Trilobitologist Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Attached are photos of Isotomocrinus tenuis (Billings) from the Bobcaygeon Formation. I was calling these Isotomocrinus typus Ulrich. Isotomocrinus typus is not reported in Bill's book and I was wondering if anybody knows what happened with this species. Bill reports 2 species of heterocrinitids from the Ontario Ord.: I tenuis and Cincinnaticrinus variabrachialis. I was wondering if anybody knows the status of I. typus - was it synonomized or changed genus? Also - does anybody know of other genera/species of heterocrinitids from Ontario? I have seen reference to Ohiocrinus bellevillensis (SPRINGER, 1911), but have no information on this. I know most of the species previously assigned to Heterocrinus have changed genus. Are there still any valid species of Heterocrinus from the Ontario Ordovician? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ordovician_Odyssey Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) By billings, do you meen the formation? as for your little problem, i beleive you have the right name... it may have been updated though... Edited January 8, 2011 by trilobite guy -Shamus The Ordovician enthusiast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trilobitologist Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share Posted January 8, 2011 No it does not refer to the formation. The name after the species name (as in Isotomocrinus tenuis (Billings)) is the name of the author who first described the species. All organisms have 2 names: A genus (as in Isotomocrinus) and a species (as in tenuis). Following the species name is the author (who first decribed the species) and the year of that publication (1857) So - in order to correctly write the full name of a species, you would write: Isotomocrinus tenuis (Billings, 1857) If the author's name is in brackets, it means the species has changed genus name from the original publication. The original name of I. tenuis is: Heterocrinus tenuis Billings, 1857. So you can write: Triarthrus rougensis or Triarthrus rougensis Parks or Triathrus rougensis Parks, 1928 This means that William Parks originally described a species called "rougensis" in 1928 and he assigned this species to the genus Triarthrus. The genus name is still Triarthrus, as his name is not it brackets. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geodigger Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Attached are photos of Isotomocrinus tenuis (Billings) from the Bobcaygeon Formation. I was calling these Isotomocrinus typus Ulrich. Isotomocrinus typus is not reported in Bill's book and I was wondering if anybody knows what happened with this species. Bill reports 2 species of heterocrinitids from the Ontario Ord.: I tenuis and Cincinnaticrinus variabrachialis. I was wondering if anybody knows the status of I. typus - was it synonomized or changed genus? Also - does anybody know of other genera/species of heterocrinitids from Ontario? I have seen reference to Ohiocrinus bellevillensis (SPRINGER, 1911), but have no information on this. I know most of the species previously assigned to Heterocrinus have changed genus. Are there still any valid species of Heterocrinus from the Ontario Ordovician? Hi Kevin, Here is an excerpt from the article: Whiterockian (Ordovician) crinoid fauna from the Table Head Group, western Newfoundland, Canada by Ausich et. al, 1998. Hope that helps answer your question. Cheers, Bill "Discussion Warn and Strimple (1977) placed the type species of Isotomocrinus, I. typus, in synonymy with I. tenuis, so three species are now recognized, I. tenuis (Billings), Isotomocrinus minutus Kolata, and I. apheles n.sp. Brower and Veinus (1974) recognized another different Isotomocrinus but left it in open nomenclature. Isotomocrinus apheles n.sp. differs from other named species in that it has a very steep sided aboral cup, anal X higher than wide, 5 primibrachials, 611 secundibrachials, and an arm branching above the primibrachitaxis with equal divisions (isotomy) that alternate as exotomous and endotomous. In contrast, I. tenuis has a steep to very steep sided aboral cup, anal X higher than wide, 45 primibrachials, 47 secundibrachials, and arm branching that approaches ideal isotomous branching; and I. minutus has a steep-sided aboral cup, anal X wider than high, 56 primibrachials, 911 secundibrachials, and isotomous arm branching. Isotomocrinus tenuis is reported from numerous Caradoc localities, including the Hull Limestone in Ontario, Decorah Shale and Platteville Formation in Illinois, and the Dunleith Formation in Minnesota. Isotomocrinus minutus is known from the Decorah Shale and Grand Detour Formation in Illinois and Minnesota." