Taxonomic Re-Examination of the Late Cretaceous Planktonic Foraminiferal Species Archaeoglobigerina Cretacea (d'Orbigny, 1840) and Constraints on Its Morphologic Variability and Stratigraphic Distribution in One of The Type Localities (Kent, SE England)
{"title":"Taxonomic Re-Examination of the Late Cretaceous Planktonic Foraminiferal Species Archaeoglobigerina Cretacea (d'Orbigny, 1840) and Constraints on Its Morphologic Variability and Stratigraphic Distribution in One of The Type Localities (Kent, SE England)","authors":"F. Falzoni, A. Bartolini","doi":"10.2113/GSJFR.51.1.46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Distinctive and taxonomically relevant morphological differences exist between the original drawings of Archaeoglobigerina cretacea illustrated by d'Orbigny (1840) and the lectotype designated by Banner & Blow (1960), particularly regarding the equatorial periphery, which is rounded in the former and double-keeled in the latter specimen. Such differences would suggest that they are not conspecific, but this hypothesis cannot be easily tested because d'Orbigny's drawings likely represent a synthesis of observations on several specimens rather than a single individual and the slide intended to contain the lectotype is empty.\n In this study, we have re-examined the A. cretacea type specimens deposited in the d'Orbigny collection at the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle in Paris and samples from one of the type localities (Kent, SE England) with the aim to reconstruct d'Orbigny's species concept, clarify its morphological features, and better constrain its stratigraphic distribution.\n Our study suggests that d'Orbigny's concept for A. cretacea was broad and included unkeeled as well as double-keeled morphotypes. However, assemblages from Kent yield common and large-sized specimens conspecific with the lectotype in the middle Santonian-lower Campanian, while morphotypes resembling the drawings of d'Orbigny are absent. Accordingly, five topotype specimens from the lower Campanian of Kent are herein illustrated in order to stabilize the species concept adopted over the last 60 years on the basis of the lectotype drawing and description. All topotypes possess a wide imperforate peripheral band and a moderately to weakly developed double-keeled periphery. Finally, the description of A. cretacea is emended to exclude specimens that do not possess an imperforate peripheral band and to include those that show curved and weakly beaded spiral sutures.","PeriodicalId":54832,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foraminiferal Research","volume":"51 1","pages":"46-63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foraminiferal Research","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2113/GSJFR.51.1.46","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PALEONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Distinctive and taxonomically relevant morphological differences exist between the original drawings of Archaeoglobigerina cretacea illustrated by d'Orbigny (1840) and the lectotype designated by Banner & Blow (1960), particularly regarding the equatorial periphery, which is rounded in the former and double-keeled in the latter specimen. Such differences would suggest that they are not conspecific, but this hypothesis cannot be easily tested because d'Orbigny's drawings likely represent a synthesis of observations on several specimens rather than a single individual and the slide intended to contain the lectotype is empty.
In this study, we have re-examined the A. cretacea type specimens deposited in the d'Orbigny collection at the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle in Paris and samples from one of the type localities (Kent, SE England) with the aim to reconstruct d'Orbigny's species concept, clarify its morphological features, and better constrain its stratigraphic distribution.
Our study suggests that d'Orbigny's concept for A. cretacea was broad and included unkeeled as well as double-keeled morphotypes. However, assemblages from Kent yield common and large-sized specimens conspecific with the lectotype in the middle Santonian-lower Campanian, while morphotypes resembling the drawings of d'Orbigny are absent. Accordingly, five topotype specimens from the lower Campanian of Kent are herein illustrated in order to stabilize the species concept adopted over the last 60 years on the basis of the lectotype drawing and description. All topotypes possess a wide imperforate peripheral band and a moderately to weakly developed double-keeled periphery. Finally, the description of A. cretacea is emended to exclude specimens that do not possess an imperforate peripheral band and to include those that show curved and weakly beaded spiral sutures.
d’Orbigny(1840)绘制的圆纹古珠藻原始图与Banner&Blow(1960)指定的选择型之间存在着独特的、与分类学相关的形态差异,尤其是在赤道边缘,前者是圆形的,后者是双龙骨的。这种差异表明它们不是同种的,但这一假设无法轻易验证,因为d’Orbigny的绘画可能代表了对几个标本而不是单个标本的观察结果的综合,并且旨在包含选模的幻灯片是空的。在这项研究中,我们重新检查了存放在巴黎国家自然历史博物馆(Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle)d’Orbigny收藏的A.cretacea模式标本和其中一个模式地区(肯特郡,英格兰东南部)的样本,目的是重建d’Orbigny的物种概念,阐明其形态特征,并更好地限制其地层分布。我们的研究表明,d’Orbigny对A.cretacea的概念是广泛的,包括无骨和双骨形态类型。然而,Kent的组合产生了与Santonian-lower Campanian中期的选择型相同的普通和大型标本,而缺乏类似d‘Orbigny图纸的形态型。因此,为了稳定过去60年来在选型图和描述的基础上采用的物种概念,本文对肯特下坎潘阶的五个地形模式标本进行了说明。所有地形类型均具有较宽的无孔外围带和中等至弱发育的双龙骨外围。最后,对A.cretacea的描述进行了修订,排除了不具有无孔外周带的标本,并包括那些显示弯曲和弱珠状螺旋缝合线的标本。
期刊介绍:
JFR publishes original papers of international interest dealing with the Foraminifera and allied groups of organisms. Review articles are encouraged.