EES 229

Invertebrate Paleontology

Spring 2004

return to syllabus

 

Lab 7: Brachiopoda

  • Use text book Chapter 10

Brachiopods on the web:


Goals of this lab: Learn to distinguish brachiopod features used in taxonomy; become familiar with common Brachiopod groups and when they lived.


There are 4 assemblages of Brachiopods (1-4). Assume for each that the fossils lived at the same time and at the same place.

  • For each assemblage: shortly describe the different types of Brachiopods; include information on length/width ratio, concavity/convexity; shape of hingeline; presence of ribs, spines; punctate or not; visibility of pedicle foramen; presence/absence sulcus. Try to infer the mode of life of each group: attached? living in/on mud? (text book p. 236-238 first edition, p. 242-243 second edition).
  • Identify the Brachiopoda as to Order level if they are Articulata (textbook p. 232-236 first edition, p. 236-241 second edition: Orthida, Strophomenida, Pentamerida, Spiriferida, Rhynchonellida, Terebratulida). If they are Inarticulata, try to determine whether they are Lingulata, Inarticulata, or of 'uncertain position' (Figure 13.9A, p. 233 first edition, p. 237 second edition textbook).
  • Assume that the Brachiopods that you see represent the complete assemblage around at that time. Use your text book to figure out the most probable geological time period for each assemblage.

 

TABLE : Some characteristic morphologic features of articulate brachiopods

Note: H=hinge, L=length, PV = pedicle valve

Order/  Suborder

Convexity

Pedicle Opening

Hinge

H:L

Other

Orthida

Unequally biconvex

triangular

strophic

<1

Diverging costae

Strophomenida/ Strophomenidina

Plano-concavo-convex

absent

strophic

1

Thin-shelled

Strophomenida/Chonetidina

Plano-concavo-convex

absent

strophic

1

Spines on hinge

Strophomenida/ Productidina

Plano-concavo-convex

absent

Strophic

1

Spines on PV

Pentamerida

biconvex

absent

astrophic

--

Medial septum

Rhynchonellida

biconvex

absent

astrophic

--

Strongly plicate

Spirifirida/ Atrypidina

biconvex

small

astrophic

--

Often costat

Spirifirida/ Spiriferidina

biconvex

triangular

strophic

1

Wing-shaped

Spirifirida/ Athyridina

biconvex

Small, circular

astrophic

--

Often smooth

Terebratulida

biconvex

circular

astrophic

--

Smooth



Assemblage 1:

'Inarticulate' groups

Articulate, Orthida

Articulate, Pentamerida

Lingula obtusa: Lingulida, Lingulata

Palmorthis elegantula

Sieberella roemeri

Praebolus bretonensis: uncertain position (Obolellida)

Hebertella occidentalis

Lingulepsis paradoxides: Lingulida, Lingulata

Hesperorthis tricenaria

Lingulella starri: Lingulida, Lingulata

Rhipidomella sp.

Hesperorthis sp.

Dinorthis subquadrata

In this assemblage there are 4 inarticulate groups, 6 Orthida, and one Pentamerid. Note straight hingeline, fine ribbing of the Orthida, usually rather flat, biconvex, no sulcus. The absence of articulate brachiopods other than Orthida (dominant) and Pentamerida and the abundant occurrence of inarticulate groups places this assemblage in the Cambrium (p. 238/243 text book, lingulid-orthid assemblage). Ecology: this must have been a mixed environment, with a probably muddy substrate because of the common lingulids, but rocky outcrops where the orthids could become attached.


Assemblage 2:

Terebratulida

Rhynchonellida

Terebratula sp.