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trilobitologist Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share Posted January 8, 2011 Thanks Bill - So I typus is a junior syn. of I tenuis. Good to know. Guess I'll call all Isotomos I. tenuis from now on..... Have you heard of Ohiocrinus bellevillensis (SPRINGER, 1911? Also have you seen any Eustenocrinus from Ontario? K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trilobitologist Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share Posted January 8, 2011 Geek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crinus Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 The Warn and Strimple paper also stated that the original Springer Ohiocrinus specimens could not be found for verification and they placed the specimens in Daedalocrinus. Thus Daedaleocrinus bellevillensis. I have a Eustenocrinus from Carden on my web page. My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trilobitologist Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 The Warn and Strimple paper also stated that the original Springer Ohiocrinus specimens could not be found for verification and they placed the specimens in Daedalocrinus. Thus Daedaleocrinus bellevillensis. I have a Eustenocrinus from Carden on my web page. My link I haven't seen the Warn and Strimple paper. Have you a pdf of this paper or the complete reference citation? Bill - you got this paper? So Ohiocrinus bellevillensis was first described by Springer, then the specimens were lost, then Warn and Strimple placed it as Daedalocrinus bellevillensis based on Springers photos I assume? Got it right? And I'm assuming it's from the Belleville area? Did they also distinguish between Daedalo kirki and bellevillensis? Yes I have seen Eustenocrinus before from Carden, thanks for the photo, Great find! Is E. springeri reported from Ontario? Where was it originally described from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trilobitologist Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 Here are some photos of a specimen from Carden I'm not sure of. I think it is either a slightly distorted Praecupulocrinus or a Glaucocrinus. Bill thinks maybe Glaucocrinus as well. Opinions?? Unfortunately it is not the best preserved. What you see is what you get - no more prep can be done on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crinus Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Here are some photos of a specimen from Carden I'm not sure of. I think it is either a slightly distorted Praecupulocrinus or a Glaucocrinus. Bill thinks maybe Glaucocrinus as well. Opinions?? Unfortunately it is not the best preserved. What you see is what you get - no more prep can be done on it. Glaucocrinus yes and no. I believe that it is now Anomalocrinus. There is a paleontologist in Georgia that is working on it. A few months back he asked for pic of every specimen I had. Hopefully something comes of that. The same paper (WARN AND sTRIMPLE) synonomized kirki and bellevillensis. bellevillensis wins because it came first. I only have a hard copy of the paper. crinus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geodigger Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I haven't seen the Warn and Strimple paper. Have you a pdf of this paper or the complete reference citation? Bill - you got this paper? So Ohiocrinus bellevillensis was first described by Springer, then the specimens were lost, then Warn and Strimple placed it as Daedalocrinus bellevillensis based on Springers photos I assume? Got it right? And I'm assuming it's from the Belleville area? Did they also distinguish between Daedalo kirki and bellevillensis? Yes I have seen Eustenocrinus before from Carden, thanks for the photo, Great find! Is E. springeri reported from Ontario? Where was it originally described from? Hi Kevin, I have the Warn and Strimple paper but it is too large in file size to email. Below are some snipplets from that paper. Cheers, Bill "Type species. — Daedalocrinus kirki Ulrich, 1925 by original designation (p. 97); this species is considered a junior subjective synonym of Heterocrinus bellevillensis Billings, 1883 herein." ........... "Occurrence. — Kirkfieldian. Daedalocrinus is known from the Hull crinoid beds of Belleville and Kirkfield, Ontario. Billings (1883, p. 50) described Heterocrinus bellevillensis from the "Trenton limestone" at Belleville, Ontario, {= Hull beds); Ulrich (1925, p. 97) reported its, and another species' {D. kirki, considered a junior synonym of D. bellevillensis), occurrence in the "Lower Trenton crinoid beds," Kirkfield, Ontario (= Hull crinoid beds at Kirkfield, Ontario, where it is evidently fairly common)." ............. "Springer (1911, p. 27) reported that Kirkfield material in the United States National Museum collection makes it evident that Heterocrinus bellevillensis has a convoluted anal sac, which would confirm its referral (by Springer) to Ohiocrin/us. Ulrich (1925, pp. 97-98), using the same material as Springer had, described the anal sac as large and balloon-shaped. The authors have examined a number of well-preserved specimens in the Kopf collection (at the University of Cincinnati) and have perused the USNM cincinnaticrinids and homocrinids but have not found evidence to corroborate Springer's or Ulrich's observations." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trilobitologist Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Which paleontologist from Georgia is working on Anomalocrinus? Just wondering..... I think there may be Anomalocrinus and Glaucocrinus falconeri, but I guess if they are synonomyzed, then there could be 2 species from Ontario. And Bill - you're such a geek. Thanks for the info! I'll have to get that paper from you next time we meet! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crinus Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Which paleontologist from Georgia is working on Anomalocrinus? Just wondering..... I think there may be Anomalocrinus and Glaucocrinus falconeri, but I guess if they are synonomyzed, then there could be 2 species from Ontario. And Bill - you're such a geek. Thanks for the info! I'll have to get that paper from you next time we meet! Cheers! Brad Deline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts