Jump to content

sTamprockcoin

Recommended Posts

Just picked this and a similar one up this morning. This is a Devonian , Brallier/Harrell formation, raod cut a few blocks from my house.

Is this a preserved track and (I know its indistinct) and if so from what kind of critter?

Any help is appreciated.

31717a.jpg

31717b.jpg

  • I found this Informative 1

“Beautiful is what we see. More beautiful is what we understand. Most beautiful is what we do not comprehend.” N. Steno

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a trace fossil of a brittle star, made by the arm when it was crawling. 

 

Pteridichnites biseriatus, Brallier Formation. 

  • I found this Informative 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice find, Tim! :) 

 

I agree,  - similar ones found in this flickr album.

Regards, 

  • I found this Informative 1

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the similarities are obvious it seems a little odd that a  long brittle star arm can produce such a neat trace if it was crawling? Also just to poke at this a bit more, the arm doesn't appear to taper like most brittle stars. I haven't read any of the relevant  literature which interprets this ichnofossil so I'm just throwing it out there, maybe there are some modern comparitive studies? 

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, westcoast said:

While the similarities are obvious it seems a little odd that a  long brittle star arm can produce such a neat trace if it was crawling? Also just to poke at this a bit more, the arm doesn't appear to taper like most brittle stars. I haven't read any of the relevant  literature which interprets this ichnofossil so I'm just throwing it out there, maybe there are some modern comparitive studies? 

 

The trace fossil from what I recall was made by a constant crawling through the mud, so tapering wouldn't likely occur in the fossil. The neatness is very nice on this specimen, most are far more poorly preserved than this one, so don't take this as the common condition. Also, different animals would obviously have slightly different tracks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If You watch brittle star videos thier movement is by flailing thier arms. It is a unique form of locomotion. I co not see how that type of movement could leave a continuous track.

Also - where are the marks left by the other arms of a brittle star?

http://www.livescience.com/20196-brittle-star-movement.html

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=brittle+star+movement&qpvt=brittlestar+movement&FORM=VDRE

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking something along the lines of the makers of Gyrochorte or a straighter type of Nereites biserialis.  There is  no consensus as to the makers of those traces but nobody suggests ophiuroid. Ichnology really is the Dark Arts of paleontology however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ynot said:

If You watch brittle star videos thier movement is by flailing thier arms. It is a unique form of locomotion. I co not see how that type of movement could leave a continuous track.

Also - where are the marks left by the other arms of a brittle star?

http://www.livescience.com/20196-brittle-star-movement.html

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=brittle+star+movement&qpvt=brittlestar+movement&FORM=VDRE

 

The paper that sTamprockcoin posted suggests how the trace could have been made, but, in my opinion,... is far from the last word on the subject. 

 

"As pointed out by one of the paper’s reviewers (Philip Novack-Gottshall, personal communication, 2006), if P. biseriatus is the product of an ophiuroid or an asterozoan, the lack of pentameral symmetry in the impressions of arms, especially in association with possible feeding marks, seems contradictory. We would offer the observation that intact bedding surfaces containing multiple P. biseriatus are commonly marked by very small (less than 1 cm. in height), broad ripples. The irregular topography of this sediment surface may have precluded the preservation of the imprints of all five arms.

Alternatively, as illustrated and discussed by Schäfer (1972, Figure 117, p. 210), the typical mode of ophiuroid movement is by single-arm locomotion where one arm propels the organism (see Figure 6) and the remaining arms trail behind. This may help explain the predominance of single P. biseriatus even in conjunction with mouth impressions, especially if the tracemaker was feeding opportunistically as it moved across the bottom ."

 

I agree that the fossil is Pteridichnites biseriatus, but am skeptical of the trace maker's identity.

  • I found this Informative 3

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Pteridichnites biseriatus is the correct name for this trace but the maker is questionable

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the variety of discussion. I thought that this uncertainty might be the case. I'm pleased to know the name and quality of what I've found. I'm  definitely going to do more exploring at the spot and who knows maybe I'll make a contribution to the bottom feeders (pun on trace fossils) of paleontology.:trilowalk:

  • I found this Informative 2

“Beautiful is what we see. More beautiful is what we understand. Most beautiful is what we do not comprehend.” N. Steno

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
On 3/18/2017 at 12:35 AM, westcoast said:

I haven't read any of the relevant  literature which interprets this ichnofossil so I'm just throwing it out there, maybe there are some modern comparitive studies? 

 

On 3/18/2017 at 4:05 PM, sTamprockcoin said:

I'm pleased to know the name and quality of what I've found.

 

I find this older topic related to Pteridichnites biseriatus.
According to Miller et al., 2009, Pteridichnites biseriatus is now considered Psammichnites biseriatus.

 

" The specimens from the Saltville area suggest that Psammichnites biseriatus was produced by a small, shallow-burrowing, mollusc- or annelid-like deposit feeder, that thrived in the upper parts of recently deposited muddy turbidites in a depositional basin that supported few other kinds of benthic organisms, owing to frequent erosion-deposition events, continual turbidity and influx of freshwater from Catskill deltaic lobes to the east, and possibly because of intervals/zones of stagnation and eutrophication at the seafloor. "

 

 

  • I found this Informative 1

" We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. "

Thomas Mann

My Library

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

I might have found one today too, (maybe in the same outcrop since Tim and I are neighbors)  but mine was neither as long nor as sharply defined.  To be honest in the field I thought it was a trilobite track and I gave it away.    But now I have a new appreciation for the Brallier rocks I dig up in my garden.   I gather experts no longer think brittlestar?   But for fun, see pages 260-261 in this 1913 source, which might be the type fossil when it was first thought to be one.  https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc6000/sc6046/000000/000001/000000/000035/pdf/msa_sc6046_1_35.pdf

 

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
×
×
  • Create New...