Show us your Devonian Epizoans & Pathological Brachiopods!

[Mediospirifer]

On 1/26/2020 at 5:23 AM, Brach3 said:

It can be barnacle borings on valve. Please check this specimen with paper. Why not?

 

Here are a couple more images of my pyritized brachiopod: 

 

 

 

Notice that the pits are on both valves. They're aligned along the grooves between plications, with the long axis in line with the groove. By contrast, compare with the barnacle borings in this figure from the paper you linked above:

 

 

The barnacle borings appear to be randomly oriented, and are not in a regular pattern on the shell. So no, my specimen appears to be untouched by predators or parasites.

 

I can get higher magnification images of the most prominently pitted areas if you want. I'll try to arrange the lighting to show the pits better.

 

[Mediospirifer]

Here's another interesting bryozoan piece from the Upper Ordovician. This is from the same site as the Vinlandostrophia sp. that I posted earlier. I need to get some closeups of this one, too. 

 

 

Looking at the edge of the brachiopod shell, I'm thinking this bryo may have also been encrusting a living brachiopod. Here's a couple of edge views:

 

 

And I have a few more photos to post in the next comment. 

 

[Mediospirifer]

Here's another similar bryozoan (similar age to the last, different collecting site). This one encrusted a bivalve, which then disintegrated and left the bioimmured impression in the underside of the bryo. You can see the horizontal ridges in the image at right: 

 

 

I'll get more images of the entire specimen soon, and some closer details of the bioimmured surface. 

 

[Mediospirifer]

And one more encrusted brachiopod, with a different species of bryozoan. This might be Strophomena sp., with Constellaria growing on the shell. Like the one above, the bryo isn't growing past the shell margin, so this could have been a living host:

 

 

That's all for tonight; I have some more Vinlandostrophia that I need to clean matrix from, and several specimens to photograph and share here. When I have a chance, I'll post some Devonian material that I revisited yesterday. 

 

 

[Brach3]

14 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

So no, my specimen appears to be untouched by predators or parasites.

Ок

 

12 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

I'm thinking this bryo may have also been encrusting a living brachiopod.

This is a very brave/ambitious assumption that deserves respect  because we have only small fragment.

It's very interesting to hear the arguments.

 

11 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

This one encrusted a bivalve

  

 

These specimens are the "Relationships to live hosts": 1 photo is from D3, 2 photo is a modern specimen . 

I don't understand why we use here word "hitchhiker" for Epizoans on the Brachiopods. or I can't translate... 

In papers (articles) I see "guest" because Brachiopods can't move. 

But modern Pelagodiscus atlanticus (brachiopod) can attached to modern bivalve Kellyella chumi, K. longa и Bathyarca profundicola and may be can move  but it's the exception...

 

11 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

Like the one above, the bryo isn't growing past the shell margin, so this could have been a living host:

And shell margin could be undo the mud... we need to see the other shell (valve) to see "crossing the commissure"...

 

Can it be the same Epizoans?

 

11 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

I'll post some Devonian material that I revisited yesterday. 

 

 

@Mediospirifer @Al Tahan @Shamalama @Misha @Monica

[Mediospirifer]

12 hours ago, Brach3 said:

This is a very brave/ambitious assumption that deserves respect  because we have only small fragment.

It's very interesting to hear the arguments.

 

I say this because while the specimen isn't complete with both valves intact, we do have one valve nearly intact (there's only one small area of shell margin that appears chipped), and the shell margin is almost completely exposed to view. There are no places where the bryozoan can be seen to grow around the edge of the shell and onto the interior surface.

 

In areas where the valve margin is intact and exposed, the bryozoan edge does not appear to have been broken. It comes up to the commissure, and stops there with a normal growth pattern for the edge of a bryozoan patch. If the bryozoan had grown across the commissure before the shell was disarticulated, I would expect to see broken surfaces where the valve margin is now.

 

The other specimen (the possible Constellaria sp.) is missing a large piece of valve, but the intact margin shows similar features. Only where the valve is broken do we see a broken bryozoan.

 

Here are a few photos at higher magnification of the valve margins (two of the first one, one of the Constellaria):

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Brach3 said:

Can it be the same Epizoans?

 

I don't think so. The specimen on the Vinlandostrophia sp. doesn't show the complex features of the one on the Strophomena sp. It also has a deeper texture. Here's a photo with some of the mud removed:

 

 

I'll get more pictures at some point. I'll also remove matrix from the two above.

 

[caldigger]

@Tidgy's Dad

Adam, I can't believe there's a post about brachs, brachs and more brachs and you haven't jumped in and commented or added to it.  

It's brachs for goodness sake!!!!

[Tidgy's Dad]

3 hours ago, caldigger said:

@Tidgy's Dad

Adam, I can't believe there's a post about brachs, brachs and more brachs and you haven't jumped in and commented or added to it.  