Rhynchonella vanuxemi

Terebratula insignis

Rhynchonella platybola

Terebratula globosa

Columna teres

This assemblage consists of various, species that mainly belong to the genera Terebratula and Rhynchonella (T and R). They can be grouped into two types: one with ribs, rather triangular in outline (R), and one smooth, with an oval outline (R). Both have curved, not well defined hingelines. Note the large pedicle foramen in theTerebratulids, and the rather sharp top ('beak') and coarse ribs in theRhynhconellids. The Terebratulids lived attached by large pedicle, as did the Rhynchonellids by their thinner ones. The latter probably had (for a brachiopod) rather high rates of flow of water (p. 237/242). The absence of other brachiopoda suggests that this assemblage post-dated the Permian extinction and probably even the Triassic (the age is, in fact, Early Cretaceous). Both groups live attached by their pedicle, so we are probably looking at an assemblage formed on a rocky substrate. Note the absence of bivalves: this was probably a place unfavorable for bivalves, maybe because of an absence of mud for burrowing, or presence of strong currents.


Assemblage 3:

Strophomenida

Spiriferida

Rhynchonellida

Terebratulida

Dictyoclostus inflatus (productid)

Phriadothyris perplexa

Rhynchonella wortheri

Terebratula bovidens

Chonetes sp.

Neospirifer triplicatus

Echinoconchus punctatus (productid)

Strophomena sp.

Strophonelloides reversus

Productus sp. (productid)

Productus costatus (productid)

Juresania nebraskensis (productid)

This assemblage is dominated by diverse Strophomenids, including some typical Strophomena-like forms (very flat, D-shaped), and the highly concavo-convex group of the Productinida. Note the straight hingeline, usually no foramen. Note the dominance of the productid-type strophomenids, and the presence of some spirifers (biconvex; straight hinge line; rather shallow sulcus), one Rhynchonellid (biconvex, note coarse ribs, curved hingeline), and one small Terebratulid (high, narrow shell, strongly curved hinge line). In productid forms: note rather rugged shells of some forms (J. nebraskensis); probably had spines during life. Also use the openings in E. punctatus (really pseudo-punctate, actually; see p. 231/236; rods have fallen out).

The dominance of productid strophomenids suggest that this fauna lived in the Carboniferous; all other groups could also have lived at that time (Figure 13 .9A).

As to ecology: forms without pedicle dominate heavily, suggesting a fairly shallow marine, muddy area, where the flat strophomenid could lie on/slide over the mud (Chonetes is thought to have slided); the productids were problably living partially in the mud. The Rhynchonellid and Terebratulid may have lived attached to other brachiopods (lacking a rocky substrate). Alternatively, there may have been places with thin mud cover over a rocky substrate where the Spiriferida, Rhynchonellid and Terebratulid lived.


Asssemblage 4.

Spirifirida

Orthida

Pentamerida

Rhynchonellida

Strophomenida

Acrospirifer murchisoni

Orthostrophia strophemenoides

Pentamerus sp.

Rhynchotrema capax

Strophomena rugosa

Atrypa rockfordiensis

Atrypa sp.

Composita sp.

Athyris nettelrothi

Eospirifer macropleura

Spirifer mucronatus

Spirifer acuminatus

Spirifer sp.

This assemblage is heavily dominated by various types of Spiriferida, but has components of 4 other groups. Note the typical Spirifer-related forms with the small height/width ratio and the long, straight hingeline, deep sulcus. Also note the more oval, biconvex or concavo-conxex groups of Atrypa and Athyris (p. 234, 235), with sulcus, short hinge line, failry smooth shells. Note typical strongly biconvex shell with high ratio of height to width in Pentamerus, the flat concavo-convex Strophomenid. Strong dominance of Spiriferida, and high diversity of Brachiopod groups suggests that this assemblage was Devonian (Fig. 13.9A).

Ecology is rather difficult because of the diversity of brachiopods. The water was probably fairly shallow (shelf; few hundreds of meters). The substrate was probably not covered with deep mud, since it must have given enough opportunity for attachment. Many Spirifer-shaped brachiopods are thought to have been stabilized in sitting on soft sediment by the long 'wings' to the side. There are few attached-living forms (which may have become attached to other brachiopods), so there were probably not many outcrops of rock in this shallow marine area.