Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-w9nzq Total loading time: 0.592 Render date: 2021-08-05T21:38:39.503Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Cladid crinoids from the Late Kinderhookian Meadville Shale, Cuyahoga Formation of Ohio

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Thomas W. Kammer
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geography, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506-6300, USA,
Edgar W. Roeser
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0013, USA
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

A total of 17 species of cladid crinoids are documented from the late Kinderhookian Meadville Shale Member of the Cuyahoga Formation of northeastern Ohio, the most diverse assemblage of Kinderhookian-age cladids known in North America. One new genus, six new species, and seven new combinations are reported. New taxa include Cuyahogacrinus lodiensis new genus and species, and the new species Cyathocrinites simplex, Atelestocrinus meszarosi, Goniocrinus sceletus, Aphelecrinus gracilis, and Lebetocrinus ohioensis. New combinations include Logocrinus warreni (Laudon et al., 1952), Histocrinus aegina (Hall, 1863), Paracosmetocrinus richfieldensis (Worthen, 1882), P. corycia (Hall, 1863), Acylocrinus lyriope (Hall, 1863), Linocrinus merope (Hall, 1863), and L. paternus (Hall, 1863). Remaining taxa include Cyathocrinites lamellosus (White, 1863) and Ascetocrinus whitei (Hall, 1861), both of which also occur in the Osagean Burlington Limestone, and the endemic species Cosmetocrinus crineus (Hall, 1863) and Pachylocrinus subtortuosus (Hall, 1863).

Collectively, the cosmopolitan genera and species of cladids show a greater overall affinity with Osagean cladid faunas than with other Kinderhookian cladid faunas. However, this is true for other Kinderhookian cladid faunas as well that individually have more taxa in common with Osagean faunas than other Kinderhookian faunas. This suggests a greater degree of endemism and local speciation during the Kinderhookian as a prelude to the rapid radiation of cladids, and other crinoids, during the Osagean.