It's brachs for goodness sake!!!!

I've been following it, on and off, some lovely specimens and interesting posts, but I haven't really got around to 'Adam''s Devonian' yet and i don't have any with obvious pathologies or predation damage in the Cambrian or Ordovician, I don't think. 

But here's a bryozoan on a Mucrospirifer for now: 

 

[Mediospirifer]

I should clarify my comments above about my encrusted single-valve specimens. I'm not saying with certainty that these two brachiopods were alive when the bryozoan colonized them. It's also possible that the bryozoans colonized dead shells that happened to be lying on a muddy substrate with the convex side up, and the bryo was disinclined to grow past the hard substrate of the shell onto the softer mud. We really need to know what the life positions of the brachiopods would have been, and I don't. I can't even see enough of the first one to make a guess at its family, except that I don't think it's a spiriferid. I may be able to do better than that after I scrape away more of the matrix and expose the complete valve interior.

 

[Brach3]

14 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

I'm not saying with certainty that these two brachiopods were alive when the bryozoan colonized them.

Yes, sometimes we can't argue/discuss such specimens because we are not the clairvoyants.

In this specimen we can't say exactly "Relationships to live hosts" or "Relationships to dead hosts". 

 

"to be lying on a muddy substrate with the convex side up" like these (whole valves): 

 

correct answer: at your discretion ))) and so and so

 

 

14 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

I may be able to do better than that after I scrape away more of the matrix and expose the complete valve interior.

May be, do you have another valves similar/like it? to exclude/remove "I scrape away more of the matrix"... 

I think we can't to determine/define a brachiopod from the valve interior.

 

If you can, in ideal you'll say me genus (to see treatise), then we will define "life positions"...

but this specimen looks like undiagnosed  I think we need the similar whole valve 

 

On 06.02.2020 at 2:53 PM, caldigger said:

I can't believe there's a post about brachs, brachs and more brachs

 

@caldigger I know there are a lot of Brachiopod's Hunters on TFF... but I don't know how to find them!

I need their photos to proof hypothesises 

I'll pay for each alive ) thank you 

 

On 06.02.2020 at 5:14 PM, Tidgy's Dad said:

But here's a bryozoan on a Mucrospirifer for now:

 

 

Please, can you photo a valve with a bryozoan (not a part)?

and what is from the other side of the valve?

 

or is it an other side, not an other brachiopod?

 

When I see such specimens I remember a modern brachiopod Terebratella sanguinea 

 

On 06.02.2020 at 5:14 PM, Tidgy's Dad said:

i don't have any with obvious pathologies or predation damage in the Cambrian or Ordovician

Predators / storms have always been... sometimes we have, but think we don't have... let's see our collections

I think you have many interesting brachiopods like "a bryozoan on a Mucrospirifer"  

 

 

@Mediospirifer @Shamalama @Al Tahan @Fossildude19 @Misha @Monica @Tidgy's Dad

[Tidgy's Dad]

Hmmm. 

This is me :

And I don't have most of my fossils photographed yet. 

But you can find many of my Ordovician specimens in my thread http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/78974-adams-ordovician/

Though I still have several more to add. 

 

[Brach3]

2 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

But you can find many of my Ordovician specimens in my thread http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/78974-adams-ordovician/

What is it? (from here link)  

 

I have such problematic in D3 and we don't know what epizoan is it... may be (?)Sphenothallus sp.

or I see what I want to see  What is it? (from here link).

 

What is it? (from here link). It's look like rare bryozoan or... can you make photo ("close up")?

 

@Mediospirifer @Al Tahan @Shamalama @Monica @Tidgy's Dad @Misha @Fossildude19 @caldigger

 

From here: link

 

 

"This genus, like other stophomenids, did not anchor using a pedicle, but instead lay flat on a silty/ muddy substrate which many other organisms including other brachiopods couldn't exist in so easily as they couldn't fix themselves to the fine sediment."

 Can you share paper (article) about "live position"?

 

It's impossible because brachiopoda can't breathe in this case!  The current will flip over / turn the valves, and mud will cover. It's fatality  

 

I know some Terebratula sp. can live and roll (the leg came off), but nobody knows how long.

 

It's very interesting to see the epizoan's relationship. 

[Tidgy's Dad]

Microconchids in the second batch for the most part, I suspect, but you may be correct with Sphenothallus. 

Not sure about the first and last photos. 

I'll try close ups later when I have the time. 

[sharkdoctor]

Great thread! One of my favorite in recent memory.

[Tidgy's Dad]

4 hours ago, Brach3 said:

 

"This genus, like other stophomenids, did not anchor using a pedicle, but instead lay flat on a silty/ muddy substrate which many other organisms including other brachiopods couldn't exist in so easily as they couldn't fix themselves to the fine sediment."

