Protocycloceras sp.

Kröger, Björn & Pohle, Alexander, 2021, Early-Middle Ordovician cephalopods from Ny Friesland, Spitsbergen - a pelagic fauna with Laurentian affinities, European Journal of Taxonomy 783 (1), pp. 1-102 : 57-58

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2021.783.1601

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:071EAD63-05ED-4D6C-AC45-8719E6D79E0B

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7449596

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5F4487AC-FF94-FF97-FD73-7A65FBB37865

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Protocycloceras sp.
status

 

Protocycloceras sp.

Fig. 36A View Fig

Material examined

Specimen FMNH-P30417 from Profilstranda section , bed PO 123.3, 120.3 m above base of Olenidsletta Member, V2 a trilobite zone , Blackhillsian , Floian .

Description

The specimen is an orthoconic fragment of a phragmocone with a circular conch cross section 2.0– 5.5 mm in diameter and 17 mm long (angle of expansion 12°). The specimen is ornamented with a transverse annulation, the annuli slope very slightly toward the aperture at the antispihuncular side, ca 3 annuli occur per distance similar to the corresponding conch diameter. Additionally, fine striae occur, which run parallel to the annulations, ca 20 striae occur per one millimeter. The chamber distance is roughly similar to the distance of the annuli; at the adoral end of the specimen the chamber length is 1.5 mm. There the siphuncle is 0.75 mm in diameter (rSD = 0.14) and positioned ca 0.6 mm from the conch margin (rSP = 0.1). The connecting ring segments are slightly concave and relatively thick, and the septal necks are orthochoanitic to loxochoanitic with a length of 0.4 mm, where the chamber length is 1.5 mm.

Remarks

This specimen differs from P. minor sp. nov. in having a very thin siphuncle (rSD = 0.14, compared with rSD = 0.22 in P. minor ). Hence, it is morphologically transitional to Slemmestadoceras attavus (Brøgger, 1882) and Kyminoceras forresti Teichert & Glenister, 1954 , which have a thin marginal siphuncle, and C. arennigense and P. lamarcki which have a much thicker siphuncle, that is positioned close to the conch center. However, based on this single, small fragment the erection of a new species would be not justified and it will be left in open nomenclature until more material is available.

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF