Brachiopods from the Kalkberg formation

[Misha]

Hello everyone,

I am looking to get some more definitive IDs for these finds from the Lower Devonian Kalkberg Formation in NY.

I have some idea for what these guys might be but I would like to see other opinions from the forum before I start labeling them.

I will post more brachiopods as I take and process pictures, but here are the first few:

 

1. I believe these are three might be Rhipidomella

 

[Fossildude19]

Maybe Discomyorthis sp. ?

 

 

Brightened:

 

 

[Jeffrey P]

I cannot tell if they are Discomyorthis, Levenea, or Tyersella which all look pretty similar. Would need more photos from other angles and more complete specimens to know for sure, but you may want to go with unidentified orthid brachiopods. 

[Misha]

3 minutes ago, Jeffrey P said:

I cannot tell if they are Discomyorthis, Levenea, or Tyersella which all look pretty similar. Would need more photos from other angles and more complete specimens to know for sure, but you may want to go with unidentified orthid brachiopods. 

I will try to get more angles and post them here later, but all of these do look similar.

Thank you

[Misha]

2. I believe this one might be the pedicle valve of Mesodouvillina 

 

 

[Misha]

3. I thought I had a picture of the hinge from this one but I cannot find it, will also post that later. Not sure about the ID for this brachiopod

[Misha]

4. This one has both valves intact, I pretty certain it is Uncinulus. As for the species, I would say it is probably sphaeroidalis 

[Misha]

5. These were the most common organism at the site aside from bryozoans and crinoids, but I am not sure what they could be.

 

[Misha]

Here is a better profile view:

[Misha]

5. I believe this one is Kozlowskiellina, not sure about the smaller spiriferid, might post photos of it later.

 

[Misha]

6. I am fairly certain that this steinkern is Discomyorthis sp. but I am wondering what those beautiful structures on the inside were. Muscle attachment points? 

Maybe @Tidgy's Dad can tell me 

[Misha]

@Jeffrey P Here arre some additional views of those Orthids although I am not sure how helpful they will be.

[Jeffrey P]

One of the difficulties identifying Kalkberg brachiopods is that most of the shells are single valve or flattened. That is especially frustrating in that how robust the shell is may be one of its its diagnostic features. The real problem though is the high biodiversity of the formation- so many species of brachiopods and other things. It's also what I love most about it, plus the excellent preservation of the specimens. 

[Tidgy's Dad]

I think Tim is right when he says Discomyorthis.  I don't think it's Tyersella as that would have a bit of a sulcus on the pedicle valve and likewise Levenea has a more distinct fold. 

2. Probably Mesodouvillina varistriata, but it would need a bit of prepping to show the finer costae. If they're not there, then it could be Eoschuchertella woolworthana. 

The next one -3 - might be a battered Rhipidomella, but I'm far from certain. It would help if you included a scale! 

4. I'd go for Uncinulus, but not sure of species. Could be U. abruptus. 

5. Platyceras sp. 

6. Yes, this is typical of a Discomyorthis muscle field arrangement. 

Hope this helps a bit, but please remember, I have never been to this formation, so listen to those who collect there rather than to me! 

[Misha]

Just now, Jeffrey P said:

One of the difficulties identifying Kalkberg brachiopods is that most of the shells are single valve or flattened. That is especially frustrating in that how robust the shell is may be one of its its diagnostic features. The real problem though is the high biodiversity of the formation- so many species of brachiopods and other things. It's also what I love most about it, plus the excellent preservation of the specimens. 

I noticed that too, is this because all these animals were dying elsewhere and washing up here to be fossilized? So many are disarticulated, broken up, etc.

[Misha]

8 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

3 - might be a battered Rhipidomella, but I'm far from certain. It would help if you included a scale!

I don't think it is, the shell has some curvature that I have not seen from Rhipidomella, and it is larger than any individual I have seen of that genus. I will retake the pictures for that one, with some different angles and a scale.

8 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

5. Platyceras sp.

Really? That's interesting. I was debating whether these guys are gastropods or brachs because they have that shape to them, but at the same time, they are all so symmetrical that I thought they were definitely brachiopods.

Thank you for all the help!

[Misha]

7. All of the shells here are quite similar, one site I have been looking at for possible IDs states that Atrypa reticularis is present in the Kalkberg, might these represent that species?

[Misha]

8. Meristella sp. perhaps? 

[Misha]

@Tidgy's Dad I have been thinking about the fossils in number 5, and I also came across some pictures of different Meristella species some of which look quite similar to these. Is there anything that rules out the possibility of them being that brachiopod? 

Platyceras does make sense as these were very plentiful but I did not find a single or with a second valve, I just want to make sure and eliminate as many other possibilities as possible.

[Misha]

Here are some more photos of object 3, they aren't great in quality but hopefully, they will help

 

[Tidgy's Dad]

7. Yes, Atrypa reticularis does occur in the Kalkberg Formation. Some of these, such as the first one, are this species, but not sure about some of the others.

8. Meristella is an athyrid, not a terebratulid, but these could be it. Some of the number 5s could be as well. It's difficult without specimens in hand and no scale.

5. There are also two number 5s. Not sure which spiriferids these are. 

3. Not Rhipidomella. Maybe a productid. 

[Misha]

1 hour ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

7. Yes, Atrypa reticularis does occur in the Kalkberg Formation. Some of these, such as the first one, are this species, but not sure about some of the others.

8. Meristella is an athyrid, not a terebratulid, but these could be it. Some of the number 5s could be as well. It's difficult without specimens in hand and no scale.

5. There are also two number 5s. Not sure which spiriferids these are. 

3. Not Rhipidomella. Maybe a productid. 

For the number fives, I think I will just call them Meristella for now, some of them have a groove running down the middle which is something that other specimens of the brachiopod have.

Not sure why I said terebratulid, 

I did accidentally make two number 5s, but I think changing it will throw all the previous comments off and create confusion so I will just keep it.

For number 3 I have been looking through some of my resources and noticed similarities to Pleuropleurina and Schizophoria. I think it is likely the latter

Once again, Thank you for all the help. Everything from tips on how to get the item IDed to the IDs themselves. I really appreciate it

[Misha]

As I was sorting through my find I came across this guy:

 

No idea as to the ID, maybe some rhynchonellid based on the ribbing? but the shape does not match any that I know.

What interests me a lot about this brachiopod though is the little pinhole on it, was it caused by predation? Burrowers? or is it just a product of weathering?

 

I would love to hear some opinions as to either of those things.

Thank you,

 

[Misha]

@Tidgy's Dad @Jeffrey P

Any ideas as to what this might be?

[Tidgy's Dad]

Not sure I'm afraid.

Don't forget that, unlike bivalves that are full of juicy yummy stuff, brachiopods are largely empty barring fine lophophores, the animal is small and located only near the beak end. Modern ones are also said to taste horrible, are often coloured with warning reds and oranges (in shallower waters) and most predators avoid them. It's not impossible that a starving or confused predator bored into the shell, but it's an enormous waste of energy to keep trying this until you get to the fleshy bit near the hinge.