 Can you share paper (article) about "live position"?

It's impossible because brachiopoda can't breathe in this case!  The current will flip over / turn the valves, and mud will cover. It's fatality . 

Not impossible. Never underestimate brachiopods! (nor me). 

Many brachiopods were, and are free living, or cemented, the pedicle is not the only lifestyle. 

There's lots about this scattered through the Treatise. 

See the Treatise of Invertebrate Palaeontology Part H Revised Brachiopoda Volume 6, supplement page 2847 Quote :

 The strophomenate pedicle also underwent transformations that resulted in a relocation of the pedicle and its postlarval loss in most lineages. The pedicles of the oldest strophomenates (billingsellides, early strophomenides, and orthotetides) were evidently fully functional albeit restricted to the delthyrial apex by an undivided deltidium or pseudodeltidium. In younger strophomenates, including later strophomenides, the pseudodeltidium is entire, with the pedicle foramen shifted to a supra-apical position. The juvenile pedicle was commonly enclosed in an erect, mineralized tube (pedicle sheath) but was lost in adults that became free-lying or cemented to the substrate by umbonally secreted polysaccharide (orthotetidines) or spines (productides; Williams, Brunton, & MacACKinnon, 1997, p. 357–359). I

 etc as well as 

Volume 1 the section on Morphology, here's a bit from page 442.

The concept of the pedicle as a stalk and
anchor developed as a result of the difficulties
in observing living articulated brachiopods
except for those found on rocks and
reefs i n shallow water. These are now known
to be specialized for that type of habitat. In
environments of this type articulated brachiopods
follow a sedentary existence, with the
pedicle functioning as an organ for attachment
to the substrate, As a consequence, the
presence of a pedicle was regarded as a sign
of attachment, and foramen size was thought
to be correlated with strength of attachment.
Dredged collections tended to confirm these
assumptions because the individuals of some
species that were retrieved had pieces of the
substrate adhering to the tip of the pedicle.

 

It goes on to talk about modern free living brachiopods. 

Or try this link to brachiopod lifestyles that mentions Rafinesquina and it's free lying lifestyle:

 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1365-2451.1997.t01-1-00018.x

And many other ways of life too.

From page 2

Free-living brachiopods survived at the sediment
water interface by developing large flat shells
(Rafinesquina), high interareas (Cyrtia), extravagant
anterior flanges (Stenoscisma), posterior spines
(Chonetes) and rhizoid spines (Aulostega) to aid stability
and prevent submergence. More robust and
globose terebratulides such as Terebratella, and probably
some species of Tichosina (Fig. 1B,C), were free
to roll on the substrate.
And page 3 there is a diagram explaining free living, anchored, cemented and other methods employed by brachiopods .

[Brach3]

From here: link

 

@Tidgy's Dad

There are several specimens (Crania sp.) from D3. I've collected specially these brachiopods (relationship ("Epizoans-Epizoans") 

Like Petrocrania sp. from D2. These brachiopods are from my own collection, I've been collected them for 5 years.

They are not rare, but noone wants to go to the other region to collect them... It's a gift.    

 

 

"two-storey house":    (Brachiopod + Brachiopod + Microconchida)

 

"three-storey house + swimming pool": (Brachiopod + Brachiopod + Microconchida & Cornulites + Bryzoan) 

 

* Microconchida & Cornulites are undo Bryzoan like here: 

 

These all specimens show us what trepostome bryozoan don't cover the inarticulate brachiopods !!! and it's atomic bomb 

Like here and Petrocrania sp. repeats the sculpture of the valve brachiopod-host!!!  mmm  

 

I've came here to increase photos (data base), here are examples from D2, USA:

  

Please, Check your collection, you may have these brachiopods  

There are exactly such specimens in USA (very very much/many)

 

23 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

There's lots about this scattered through the Treatise. 

 

I have some comments about, but I have to read these recommended articles at first. I don't know English so I need time (days) to translate it. I'll answer later... It's very interesting situation ... I've came here to get photos (brachiopods + epizoans) from D2 BUT I'll go to study/understand/deal_with life position of Ordovic brachiopods and read papers about Ordovic... Ordovic, Ordovic   ha-ha-ha 

 

@Mediospirifer @Shamalama @Al Tahan @Fossildude19 @Misha @Monica @Tidgy's Dad @caldigger

[Misha]

I was just going over my brachiopods and found a piece that I think fits for this thread.

It is an Athyris spiriferoides with a bit of bryozoa attached.

[Monica]

@Brach3

How about a few more epibionts from the mid-Devonian of Hungry Hollow near Arkona, Ontario? 

 

1. A solitary rugose coral with an encrusting bryozoan and something else - either Aulopora or Hederella?  What do you think?