Type
Research Article
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

Ausich, W. I. 1980. A model for niche differentiation in Lower Mississippian crinoid communities. Journal of Paleontology, 54:273288.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. 1996. Phylum Echinodermata, p. 242261. InFeldmann, R. M. and Hackathorn, M.(eds.), Ohio Fossils. Geological Survey of Ohio Bulletin 70.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Kammer, T. W. 2008. Generic concepts in the Amphoracrinidae Bather, 1899 (Class Crinoidea) and evaluation of generic assignments of North American species. Journal of Paleontology, 82:11391149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Lane, N. G. 1982. Crinoids from the Edwardsville Formation (Lower Mississippian) of Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 56:13431361.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Roeser, E. W. 2012. Camerate and disparid crinoids from the late Kinderhookian Meadville Shale, Cuyahoga Formation of Ohio. Journal of Paleontology, 86:488507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Sevastopulo, G. D. 2001. The Lower Carboniferous (Tournaisian) crinoids from Hook Head, County Wexford, Ireland. The Palaeontological Society Monograph, 216:1136.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Brett, C. E., and Hess, H. 1999. Taphonomy, p. 5054. InHess, H., Ausich, W. I., Brett, C. E., and Simms, M. J.(eds.), Fossil Crinoids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Kammer, T. W., and Lane, N. G. 1979. Fossil communities of the Borden (Mississippian) delta in Indiana and northern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 53:11821196.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. and Moodey, M. W. 1943. Bibliographic and faunal index of Paleozoic pelmatozoan echinoderms. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 45, 734p.Google Scholar
Bassler, R. S. 1938. Pelmatozoa Palaeozoica. InQuenstedt, W.(ed.), Fossilium catalogus, I: Animalia. Part 83: W. Junk, s'Gravenhage. 194p.Google Scholar
Bather, F. A. 1890. British fossil crinoids. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 6, 5:310334.Google Scholar
Bather, F. A. 1899. A phylogenetic classification of the Pelmatozoa. British Association for the Advancement of Science (1898), 916923.Google Scholar
Brezinski, D. K. 2009. Biostratigraphic distribution of Appalachian Carboniferous trilobites, p. 7884. InGreb, S. F. and Chesnut, D. R. Jr.(eds.), Carboniferous of the Appalachian and Black Warrior basins. Kentucky Geological Survey Special Publication 10, Series XII.Google Scholar
Carter, J. L. 1987. Lower Carboniferous brachiopods from the Banff Formation of western Alberta. Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 378, 183p.Google Scholar
Collinson, C., Rexroad, C. B., and Thompson, T. L. 1971. Conodont zonation of the North American Mississippian, p. 353394. InSweet, W. C. and Bergstrom, S. M.(eds.), Symposium on Conodont Biostratigraphy. Geological Society of America Memoir 127.Google Scholar
Coogan, A. H., Heimlich, R. A., Malcuit, R. J., Bork, K. B., and Lewis, T. L. 1981. Early Mississippian deltaic sedimentation in central and northeastern Ohio, p. 113152. InRoberts, T. G.(ed.), GSA Cincinnati '81: Field Trip Guidebooks, Vol. 1. Stratigraphy, sedimentology: American Geological Institute.Google Scholar
Gahn, F. J. and Baumiller, T. K. 2004. A bootstrap analysis for comparative taphonomy applied to Early Mississippian (Kinderhookian) crinoids from the Wassonville cycle of Iowa. Palaios, 19:1738.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gahn, F. J. and Kammer, T. W. 2002. The cladid crinoid Barycrinus from the Burlington Limestone (Early Osagean) and the phylogenetics of Mississippian botryocrinids. Journal of Paleontology, 76:123133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldring, W. 1923. The Devonian crinoids of the state of New York. New York State Museum Memoir 16, 670p.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. Jr., 1986. Late Kinderhookian (Early Mississippian) ammonoids of the western United States. Journal of Paleontology, Memoir 19, supplement to vol. 60, no. 3, 36p.Google Scholar
Gradstein, F., Ogg, J., and Smith, A. 2004. A Geologic Time Scale. Cambridge University Press, 589p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. and Whitfield, R. P. 1875. Crinoidea of the Waverly Group. Ohio Geological Survey Report, Vol. 2. Geology and Palaeontology, pt. 2, Palaeontology, p. 162179.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1861. Descriptions of new species of Crinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Journal of the Boston Society of Natural History, 3:261328.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1863. Preliminary notice, of some species of Crinoidea from the Waverly Sandstone series of Summit Co., Ohio, supposed to be of the age of the Chemung Group of New York. Preprint of Seventeenth Annual Report of the Regents of the University of the State of New-York, on the Condition of the State Cabinet of Natural History, and the Historical and Antiquarian Collection annexed thereto, State of New York in Senate Document 189. Comstock and Cassiday Printers, Albany, p. 5060.Google Scholar
Hyde, J. E. 1953. Mississippian formations of central and southern Ohio. Ohio Geological Survey Bulletin 51, 355p.Google Scholar
