge shows the dentition and resilifer to be fundamentally similar to those of other species of Nuculoidea, while the resilifer morphology and shell shape more closely link N. corbuliformis to post-Devonian nuculid species. An internal mold of a probable N. corbuliformis found among Hall's original syntypes (here restudied) shows typical nuculid interior morphology. These new data allow the problematic genus Nuculoidea Williams and Breger to be further clarified.

Comparisons with N. corbuliformis suggest that N. aquisgranensis (Beushausen), N. herzeri (Nettleroth), N. neda (Hall and Whitfield), N. niotica (Hall and Whitfield), N. trigona (Spriestersbach), N. macrorhyncha (Spriestersbach), and N. subtrigona (Simpson) are subjective junior synonyms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 60 , Issue 6 , November 1986 , pp. 1177 - 1185
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. 1966. Mollusques, bivalves et céphalopodes du Paleozoïque Armoricain, étude systématique essai sur la phylogénie des bivalves esquisse paleoecologique. Imprimerie Commerciale et Administrative, Brest, 471 p.Google Scholar
Babin, C. 1973. Bivalvia of the Kartal Formation of Devonian age, Istanbul. Ege Universitesi Fen Fakultesi Kitaplar Serisi, 40:37–71.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. B. 1979a. North American Devonian Carydiidae (Bivalvia). Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 11(5):225.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. B. 1979b. Michigan Basin endemism and the evolution of Nuculopsis Girty (Bivalvia). Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 11 (5):225.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. B. 1983. Middle Devonian Bivalvia from the Solsville Member (Marcellus Formation), Central New York State. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 174(3):193–326.Google Scholar
Bailey, J. B. 1986. North American Devonian Carydiidae (bivalvia): systematics, phylogeny, and implications in the early diversification of the class. Journal of Paleontology, 60(2):302–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beushausen, L. von. 1895. Die Lamellibranchiaten des rheinischen Devon mit Ausschluss der Aviculiden. Abhandlungen der Königlich Preussischen geologischen Landesanstalt, neue Folge, 17:1–514.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. D. and Bradshaw, M. A. 1971. Functional morphology of some fossil palaeotaxodont bivalve hinges as a guide to orientation. Palaeontology, 14(2):242–249.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, M. A. 1974. Morphology and mode of life of the bivalves Nuculoidea vespa n. sp. and Nuculoidea umbra n. sp. from the Devonian of New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, 17(2):242–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, M. A. 1978. Position of soft parts in fossil palaeotaxodont bivalves as suggested by features of the shell interior. Alcheringa, 2:203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J. M. and Ruedemann, R. 1903. Catalogue of type specimens of Paleozoic fossils in the New York State Museum. New York State Museum Bulletin, 65:1–847.Google Scholar
Clarke, J. M. and Ruedemann, R. and Swartz, C. K. 1913. Pelecypoda, p. 539–699. In Systematic Paleontology of the Upper Devonian Deposits of Maryland. Maryland Geological Survey, Middle and Upper Devonian.Google Scholar
Cleland, H. F. 1903. A study of the fauna of the Hamilton Formation of the Cayuga Lake section in central New York. United States Geological Survey Bulletin, 206:1–112.Google Scholar
Cox, L. R. et al. 1969. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, part N, Mollusca 6, Bivalvia, Vols. 1 and 2. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, 952 p.Google Scholar
Driscoll, E. G. 1964. Accessory muscle scars, an aid to protobranch orientation. Journal of Paleontology, 38(1):61–66.Google Scholar
Ellison, R. L. 1965. Stratigraphy and paleontology of the Mahantango Formation in south-central Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological Survey Bulletin, 4th ser., G48:1–298.Google Scholar
Grabau, A. W. 1899. Geology and paleontology of Eighteen Mile Creek and the lake shore section of Erie County, New York, part 2, palaeontology. Buffalo [New York] Society of Natural Science Bulletin, 6(2):97–390.Google Scholar
Grabau, A. W. and Shimer, H. W. 1909-1910. North American Index Fossils; Invertebrates. A. G. Seiler and Co., New York, Vol. 1, 853 p.; Vol. 2,909 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1843. Geology of New York. Part IV. Survey of the Fourth Geological District. Natural History of New York, 683 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1883. Lamellibranchiata, plates and explanations. Natural History of New York, Paleontology, 5(1):1–20.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1885. Lamellibranchiata II, descriptions and figures of the Dimyaria of the upper Helderberg, Hamilton, Portage and Chemung groups. Natural History of New York, Paleontology, 5(1):269–562.Google Scholar
