Comparative analysis of six common foraminiferal species of the genera Cassidulina, Paracassidulina, and Islandiella from the Arctic–North Atlantic domain
A. Cage, A. Pieńkowski, A. Jennings, K. Knudsen, M. Seidenkrantz
{"title":"Comparative analysis of six common foraminiferal species of the genera Cassidulina, Paracassidulina, and Islandiella from the Arctic–North Atlantic domain","authors":"A. Cage, A. Pieńkowski, A. Jennings, K. Knudsen, M. Seidenkrantz","doi":"10.5194/JM-40-37-2021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Morphologically similar benthic foraminiferal taxa can be\ndifficult to separate. Aside from causing issues in taxonomy, incorrect\nidentifications complicate our understanding of species-specific ecological\npreferences and result in flawed palaeoenvironmental reconstructions and\ngeochemical results. Over the years, a number of studies have grouped\ntogether several key Arctic–North Atlantic species in various combinations,\ndespite their distinct environmental preferences and/or stratigraphical\ndifferences, causing great confusion in the literature. These species\ninclude Cassidulina laevigata, Cassidulina neoteretis, Cassidulina teretis, Paracassidulina neocarinata, Islandiella helenae, and Islandiella norcrossi. Here, we provide for the first time a detailed comparison of\nthese taxa. We present a compilation of the original species descriptions,\nalong with clear, illustrated guidelines on how to separate these taxa to\ncircumvent taxonomic confusion. We acknowledge that some features cannot\neasily be seen with a standard low-powered microscope, especially if\nspecimens are not well preserved. In those cases, we recommend the following\nactions: (i) always strive to make a precise identification and at least\ndifferentiate between the three genera; (ii) where C. neoteretis and C. teretis cannot be separated, and\nwhere the stratigraphical context does not make the species identification\nobvious, specimens belonging to these taxa should be reported as C. teretis/C. neoteretis; and (iii) where specimens in a sample cannot be confidently assigned to a specific\nspecies of Islandiella or Cassidulina, specimens should be grouped as Islandiella spp. or Cassidulina spp., followed by\nnaming the most dominant species in brackets. The improved identification of\nCassidulina, Paracassidulina, and Islandiella specimens will ensure development of a better understanding of the\necological affinities of these key Arctic–North Atlantic taxa, consequently\nresulting in more accurate palaeoenvironmental reconstructions and\ngeochemical data.","PeriodicalId":54786,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Micropalaeontology","volume":"40 1","pages":"37-60"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Micropalaeontology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/JM-40-37-2021","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PALEONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25
Abstract
Abstract. Morphologically similar benthic foraminiferal taxa can be
difficult to separate. Aside from causing issues in taxonomy, incorrect
identifications complicate our understanding of species-specific ecological
preferences and result in flawed palaeoenvironmental reconstructions and
geochemical results. Over the years, a number of studies have grouped
together several key Arctic–North Atlantic species in various combinations,
despite their distinct environmental preferences and/or stratigraphical
differences, causing great confusion in the literature. These species
include Cassidulina laevigata, Cassidulina neoteretis, Cassidulina teretis, Paracassidulina neocarinata, Islandiella helenae, and Islandiella norcrossi. Here, we provide for the first time a detailed comparison of
these taxa. We present a compilation of the original species descriptions,
along with clear, illustrated guidelines on how to separate these taxa to
circumvent taxonomic confusion. We acknowledge that some features cannot
easily be seen with a standard low-powered microscope, especially if
specimens are not well preserved. In those cases, we recommend the following
actions: (i) always strive to make a precise identification and at least
differentiate between the three genera; (ii) where C. neoteretis and C. teretis cannot be separated, and
where the stratigraphical context does not make the species identification
obvious, specimens belonging to these taxa should be reported as C. teretis/C. neoteretis; and (iii) where specimens in a sample cannot be confidently assigned to a specific
species of Islandiella or Cassidulina, specimens should be grouped as Islandiella spp. or Cassidulina spp., followed by
naming the most dominant species in brackets. The improved identification of
Cassidulina, Paracassidulina, and Islandiella specimens will ensure development of a better understanding of the
ecological affinities of these key Arctic–North Atlantic taxa, consequently
resulting in more accurate palaeoenvironmental reconstructions and
geochemical data.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Micropalaeontology (JM) is an established international journal covering all aspects of microfossils and their application to both applied studies and basic research. In particular we welcome submissions relating to microfossils and their application to palaeoceanography, palaeoclimatology, palaeobiology, evolution, taxonomy, environmental change and molecular phylogeny.