Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T03:52:45.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Calculation and simulation of ammonoid hydrostatics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

W. Bruce Saunders  and
Earl A. Shapiro
W. Bruce Saunders
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania 19010
Earl A. Shapiro
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources, 19 Martin Luther King Drive SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30334
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The buoyancy, stability, and orientation of a shelled cephalopod in water are the predictable products of shell geometry, body chamber length, and such physical parameters as shell, tissue, and water densities. Given such physical characteristics as shell geometry, shell, tissue, and water densities, and shell thickness, the hydrostatic characteristics of planispiral shelled cephalopods, including orientation, centers of mass and buoyancy, stability, and neutrally buoyant body chamber length, can be calculated and simulated using microcomputer-based techniques. Individual variables such as geometry, body chamber length, and shell thickness are linked in a calculable manner to orientation, neutral buoyancy, and stability. Living Nautilus provides a means of testing the model and for making hydrostatic comparisons between ammonoids and nautiloids. The close agreement between calculated versus observed body chamber lengths in five species of Mississippian ammonoids shows that neutral buoyancy, and (with one exception) Nautilus-like orientations, were at least feasible for these species.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , Winter 1986 , pp. 64 - 79
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

Literature Cited

Bayer, U. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. 1984. Iterative evolution of Middle Jurassic ammonite faunas. Lethaia. 17:1–16.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1969. Technique for scale modelling of cephalopod shells. Palaeontology 12:48–55.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1976. Flow patterns and drag coefficients of cephalopod shells. Palaeontology. 19:539–563.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1980. Motor performance and jet propulsion in Nautilus: implications for cephalopod paleobiology and evolution. Bull. Am. Malacol. Un. 1980.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1981. Hydromechanical design of fossil cephalopods. Pp. 289–336. In: House, M. R. and Senior, J. R., eds. The Ammonoidea. Syst. Assoc. Spec. Vol. 18. Academic Press; London.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. and Westermann, G. E. G. 1976. Hydrodynamic properties of cephalopod shell ornament. Paleobiology. 2:316–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, D., Ward, P. D., and Westermann, G. E. G. 1980. Function of cameral water in Nautilus. Paleobiology. 6:168–172.Google Scholar
Crick, R. E. 1983. The practicality of vertical cephalopod shells as paleobathymetric markers. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 94:1109–1116.Google Scholar
Denton, E. J. and Gilpin-Brown, J. B. 1966. On the buoyancy of the pearly Nautilus. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 46:723–759.Google Scholar
Ebel, K. 1983. Berechnungen zur Schwebefahigkeit von Ammoniten. N. Jb. Geol. Palaeontol. Mont. 10:616–640.Google Scholar
Ebel, K. 1985. Gehausespirale und Septenform bei Ammoniten unter der Annahme vagil benthischer Lebenweise. Paläontol. Z. 59:109–123.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. Jr. 1965. Carboniferous cephalopods of Arkansas. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper. 460:1–322.Google Scholar
Heptonstall, W. B. 1970. Buoyancy control in ammonoids. Lethaia. 3:317–328.Google Scholar
Kummel, B. and Lloyd, R. M. 1955. Experiments on relative streamlining of coiled cephalopod shells. J. Paleontol. 29:159–170.Google Scholar
Moseley, H. 1838. On the geometrical forms of turbinated and discoid shells. Roy. Soc. London Phil. Trans. 1838:351–370.Google Scholar
Mutvei, H. 1983. Flexible nacre in the nautiloid Isorthoceras, with remarks on the evolution of cephalopod nacre. Lethaia. 16:233–240.Google Scholar
Mutvei, H. and Reyment, R. A. 1973. Buoyancy control and siphuncle function in ammonoids. Palaeontology. 16:623–636.Google Scholar
Packard, A., Bone, Q., and Hignette, M. 1980. Breathing and swimming movements in a captive Nautilus. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 60:313–328.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1967. Geometric analysis of shell coiling: coiling in ammonoids. J. Paleontol. 41:43–65.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. and Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1967. Equations for volume and center of gravity in ammonoid shells. J. Paleontol. 41:566–574.Google Scholar
Reyment, R. A. 1958. Some factors in the distribution of fossil cephalopods. Stockholm Contrib. Geol. 1:97–184.Google Scholar
Reyment, R. A. 1973. Factors in the distribution of fossil cephalopods. Part 3: Experiments with exact models of certain shell types. Bull. Geol. Inst. Univ. Uppsala N.S. 4:7–41.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B. 1973. Upper Mississippian ammonoids from Arkansas and Oklahoma. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 145:1–110.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B. 1975. The Upper Mississippian Eumorphoceras richardsoni-Cravenoceras friscoense ammonoid assemblage, North American midcontinent. C. Rend. VII Cong. Int. Strat. Geol. Carb. 4:201–207.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B. 1983. Natural rates of growth and longevity of Nautilus belauensis. Paleobiology. 9:280–288.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B. 1984. The role and status of Nautilus in its natural habitat: evidence from deep-water remote camera photosequences. Paleobiology. 10:469–486.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B. 1985. Studies of living Nautilus in Palau. Nat. Geogr. Soc. Res. Rep. 18:669–682.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B. and Swan, A. R. H. 1984. Morphology and morphologic diversity of mid-Carboniferous (Namurian) ammonoids in time and space. Paleobiology. 10:195–228.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., Shapiro, E. A., and Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. 1981. The potential significance of cameral fluid in the aperture orientation of coiled cephalopods. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. w. Program:546.Google Scholar
Saunders, W. B., Manger, W. L., and Gordon, M. Jr. 1977. Upper Mississippian and Lower and Middle Pennsylvanian ammonoid biostratigraphy of northern Arkansas. Pp. 117–137. In: Sutherland, P. K. and Manger, W. L., eds. Mississippian-Pennsylvanian Boundary in Northeastern Oklahoma and Northwestern Arkansas. Okla. Geol. Surv. Guidebook 18. Univ. Okla. Press; Norman.Google Scholar
Shapiro, E. A. and Saunders, W. B. 1984. The effects of shell geometry on stability in the ammonoid shell: an analysis of the mathematical paradigm. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. w. Program:126.Google Scholar
Stenzel, H. B. 1964. Living Nautilus. Pp.K59–K93. In: Teichert, C., Kummel, B., Sweet, W. C., Stenzel, H. B., Furnish, W. M., Glenister, B. F., Erben, H. K., Moore, R. C., and Nodine Zeller, D. E.Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Moore, R. C., ed. Part K. Mollusca 3. Geol. Soc. Am. and Univ. Kansas Press; Lawrence.Google Scholar
Trueman, A. E. 1941. The ammonite body-chamber, with special reference to the buoyancy and mode of life of the living ammonite. Q. J. Geol. Soc. London. 96:339–383.Google Scholar
Ward, P. D. 1980. Comparative shell shape distributions in Jurassic-Cretaceous ammonites and Jurassic-Tertiary nautilids. Paleobiology. 6:32–43.Google Scholar
Ward, P. D., Stone, R., Westermann, G. E. G., and Martin, A. 1977. Notes on animal weight, cameral fluid, swimming speed, and color polymorphism of the cephalopod Nautilus pompilius in the Fiji Islands. Paleobiology. 3:337–388.Google Scholar
Westermann, G. E. G. 1977. Form and function of orthoconic cephalopod shells with concave septa. Paleobiology. 3:300–321.Google Scholar
Willey, A. 1897. Letters from New Guinea on Nautilus and some other organisms. Q. J. Micro. Sci. N.S. 39:145–180.Google Scholar