Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T15:07:12.363Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new Ediacaran fossil with a novel sediment displacive life habit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Mary L. Droser ,
James G. Gehling ,
Mary E. Dzaugis ,
Martin J. Kennedy ,
Dennis Rice  and
Michael F. Allen
Mary L. Droser
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA,
James G. Gehling
Affiliation:
South Australia Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia 5000 School of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005
Mary E. Dzaugis
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett Bay Campus, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA
Martin J. Kennedy
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Environmental Science, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005
Dennis Rice
Affiliation:
South Australia Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia 5000
Michael F. Allen
Affiliation:
Center for Conservation Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nilpenia rossi new genus new species, described here from the Ediacara Member (Rawnsley Quartzite, South Australia), provides evidence of a Precambrian macroscopic sessile sediment-dweller. Nilpenia, ranging up to 30 cm in diameter, consists of two zones, a complex central area surrounded by radiating, dichotomously branching structures that decrease in diameter from the center to the outer edges. Other elements of the Ediacara Biota are interpreted to have been mat-encrusters but Nilpenia uniquely grew within the upper millimeters of the actual sediment displacing sediment with growth. This sediment surface was rippled and cohesive and may well have included an endobenthic mat. The branching network on the upper surface of the organisms would have been in contact with the water. The phylogenetic relationships of the Ediacara biota are not well constrained and Nilpenia is no exception. However, the morphology and ecology of Nilpenia represent a novel growth strategy present in the Ediacaran and not common today.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 88 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 145 - 151
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

Antcliff, J. B., Gooday, A. J., and Brasier, M. D. 2011. Testing the protozoan hypothesis for Ediacaran fossils: a developmental analysis of Palaeopascichnus . Palaeontology, 54:1, 157–1,175.Google Scholar
Droser, M. L., Gehling, J. G., and Jensen, S. R. 2006. Assemblage palaeoecology of the Ediacara biota: the unabridged edition? Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 232:131–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehling, J. G. 1991. The case for Ediacaran fossil roots to the metazoan tree. Geological Society of India Memoir, 20:181–224.Google Scholar
Gehling, J. G. 1999. Microbial mats in terminal Proterozoic siliciclastics: Ediacaran death masks. Palaios, 14:40–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehling, J. G. 2000. Environmental interpretation and a sequence stratigraphic framework for the terminal Proterozoic Ediacara Member within the Rawnsley Quartzite, south Australia. Precambrian Research, 100:65–95.Google Scholar
Gehling, J. G., Jago, J. B., Paterson, J. R., Brock, G. A., and Droser, M. 2012. Ediacaran–Cambrian of South Australia. Field Trip, 11–18 Aug., 34th International Geological Congress, 5–10 Aug, 2012. Brisbane, p. 36.Google Scholar
Gehling, J. G., Droser, M. L., Jensen, S., and Runnegar, B. N. 2005. Ediacaran organisms: relating form to function, p. 43–67. In Briggs, D. E. G. (ed.), Evolving Form and Function: Fossils and Development, Proceedings of a Symposium Honoring Adolf Seilacher for his contributions to palaeontology in celebration of his 80th Birthday. Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A. Google Scholar
Gehling, J. G. and Droser, M. L. 2012. Ediacaran stratigraphy and the biota of the Adelaide Geosyncline, South Australia. Episodes 35:236–246.Google Scholar
Gehling, J. G. and Droser, M. L. 2013. How well do fossil assemblages of the Ediacara Biota time? Geology, 41:447–450.Google Scholar
Gingras, M., Hagadorn, J. W., Seilacher, A., Lalonde, S. V., Pecoits, E., Petrash, D., and Konhauser, K. O. 2011. Possible evolution of mobile animals in association with microbial mats. Nature Geoscience, 4:372–375.Google Scholar
Glaessner, M. F. 1984. The dawn of animal life: a biohistorical study. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, xi+244 p.Google Scholar
Jenkins, R. J. F. 1995. The problems and potential of using animal fossils and trace fossils in Terminal Proterozoic biostratigraphy. Precambrian Research, 73:51–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, S., Gehling, J. G., and Droser, M. L. 1998. Ediacara-type fossils in Cambrian sediments. Nature, 393:567–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMenamin, M. A. 1998. The garden of Ediacara: discovering the first complex life. Columbia University Press, New York, xii+295 p.Google Scholar
Narbonne, G. M. 2005. The Ediacara biota: Neoproterozoic origin of animals and their ecosystems. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 33:421–442.Google Scholar
Peterson, K. J., Waggoner, B., and Hagadorn, J. W. 2003. A fungal analog for Newfoundland Ediacaran fossils? Integrative and Comparative Biology, 43:27–136.Google Scholar
Retallack, G. J. 1994. Were the Ediacaran Fossils Lichens. Paleobiology, 20:523–544.Google Scholar
Seilacher, A. 1992. Vendobionta and Psammocorallia—lost constructions of Precambrian evolution. Journal of the Geological Society London, 149:607–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seilacher, A., Buatois, L. A., and Mangano, M. G. 2005. Trace fossils in the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition: behavourial diversification, ecological turnover and environmental shift. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 227:323–356.Google Scholar
Seilacher, A., Grazhdankin, D., and Legouta, A. 2003. Ediacaran biota: the dawn of animal life in the shadows of giant protests. Paleontological Research, 7:43–54.Google Scholar
Seilacher, A. 2007. Trace Fossil Analysis. Springer, 226 p.Google Scholar
Sperling, E. A. and Vinther, J. 2010. A placozoan affinity for Dickinsonia and the evolution of late Proterozoic metazoan feeding modes. Evolution and Development, 12:201–209.Google Scholar
Steiner, M. and Reitner, J. 2001. Evidence of organic structures in Ediacara-type fossils and associated microbial mats. Geology, 29:1,119–1,122.Google Scholar
Tacker, R. C., Martin, A. J., Weaver, P. G., and Lawver, D. R. 2010. Trace fossils versus body fossils: Oldhamia recta revisited. Precambrian Research, 178:43–50.Google Scholar
Waggoner, B. M. 1995. Ediacaran Lichens—a critique. Paleobiology, 21:393–397.Google Scholar
Werding, B. and Sanchez, H., 1991. Life habits and functional morphology of the sediment infaunal sponges Oceanapia oleracea and Oceanapia peltata (Porifera, Haplosclerida). Zoomorphology, 110:203–208.Google Scholar
Xiao, S. and Laflamme, M. 2009. On the eve of animal radiation: phylogeny, ecology and evolution of the Ediacara biota. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 24:31–40.Google Scholar
Zhuravlev, A. Y. 1993. Were Ediacaran Vendobionta multi-cellulars. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie Abhandlungen, 190:299–314.Google Scholar