Jump to content
  • Sign in to follow this  

    Trilobite of Russia


    Sign in to follow this  
    Images:

    fifbrindacier
    • It has suffered from its fossilization and is a little crushed, but it's a rare one.

    Taxonomy

    Kingdom: Animalia
    Phylum: Arthropoda
    Class: Trilobita
    Order: Phacopida
    Family: Pterygometopidae
    Genus: (Pro)chasmops
    Species: (Pro)chasmops praecurrens
    Author Citation Schmidt, 1881

    Geological Time Scale

    Era: Paleozoic
    Period: Ordovician
    Epoch: Middle

    Stratigraphy

    Aseri horizon, C1

    Provenance

    Date Collected: 04/22/2018
    Acquired by: Purchase/Trade

    Location

    Vilpovitsy
    Saint-Petersburg
    Russia

    Comments

    It has suffered from its fossilization and is a little crushed, but it's a rare one.

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback


    Beautiful specimen. And, you're right, they are not common! A fantastic addition. :) 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    fifbrindacier

    Posted · Report

    Thank you Kane. I love the russians, they're so cute and well preserved (the trilobites of course:P).

    This one has a little suffered but it is still good. I also have an Asaphus Robustus from the lava river.

    When i saw this chasmops on the site of my favorite trilobite seller, i booked it and asked him to bring it to the exposition of Pau in April.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    fifbrindacier

    Posted · Report

    Here is a (pro)chasmops shown in a french forum dedicated to the trilobites :

    fossiles_5rn2epvd7u2g03cqwtms.jpg.53530e8f3f0d58769b4c3e3c213ac74e.jpg

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    FossilDAWG

    Posted · Report

    This is a very nice trilobite! :wub: 

    However, may I ask why you spell the genus (Pro)chasmps?  Putting part of the name in brackets is not any part of proper taxonomic nomenclature.

     

    Don

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    piranha

    Posted · Report

    I posted one back in 2011 and mentioned possible problems with the name.  At that time the name Prochasmops had only occurred in the "grey" literature.  As of 2018 it has only been listed in a total of 6 publications.  Klikushin et al. 2009 established the new genus and Krueger 2013 has elaborated further on this proposal.  The most recent paper, Schöning 2017 has reported: ?Prochasmops sp.

     

     

    Klikushin, V., Evdokimov, A., & Pilipyuk, A. 2009
    Ordovician Trilobites of the St. Petersburg Region, Russia.
    Saint-Petersburg Paleontological Laboratory, Griffon Enterprises Inc., Master Fossil Japan, 541 pp.

     

    Krueger, H.H. 2013

    Die Unterfamilie Chasmopinae (Trilobita, Pterygometopidae) aus baltoskandischen Geschieben sowie Baltoskandia und angrenzenden Gebieten. Ampyx-Verlag, 150 pp.

     

    Krueger, H.H. 2017
    Die Trilobitengattungen Estoniops MÄNNIL und Achatella DELO (Trilobita: Phacopida, Pterygometopidae) aus ordovizischen baltoskandischen Geschieben. Ampyx-Verlag, 44 pp.

     

    Lawrence, P., & Stammers, S. 2014
    Trilobites of the World: An Atlas of 1000 photographs.

    Siri Scientific Press, 416 pp.

     

    Levi-Setti, R. 2014
    The Trilobite Book: A Visual Journey.

    University of Chicago Press, 273 pp.

     

    Schöning, H. 2017
    Trilobiten aus Geschieben des Kies-Sand-Rückens in der Laerheide (Landkreis Osnabrück) – II. Ordovizische Trilobiten.
    [Trilobites from rubble of the gravel-sand ridge in the Laerheide (Osnabrück district) - II. Ordovician trilobites.]
    Osnabrücker Naturwissenschaftliche Mitteilungen, 42/43:29-80

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    fifbrindacier

    Posted · Report

    18 hours ago, FossilDAWG said:

    This is a very nice trilobite! :wub: 

    However, may I ask why you spell the genus (Pro)chasmps?  Putting part of the name in brackets is not any part of proper taxonomic nomenclature.

     

    Don

    Because the name Prochasmops is in question as say @piranha. In the french forum, it is listed as Chasmops praecurrens.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    FossilDAWG

    Posted · Report

    Interesting problem in nomenclature.  In this case the species has historically been assigned to Chasmops, but recently a new genus Prochasmops has been proposed but is not widely accepted.  The rules governing taxonomic names are quite precise.  Brackets can be used to indicate a subgenus, or when placed around the name of the person who described the species it indicates that the species was originally associated with a different genus.  They are not used to split up a name into accepted/questionable parts, nor should they be used to indicate old names that are no longer used, as you see too often in Forum posts.  The better option would be to pick one genus name (either Chasmops or Prochasmops, or even ?Prochasmops as piranha did) and then explain the controversy in the "more info" section.

     

    Don

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    FossilDAWG

    Posted · Report

    By the way, the reason I care about this is that recently I have noticed that when I google names of fossil species, images from the Fossil Forum (including from Collections) are often at or near the top of the list of recovered links.  That means that we should be extra careful to name things properly, because that information is being passed on to the entire internet.

     

    Don

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Auspex

    Posted · Report

    11 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said:

    By the way, the reason I care about this is that recently I have noticed that when I google names of fossil species, images from the Fossil Forum (including from Collections) are often at or near the top of the list of recovered links.  That means that we should be extra careful to name things properly, because that information is being passed on to the entire internet.

     

    Don

    We are, essentially, publishers practicing the process of scientific accuracy. ;)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now


×