A New Look at Pleurotomaria Perlata Hall, 1852 (Gastropoda) from the Silurian of Laurentia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GFF ISSN: 1103-5897 (Print) 2000-0863 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sgff20 A new look at Pleurotomaria perlata Hall, 1852 (Gastropoda) from the Silurian of Laurentia John S. Peel To cite this article: John S. Peel (2018) A new look at Pleurotomariaperlata Hall, 1852 (Gastropoda) from the Silurian of Laurentia, GFF, 140:3, 249-253, DOI: 10.1080/11035897.2018.1482564 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/11035897.2018.1482564 © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 27 Jun 2018. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 68 View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=sgff20 GFF 2018, VOL. 140, NO. 3, 249–253 https://doi.org/10.1080/11035897.2018.1482564 OPEN ACCESS A new look at Pleurotomaria perlata Hall, 1852 (Gastropoda) from the Silurian of Laurentia John S. Peel Department of Earth Sciences (Palaeobiology), Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY New material from Genoa, Ohio, USA, of the distinctive but poorly known Silurian gastropod Pleurotomaria Received 9 April 2018 perlata Hall, 1852, originally described from the Guelph Formation of Ontario, Canada, demonstrates that Accepted 27 May 2018 it is not a pleurotomariinid vetigastropod. It is a species of Isfarispira Gubanov, Peel & Pianovskaya, 1995, KEYWORDS first described from the Silurian of Kyrgyzstan, central Asia, and now recognised from Laurentia. Isfarispira Gastropoda; Silurian; belongs within a pycnomphaline–omphalotrochid group of euomphaloidean gastropods but this group Laurentia; systematics is too poorly understood to allow firm placement at this time. Pleurotomaria perlata is one of the most distinctive Silurian Historical background gastropods from Laurentia but its systematic position is not As a preliminary, it should be noted that Pleurotomaria perlata well known. It was proposed by Hall (1852, p. 349, pl. 84, fig. Hall, 1852 is distinct from its homonym Pleurotomaria per- 5) and illustrated on the basis of two internal moulds from the lata Conrad, 1865, described from the Eocene of Shark River, “Limestone at Galt, Canada.” The illustrations show the charac- New Jersey (Conrad 1865). That species is also poorly known, teristic multi-whorled shell, with whorls expanding slowly, and although it was subsequently assigned to Leptomaria (?) perlata the acutely lenticular, discoidal, transverse profile. As was the by Whitfield (1892, p. 232). custom of the day, the species was assigned to Pleurotomaria Following its initial description, Pleurotomaria perlata Hall, Sowerby, 1821, but this is typically a Mesozoic genus and does 1852 was listed without comment by Bigsby (1858, 1868). not occur in the Palaeozoic or in present day seas despite Schmidt (1858) compared Euomphalus undiferus Schmidt, 1858 innumerable records in older literature. Pleurotomaria and from the Silurian of Estonia to Pleurotomaria perlata but Isakar et its relatives are characterised by a deep emargination in the al. (1999) assigned Schmidt’s species to the widely phaneromph- outer lip (Knight et al. 1960) and nowadays are placed as an alous euomphaloidean Kiaeromphalus Peel & Yochelson, 1976. order within the clade Vetigastropoda (Bouchet et al. 2017). Billings in Logan et al. (1863, fig. 347) illustrated an internal The deep emargination in pleurotomariiform gastropods often mould of Pleurotomaria perlata in apertural and umbilical views culminates in a parallel-sided slit that generates a selenizone, although Whiteaves (1884, p. 22) noted “that by some inadver- usually located at or above the whorl periphery. Evidence of tance this species is figured … as Pleurotomaria solaroides” by such a selenizone is frequently lacking in poorly preserved Billings but clearly represents P. perlata. The illustrations and material, so internal moulds of many fossil species have been assignment to P. solaroides made by Billings in Logan et al. (1863) assigned to Pleurotomaria just on the basis of overall morpho- were reproduced by Lesley (1889, p. 715). logical similarity with better preserved material. Pleurotomaria Billings (1865) and Nicholson (1875) described Guelph perlata Hall, 1852 is one such species, with the uncertainty con- gastropods but without reference to Pleurotomaria perlata or cerning its identity resulting from its typical preservation as any similar form. Day (1877, p. 116) extended the geographical internal moulds in dolostone. These moulds lack details of shell distribution of Pleurotomaria perlata to Wisconsin in reporting ornamentation useful for interpretation of the nature of the “A magnificent and perfectPleurotomaria perlata five inches aperture, resulting in doubt concerning the generic placement [12 cm] in diameter found in the Niagara shale, and also in the of the species. This uncertainty can now be resolved on the basis Guelph or Gault.” Chamberlin (1883, fig. 53) confirmed the of material from the Silurian of Genoa, Ohio, USA, described Wisconsin distribution when he reproduced the apertural view herein. Pleurotomaria perlata is assigned to the genus Isfarispira of the specimen of Pleurotomaria perlata figured by Billings Gubanov, Peel & Pianovskaya, 1995, originally described from in Logan et al. (1863) without comment. The occurrence of the Silurian of central Asia, and represents the first record of P. perlata in the Silurian dolostones of the Chicago–Milwaukee the genus from Laurentia. region was also noted by Gubanov et al. (1995, p. 836). CONTACT John S. Peel [email protected] © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. Published online 27 Jun 2018 J. S. PEEL 0 25 Whiteaves (1895, p. 75) formally transferred the Pleurotomaria extending adumbilically as a continuation of the shallowly con- solaroides (Hall) of Billings in Logan et al. (1863) to P. perlata, vex base. Shell interior with numerous adaperturally concave noting its occurrence as internal moulds from Galt, Hespeler, septa in the early stages. Ornamentation of fine comarginal Elora and Belwood in Ontario. In contrast to Hall (1852), who growth lines. considered the umbilicus to be wide, Whiteaves (1895) described the umbilicus of Pleurotomaria perlata as deep, but rather nar- Discussion.— Gubanov et al. (1995) commented that Isfarispira row. Both authors, however, were describing the nature of the is distinguished from Liospira by its much greater size, greater umbilicus as preserved in internal moulds, with shell dissolved, number of more slowly expanding whorls and absence of a and not its true shape when the original shell is preserved. deep peripheral sinus and slit. Wagner (2002) tentatively placed Clarke & Ruedeman (1903, p. 21) listed Pleurotomaria perlata Isfarispira as a junior synonym of Pycnomphalus Lindström, from Hamilton, Ontario, suggesting that Pleurotomaria clipei- 1884, a reflection of his attempts to eliminate monotypic genera formis Spencer, 1884 was probably its junior synonym. from his phylogenetic classification of anisostrophic Palaeozoic Ulrich & Scofield (1897) proposed the genus Liospira in gastropods. He noted, however, that the identity of Isfarispira as a which the emargination characteristic of pleurotomariiform separate genus might be maintained if species other than the type gastropods was combined with a low spired, lenticular, shell; species Isfarispira septata were assigned to the genus. That crite- Pleurotomaria has a higher spired, trochifom, profile. Ulrich rion is now achieved through the assignment of Pleurotomaria & Scofield (1897) made no comment concerning Hall’s (1852) perlata to Isfarispira. species but Whiteaves (1906, p. 332) quoted a letter from E.O. Gubanov et al. (1995) tentatively assigned Isfarispira to Ulrich (20th January 1906) suggesting assignment to Liospira, the euomphaloidean Family Omphalotrochidae Knight, 1945 which advice he followed. Whiteaves (1906) noted, however, that which Knight et al. (1960) recognised from Devonian–?Triassic the species was still only known from internal moulds. Tentative strata. Wagner (2002) placed Isfarispira (as a tentative synonym reports from Southampton Island in the Canadian Arctic were of Pycnomphalus) within the euomphaloidean Anomphalidae made by Low (1906, p. 331) and Teichert (1937, p. 142). Bassler Wenz, 1938, although Knight et al. (1960) had regarded anom- (1915, p. 747) adopted Whiteaves’ (1906) assignment and listed phalids as a separate trochinid superfamily. However, Wagner published records under Liospira perlata (Hall). Williams (1919, (2002) considered the position of Pycnomphalus relative to pl. 24) illustrated a well-preserved internal mould from Galt, later anomphalids to be tentative, a situation recognised by Peel Ontario, almost 10 cm in diameter which he assigned to Liospira (1984a) when he divided the Anomphalidae sensu Knight et al. perlata (Hall) without comment. Coleman & Parks (1922, fig. (1960) into a Subfamily Anomphalinae Wenz, 1938 (Devonian– 109) illustrated the umbilical surface of an internal mould from ?Permian) and a new Subfamily