Hall, J. and Whitfield, R. P. 1869-1870. Preliminary Notice of the Lamellibranchiate Shells of the Upper Helderberg, Hamilton, and Chemung Groups, with Others from the Waverly Sandstones, part 2. New York State Museum, Albany, p. 1–80 (1869), p. 81–96 (1870).Google Scholar
Hall, J. and Whitfield, R. P. 1872. Descriptions of new fossils from the vicinity of Louisville, Ky., and the Falls of the Ohio. New York State Museum Annual Report, 24:181–200a.Google Scholar
Kindle, E. M. 1896. The relation of the fauna of the Ithaca Group to the fauna of the Portage and Chemung. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 6:1–56.Google Scholar
Kindle, E. M. 1901. The Devonian fossils and stratigraphy of Indiana. Indiana Department of Geological and Natural Resources Annual Report, 25:529–775.Google Scholar
Kindle, E. M. 1912. The Onondaga fauna of the Allegheny region. United States Geological Survey Bulletin, 508:1–144.Google Scholar
McAlester, A. L. 1962. Upper Devonian pelecypods of the New York Chemung stage. Pea-body Museum of Natural History Bulletin, 16:1–88.Google Scholar
McAlester, A. L. 1963. Pelecypods as stratigraphic guides in the Appalachian Upper Devonian. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 74(10):1209–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAlester, A. L. 1965. Bivalves, p. 261–267. In Hadley, J. B. (ed.), Geology and Paleontology of the Antarctic. American Geophysical Union Antarctic Research Series, 6.Google Scholar
McAlester, A. L. 1968. Type species of Paleozoic nuculoid genera. Geological Society of America Memoir, 105:1–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1877. The American Paleozoic Fossils; a Catalogue of the Genera and Species, [etc.]. Published by the author, Cincinnati, 334 p. (2nd ed., 1883).Google Scholar
Nettleroth, H. 1889. Kentucky fossil shells, a monograph of the fossil shells of the Silurian and Devonian rocks of Kentucky. Kentucky Geological Survey, 245 p.Google Scholar
Palmer, K. and Brann, D. 1966. Illustrations of fossils of the Ithaca area. Paleontological Research Institution [Ithaca, New York], 26 p.Google Scholar
Prosser, C. S. and Kindle, E. M. 1913. Pelecypoda, p. 214–279. In Systematic Paleontology of the Middle Devonian Deposits of Maryland. Maryland Geological Survey, Middle and Upper Devonian.Google Scholar
Savage, T. E. 1931. Devonian fauna of Kentucky, p. 217–247. In Jillson, W. R. (ed.), The Paleontology of Kentucky. Kentucky Geological Survey Series 6, 36 p.Google Scholar
Shimer, H. W. and Shrock, R. R. 1944. Index Fossils of North America. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, 837 p.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. B. 1890. Descriptions of new species of fossils from the Clinton, Lower Helderberg, Chemung, and Waverly Groups, found in the collections of the Geological Survey of Pennsylvania. American Philosophical Transactions, 16:435–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spriestersbach, J. 1925. Die Oberkoblenzschichten des Bergischen Landes und Sauerlandes. Jahrbuch der preussischen geologischen Landesanstalt für 1924, 45:367–450.Google Scholar
Stauffer, C. R. 1909. The Middle Devonian of Ohio. Geological Survey of Ohio, 4th ser., Bulletin, 10:1–204.Google Scholar
Stumm, E. C. 1942. Fauna and stratigraphic relations of the Prout Limestone and Plum Brook Shale of northern Ohio. Journal of Paleontology, 16(5):549–563.Google Scholar
Vokes, H. E. 1949. The hinge and marginal pectenations of Nuculoidea opima (Hall), type of Nuculoidea Williams and Breger. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 39(11):361–363.Google Scholar
Whitfield, R. P. and Hovey, E. O. 1898-1901. Catalogue of the types and figured specimens in the paleontological collections of the geological department, American Museum of Natural History. American Museum of Natural History Bulletin, 11:1–500.Google Scholar
Willard, B. 1939. The Devonian of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th ser., Bulletin, G 19:1–481.Google Scholar
Williams, H. S. 1902. Fossil faunas and their use in correlating geological formations. American Journal of Science, 4th ser., 13(78):417–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, H. S. and Breger, C. L. 1916. The fauna of the Chapman Sandstone of Maine, including descriptions of some related species from the Moose River Sandstone. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper, 89:1–347.Google Scholar
Wilson, S. 1975. Pelecypods of the Silica, p. 124–150. In Kesling, R. V. and Chilman, R. B., Strata and Megafossils of the Middle Devonian Silica Formation. University of Michigan (Ann Arbor), Museum of Paleontology, Papers on Paleontology, 8.Google Scholar