Jaekel, O. 1918. Phylogenie und System der Pelmatozoen. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 3(1):1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W. 2008. Paedomorphosis as an adaptive response in pinnulate cladid crinoids from the Burlington Limestone (Osagean, Mississippian) of the Mississippi Valley, p. 176195. InAusich, W. I. and Webster, G. D.(eds.), Echinoderm Paleobiology. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 1987. Aerosol suspension feeding and current velocities: distributional controls for late Osagean crinoids. Paleobiology, 13:379395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 1992. Advanced cladid crinoids from the Middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: primitive-grade calyces. Journal of Paleontology, 66:461480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 1993. Advanced cladid crinoids from the Middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: intermediate-grade calyces. Journal of Paleontology, 67:614639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 1996. Primitive cladid crinoids from upper Osagean-lower Meramecian (Mississippian) rocks of east-central United States. Journal of Paleontology, 70:835866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Ausich, W. I. 2006. The “Age of Crinoids”: a Mississippian biodiversity spike coincident with widespread carbonate ramps. Palaios, 21:238248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Gahn, F. J. 2003. Primitive cladid crinoids from the early Osagean Burlington Limestone and the phylogenetics of Mississippian species of Cyathocrinites. Journal of Paleontology, 77:121138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W. and Matchen, D. L. 2008. Evidence for eustasy at the Kinderhookian-Osagean (Mississippian) boundary in the United States: response to late Tournaisian glaciation? p. 261274. InFielding, C. R., Frank, T. D., and Isbell, J. L.(eds.), Resolving the Late Paleozoic Ice Age in Time and Space. Geological Society of America Special Paper 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., Baumiller, T. K., and Ausich, W. I. 1998. Evolutionary significance of differential species longevity in Osagean–Meramecian (Mississippian) crinoid clades. Paleobiology, 24:155176.Google Scholar
Kesling, R. V. and Levasseur, D. 1971. Strataster ohioensis, a new Early Mississippian brittle-star, and the paleoecology of its community. Contributions from the Museum of Paleontology, the University of Michigan, 23(20):305341.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1938. Five new genera of Carboniferous Crinoidea Inadunata. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 28:158172.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1940. Seven new genera of Carboniferous Crinoidea Inadunata. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 30:321334.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1941. Four new genera of Carboniferous Crinoidea Inadunata. Journal of Paleontology, 16:382386.Google Scholar
Kirk, E. 1942. Rhopocrinus, a new fossil inadunate crinoid genus. Proceedings of the U.S. National Museum, 92(3144) 151155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, E. 1944. Aphelecrinus, a new inadunate crinoid genus from the Upper Mississippian. American Journal of Science, 242:190203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, E. 1947. Three new genera of inadunate crinoids from the Lower Mississippian. American Journal of Science, 245:287303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kullman, J., Korn, D., and Weyer, D. 1990. Ammonoid zonation of the Lower Carboniferous Subsystem. Courier Forschung-Institute Seckenberg, 130:127131.Google Scholar
Lahola, I. 1974. Mississippian conodonts from the Strongsville Member of the Cuyahoga Formation in northeastern Ohio. Master's thesis, Kent State University, Ohio, 74p.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. and Howell, R. M. 1986. Unusual crinoids from the Ramp Creek Formation (Mississippian), Indian Creek, Montgomery County, Indiana. Journal of Paleontology, 60:898903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, N. G., Waters, J. A., and Maples, C. G. 1997. Echinoderm faunas of the Hongguleleng Formation, Late Devonian (Famennian), Xinjiang-Uygur Autonomous Region, People's Republic of China. Journal of Paleontology Memoir, 47, 43p.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1933. The stratigraphy and paleontology of the Gilmore City Formation of Iowa. University of Iowa Studies, 15(2):74.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. and Beane, B. H. 1937. The crinoid fauna of the Hampton Formation at LeGrand, Iowa. University of Iowa Studies, 17:227272.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. and Severson, J. L. 1953. New crinoid fauna, Mississippian, Lodgepole Formation, Montana. Journal of Paleontology, 27:505536.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R., Parks, J. M., and Spreng, A. C. 1952. Mississippian crinoid fauna from the Banff Formation Sunwapta Pass, Alberta. Journal of Paleontology, 26:544575.Google Scholar
Lee, K., Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 2005. Crinoids from the Nada Member of the Borden Formation (Lower Mississippian) in eastern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 79:337355.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matchen, D. L. and Kammer, T. W. 2006. Incised valley fill interpretation for Mississippian Black Hand Sandstone, Appalachian basin, USA: implications for glacial eustasy at Kinderhookian-Osagean (Tn2-Tn3) boundary. Sedimentary Geology, 191:89113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, G. C. 1983. Review of the Devonian cladid inadunate crinoids: Suborder Dendrocrinina. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 521p.Google Scholar
McIntosh, G. C. 2001. Devonian cladid crinoids: families Glossocrinidae Goldring, 1923, and Rutkowskicrinidae new family. Journal of Paleontology, 75:783807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1860. Descriptions of new species of crinoidea and echinoidea from the Carboniferous rocks of Illinois, and other western states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 12:379397.Google Scholar
Meek, F. B. and Worthen, A. H. 1869. Descriptions of new Carboniferous fossils from the western states. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 21:137172.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1890. Description of some new genera and species of Echinodermata from the Coal Measures and Subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana, Missouri, and Iowa. Journal Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 13:125.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1895. New and interesting species of Palaeozoic fossils. Illinois State Museum Bulletin, 7, 89p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. and Gurley, W. F. E. 1896. New species of crinoids from Illinois and other states. Illinois State Museum Bulletin, 9, 66p.Google Scholar
