Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Paleobiology Signup for GSW Email News
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paleobiology; April 2005; v. 31; no. 2; p. 233-252; DOI: 10.1666/0094-8373(2005)031[0233:TCDFIO]2.0.CO;2
© 2005 Paleontological Society
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gottobrio, W. E.
Right arrow Articles by Saunders, W. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

The clymeniid dilemma: functional implications of the dorsal siphuncle in clymeniid ammonoids

William E. Gottobrio1 and W. Bruce Saunders1

1 William E. Gottobrio and W. Bruce Saunders. Department of Geology, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania 19010. wgottobr{at}hotmail.com, wsaunder{at}brynmawr.edu

Clymeniid ammonoids appeared during the Late Devonian (Mid-Famennian) and quickly radiated before becoming extinct at the Devonian/Carboniferous boundary. Outwardly indistinguishable from other ammonoids, clymeniids are distinguished internally by their dorsal siphuncle, contrasted to a ventral siphuncle in almost all other ammonoids. Comparisons of a sample of Clymeniida (n = 22 genera), Goniatitida (n = 33), Prolecanitida (n = 12), and Anarcestida (n = 13) indicate that clymeniids fall within the range of other ammonoids in terms of shell geometry and suture complexity, but their siphuncles average two to three times larger and clymeniid shells are approximately 33% thicker than those of other ammonoids. Although a dorsal siphuncle would be about 50% smaller in surface area and volume than if located in a ventral position, the enlarged clymeniid siphuncle partially and, in some cases, fully compensated for this loss. Hydrostatic simulations of 15 clymeniid genera indicate that their thicker (therefore heavier) shells would have resulted in relatively short body chambers ({approx}280°) and high aperture orientations ({approx}90°). In static life-position, these orientations would have placed the dorsal clymeniid siphuncle at or near the bottom of the most recently formed chambers, seemingly an ideal location for draining liquid from the chamber. Migration of the siphuncle to the dorsal side of the shell occurs suddenly during early ontogeny (within the first two or three chambers), and mutation of homeotic gene expression is offered as a possible explanation for the sudden shift. A dorsal siphuncle may have resulted in selection for enlarged siphuncles, but this may have incurred loss of strength against hydrostatic pressure (thereby reducing depth limits) and thus rendered the clade more susceptible to the multiple eustatic and anoxic events that marked the end of the Devonian.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
PaleobiologyHome page
W. B. Saunders, E. Greenfest-Allen, D. M. Work, and S. V. Nikolaeva
Morphologic and taxonomic history of Paleozoic ammonoids in time and morphospace
Paleobiology, January 1, 2008; 34(1): 128 - 154.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Paleontological Society