 

A view of the epibionts:

 

A view of the rugose coral calyx:

 

2. The tabulate coral Alveolites goldfussi with something on the bottom - perhaps a stromatoporoid or a bryozoan?  What do you think?

 

A view of the bottom of the coral:

 

A close-up of the stromatoporoid or bryozoan on the bottom of the coral:

 

A view of the top of the coral:

 

 

 

[Mediospirifer]

10 hours ago, Monica said:

1. A solitary rugose coral with an encrusting bryozoan and something else - either Aulopora or Hederella?  What do you think?

 

A view of the epibionts:

 

Monica, I think you have Aulopora here, unless it's smaller than it appears. Nice piece! (All nice pieces. )

 

Adam, you mentioned Rafinesquina as a free-living brachiopod. Would smaller strophomenids (like my piece with the Constellaria-like bryozoan above) also be free-living, or do they have a specific life orientation? I don't have a copy of the Treatise to check for myself.

 

I'll just add one of my Devonian pieces for now. Mucrospirifer mucronatus, Middle Devonian (Kashong shale). This is a small brachiopod (about 1 cm wide), with one of the biggest cornulitids I've seen! And a second on the back, plus a small one. 

 

 

I'll post more specimens when I can. 

 

[Brach3]

16 hours ago, Misha said:

It is an Athyris spiriferoides with a bit of bryozoa attached.

 

 

@Misha Yes, it's a very beautiful Athyris  ... For me it's a very rare specimen.

There are a lot of them in Eletc fields from Lipitskay oblast but for me, it's a rary brachiopod whatever. 

 

I've found a very interesting specimen with damages... it's atomic momb!!! 

It's only / single specimen for all of the searches!!!

I've never seen such damages of Athyris in articles... never! It's unique chance for everyone to see it!  

   

 

Adam has started the most interesting discussion about "life position" of brachiopods so I post it about Athyris.

They lived like modern brachiopods (Laqueus vancouveriensis )

 

See video link (Youtube)... 

 

We know two VERY VERY rare specimens of Athyris "in situ" (they could not be preserved at all!!!)

1 - Group Athyris in the life position  2 - Athyris in life orientation inside coral Syringopora... It's fantastic  mmm 

 

And about bryozoa on the Athyris... I think you have variant №II because bryozoa grows in different directions

 

I - "Relationships to live hosts" II - "Relationships to dead hosts"

 

@Mediospirifer@Monica ... wow I'll write about in several hours (or tomorrow). It's the bombs!!! 

 

@Shamalama @Al Tahan @Fossildude19 @Tidgy's Dad @caldigger

[Tidgy's Dad]

7 hours ago, Mediospirifer said:

 

Adam, you mentioned Rafinesquina as a free-living brachiopod. Would smaller strophomenids (like my piece with the Constellaria-like bryozoan above) also be free-living, or do they have a specific life orientation? I don't have a copy of the Treatise to check for myself.

Most of the later strophomenates had lost their pedicle and were either just lying on the substrate, buried within it, anchored by spines or occasionally cemented. 

I post another paper discussing strophomenid lifestyles :

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256604981_The_Orientation_of_Strophomenid_Brachiopods_on_Soft_Substrates/link/004635237707dbf193000000/download

[Tidgy's Dad]

18 hours ago, Misha said:

I was just going over my brachiopods and found a piece that I think fits for this thread.

It is an Athyris spiriferoides with a bit of bryozoa attached.

Very nice. 

I have several of these, so will have to have a closer look.

 

[Tidgy's Dad]

3 hours ago, Brach3 said:

Athyris

Yes, the athyrids had a functional pedicle and; of course, a unique style of spiralia. 

[Mediospirifer]

9 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

Most of the later strophomenates had lost their pedicle and were either just lying on the substrate, buried within it, anchored by spines or occasionally cemented. 

I post another paper discussing strophomenid lifestyles :

 

Interesting! 

 

Looking at the paper, I see that the authors suggest a convex-valve-up life position for Rafinesquina and Strophomena, but probably convex-down for Leptaena (the latter based on other work). This adds weight to the possibility that my specimen above may have been colonized by the bryozoan while living. 

 

It also makes me wonder about Tropidoleptus carinatus. I've seen a paper (courtesy of Brach3) postulating that T. carinatus lived convex-down, and have been reoriented postmortem to a convex-up position. I have several specimens of T. carinatus, and those with epizoans are mostly encrusted on the convex shell. Here's an exception:

 

 

This one is encrusted on both valves. Each valve has a different species of Hederella! This looks like H. canadensis on the first (convex) valve, and H. filiformis on the second (concave). 

 

[Tidgy's Dad]

There still seems to be much debate about which genera lived convex side up or down but it seems  that some genera did one and others the other. Which did which is the question. 

There are lots of great papers on the epibionts too which i am still reading.