Journal Article10.1080/00241160600787890
Names for trace fossils: a uniform approach
Markus Bertling,Simon J. Braddy,Richard G. Bromley,George R. Demathieu,Jorge F. Genise,Radek Mikuláš,Jan Kresten Nielsen,Kurt S. S. Nielsen,Andrew K. Rindsberg,Michael Schlirf,Alfred Uchman +10 more
487
TL;DR: The term ‘work of an animal' should be deleted from the code, and ichnotaxa should be based solely on trace fossils as defined herein, and the following emendations are proposed to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.
read more
Abstract: The taxonomic treatment of trace fossils needs a uniform approach, independent of the ethologic groups concerned. To this aim, trace fossils are rigorously defined with regard to biological taxa and physical sedimentary structures. Potential ichnotaxobases are evaluated, with morphology resulting as the most important criterion. For trace fossils related to bioerosion and herbivory, substrate plays a key role, as well as composition for coprolites. Size, producer, age, facies and preservation are rejected as ichnotaxobases. Separate names for undertracks and other poorly preserved material should gradually be replaced by ichnotaxa based on well-preserved specimens. Recent traces may be identified using established trace fossil taxa but new names can only be based on fossil material, even if the distinction between recent and fossil may frequently remain arbitrary. It is stressed that ichnotaxa must not be incorporated into biological taxa in systematics. Composite trace fossil structures (complex structures made by the combined activity of two or more species) have no ichnotaxonomic standing but compound traces (complex structures made by one individual tracemaker) may be named separately under certain provisions. The following emendations are proposed to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature: The term ‘work of an animal' should be deleted from the code, and ichnotaxa should be based solely on trace fossils as defined herein.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
•Book
Ichnology: Organism-Substrate Interactions in Space and Time
Luis A. Buatois,M. Gabriela Mángano +1 more
- 30 Sep 2011
TL;DR: In this article, a detailed analysis of the ichnology of a range of depositional environments is presented using examples from the Precambrian to the recent, and the use of trace fossils in facies analysis and sequence stratigraphy is discussed.
779
Categories of architectural designs in trace fossils: A measure of ichnodisparity
TL;DR: Ichnodisparity has been recently introduced as a concept to assess the variability of morphologic plans in biogenic structures, revealing major innovations in body plan, locomotory system and/or behavioral program.
190
The ichnogenus Rhizocorallium: Classification, trace makers, palaeoenvironments and evolution
TL;DR: A review of more than 180 records from the literature reveals the common confusion of both ichnospecies, which has consequences for the application of rhizocorallium in facies interpretations.
157
Defining the morphological quality of fossil footprints. Problems and principles of preservation in tetrapod ichnology with examples from the Palaeozoic to the present
Lorenzo Marchetti,Matteo Belvedere,Sebastian Voigt,Hendrik Klein,Diego Castanera,Ignacio Díaz-Martínez,Ignacio Díaz-Martínez,Daniel Marty,Lida Xing,Silverio Feola,Ricardo Nestor Melchor,James O. Farlow +11 more
TL;DR: The concept of morphological preservation of tetrapod footprints was introduced in this paper, which is related to the morphological quality of footprints and distinguishes it from physical preservation (P-preservation), which characterizes whether or not a track is eliminated by taphonomic and diagenetic processes.
References
Hillichnus lobosensis igen. et isp. nov., a complex trace fossil produced by tellinacean bivalves, Paleocene, Monterey, California, USA
TL;DR: Hillichnus lobosensis has been well exposed and long known at Lobos Point, south of Monterey, central California but has defied interpretation The sediments are Paleocene deep-sea canyon fill Improvement of our knowledge of deposit feeding bivalves has allowed a reasonable interpretation of the trace fossil as the work of a subsurface deposit-feeding tellinacean bivalve.
62
Systematics and Ecology of Shell-Boring Polychaetes from New England
TL;DR: In a survey of shell-boring polychaeles of New England, representatives of five families were found: Spionidae, Cirratulidae, Capitellidae, Terebellidae, and Sabellidae; the larval development described for each species is distinct in each species.
52
Arachnostega n. ichnog. -burrowing traces in internal moulds of boring bivalves (late jurassic, northern Germany)
TL;DR: In this article, the skeleton of the ichnogenus is described and the synecology of its polychaete producers is discussed in detail: they were probably opportunistic detritus-feeders and have to be regarded as infaunal coelobites.
47
New lower permian nonmarine arthropod trace fossils from new mexico and south africa
TL;DR: In this article, the authors described four new arthropod ichnotaxa from the Robledo Mountains Member (Hueco Formation) of New Mexico, including Tonganoxichnus robledoensis new ichnospecies, consisting of repeated small traces comprising imprints of anteriorly directed legs, an elongate tapering abdomen, and a thin tail.
45
The ichnogenus Palmiraichnus Roselli for fossil bee cells
TL;DR: The microscopic structures of cell walls and closures of the three ichnospecies of Palmiraichnus are adopted here for ichnotaxonomic purposes and for comparing fossil with extant cells revealing that they are useful ich Notaxobases with respect to the problematic fossil bee cell ich notaxonomy.
43
Related Papers (5)
Richard G. Bromley
- 01 Jan 1996
Luis A. Buatois,M. Gabriela Mángano +1 more
- 30 Sep 2011