Miller, J. S. 1821. A Natural History of the Crinoidea or Lily-Shaped Animals, with Observations on the Genera Asteria, Euryale, Comatula and Marsupites. Bryan, Bristol, 150p.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1880. Description of two new species from the Niagara group and five from the Keokuk group. Journal of the Cincinnati Society of Natural History, 2(4):254259.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. 1889. North American Geology and Paleontology, Western Methodist Book Concern; Cincinnati, Ohio, 664p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. and Laudon, L. R. 1943. Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 46, 151p.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., and Laudon, L. R. 1944. Class Crinoidea, (eds.), p. 137209. InShimer, H. W. and Shrock, R. R., Index fossils of North America. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., Lane, N. G., and Strimple, H. L. 1978. Order Cladida, p. T578T759. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, C.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2(2). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder and Lawrence.Google Scholar
Owen, D. D. and Shumard, B. F. 1850. Descriptions of fifteen new species of Crinoidea from the Subcarboniferous limestone of Iowa. Journal of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, Series 2, 2(1) 5770.Google Scholar
Pashin, J. C. and Ettensohn, F. R. 1995. Reevaluation of the Bedford-Berea Sequence in Ohio and Adjacent States: Forced Regression in a Foreland Basin. Geological Society of America Special Paper 298, 68p.Google Scholar
Peck, R. E. and Keyte, I. A. 1938. The Crinoidea of the Chouteau Limestone, p. 70108. InBranson, E. B.(ed.), Stratigraphy and paleontology of the Lower Mississippian of Missouri, Pt. 2, Missouri University Studies, 13(4).Google Scholar
Rodriguez, J. 1961. Chapter 3, Paleontology, p. 4488. InRoot, S. I.Rodriguez, J., and Forsyth, J. L., (eds), Geology of Knox County, Ohio Division of Geological Survey, Bulletin 59.Google Scholar
Roeser, E. W. 1986. A Lower Mississippian (Kinderhookian-Osagean) crinoid fauna from the Cuyahoga Formation of northeastern Ohio (M.S. thesis). Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati, 322p.Google Scholar
Sallan, L. C., Kammer, T. W., Ausich, W. I., and Cook, L. A. 2011. Persistent-predator prey dynamics revealed by mass extinction. PNAS, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108:83358338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Springer, F. 1911. Some new American fossil crinoids. Harvard College, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Memoir 25:117161.Google Scholar
Springer, F. 1926. Unusual forms of fossil crinoids. Proceedings of the U.S. National Museum, 67(9):137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strimple, H. L. 1967. Aphelecrinidae, a new family of inadunate crinoids. Okalahoma Geology Notes, 28:3336.Google Scholar
Szmuc, E. J. 1957. Stratigraphy and paleontology of the Cuyahoga Formation of northern Ohio. Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, 623p.Google Scholar
Szmuc, E. J. 1970. Mississippian, p. 2367. InBanks, P. O., and Feldmann, R. H.(eds), Guide to the geology of northeastern Ohio. Northern Ohio Geological Society.Google Scholar
Thompson, T. L., Ford, N. S., and Sweet, W. C. 1971. Conodonts from the Rushville Formation (Mississippian) of Ohio. Journal of Paleontology, 45:704712.Google Scholar
Ubaghs, G. 1978. Skeletal morphology of fossil crinoids, p. T58T216. InMoore, R. C. and Teichert, K.(eds.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Echinodermata, Pt. T(2). Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Boulder and Lawrence.Google Scholar
van Sant, J. F. and Lane, N. G. 1964. Crawfordsville crinoid studies. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Article 7, 136p.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1880. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1879, p. 226378.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1885. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea, Pt. 3, Sec. 1. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for, 1885:223364 (1–139).Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Springer, F. 1886. Revision of the Palaeocrinoidae, Pt. 3, Sec. 2, Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1885, 64226 (140–302).Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 2003. Bibliography and Index of Paleozoic Crinoids, Coronates, and Hemistreptocrinids 1758–1999. Geological Society of America, Special Paper 363.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1862. Description of new species of fossils from the Devonian and Carboniferous rocks of the Mississippi Valley. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 9:833.Google Scholar
White, C. A. 1863. Observations on the summit structure of Pentremites, the structure and arrangement of certain parts of crinoids, and descriptions of new species from the Carboniferous rocks of Burlington, Iowa. Boston Society of Natural History Journal, 7:481506.Google Scholar
Worthen, A. H. 1875. Descriptions of invertebrates. Illinois Geological Survey, 6:489532.Google Scholar
Worthen, A. H. 1882. Descriptions of fifty-four new species of crinoids from the lower Carboniferous limestones and Coal Measures of Illinois and Iowa. Illinois State Museum of Natural History, Bulletin, 1:338.Google Scholar
Worthen, A. H. 1883. Description of fossil invertebrates. Illinois Geological Survey, 7:269322.Google Scholar
4
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.

Cladid crinoids from the Late Kinderhookian Meadville Shale, Cuyahoga Formation of Ohio
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.

Cladid crinoids from the Late Kinderhookian Meadville Shale, Cuyahoga Formation of Ohio
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.

Cladid crinoids from the Late Kinderhookian Meadville Shale, Cuyahoga Formation of Ohio
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *