Paradoxides type from ZAGORA

[mediterranic]

Hello guys,

any thoughts about the best match of this Paradoxides type one, not from Tinjdad but from a cambrian area near Zagora?

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks in advance,

Miguel

[Kane]

A number of our members are having difficulties posting images on the forum as of late. We are aware of the problem, and a service request to the provider should identify the problem and lead to a fix in the near future.  Our apologies for the (temporary) inconvenience.

[mediterranic]

Thanks for the information and for the support.

 

I turned around this temporary issue through my portfolio.

 

The pictures from this specimen are online here: 

 

[Kane]

As per our forum policy, we cannot post sales links here. It is also highly preferable to post images directly here. Since that is not an option at the moment, you may have to be patient until we can get a fix in place.  

[Fossildude19]

I've uploaded the photos to the original post.  

[mediterranic]

5 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

I've uploaded the photos to the original post.  

Thanks a lot :-)

[doushantuo]

Medi,you have several publication by Linan and Gozalo at your disposal?

[FossilDAWG]

Very nice trilobite.    @piranha would be able to offer the most authoritative comments on the species.

 

Don

[mediterranic]

2 minutes ago, doushantuo said:

Medi,you have several publication by Linan and Gozalo at your disposal?

Not here with low internet plafond at the desert.

[doushantuo]

http://geol00.geol.uniovi.es/TDG/Volumen01/TG01-06.PDF

Don is right,of course,Piranha's encyclopedic trilo knowledge is unsurpassable and most certainly will provide a fairly definitive answer 

PLEASE TAKE NOTE of the age of this piece:both taxonomy and stratigraphy might be outdated

Esteve's piece on Spanish Paradoxides variability will be in Fruitbat's Library and MOST certainly in Píranha 's compendium of free trilobite papers.

i THINK i might have miscellaneous shorter pieces from the Boletin Minero.and if so,mostly from Gil Cid

 

 

this only contains one paradoxid,rouvillei.

I can't decipher the map enough to see if any localities are "near Zaragoza"

 

 

 

 

 

 

[doushantuo]

Esteve and Alvaro have recently(online per june 2017,Geological Magazine) taken a closer look at Moroccan and Spanish lower Cambrian trilobites,but that one's paywalled

[piranha]

The Moroccan paradoxidids are up in the air right now.  Until additional info is available, label it: Acadoparadoxides sp.

 

 

Álvaro, J.J., Esteve, J., & Zamora, S. (2017)

Morphological assessment of the earliest paradoxidid trilobites (Cambrian Series 3) from Morocco and Spain.

Geological Magazine, (ahead-of-print publication) pp. 1-30

 

Geyer, G., & Vincent, T. (2015)

The Paradoxides puzzle resolved: the appearance of the oldest paradoxidines and its bearing on the Cambrian Series 3 lower boundary.

Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 89(3):335-398  PDF LINK

 

Geyer, G. (1993)

The giant Cambrian trilobites of Morocco.
Beringeria, 8:71-107

[mediterranic]

Thanks a lot for your opinion, @piranha

[fifbrindacier]

Nice trilobite, tanks for sharing it with us.

[mediterranic]

1 minute ago, fifbrindacier said:

Nice trilobite, tanks for sharing it with us.

Thank you @fifbrindacier

[Tidgy's Dad]

It looks like what we would call Acanthoparadoxides mureroensis here. 

I understand these have been described from Spain, but not officially from Morocco. 

Yet.

As Piranha says, they need more study and revision here in Morocco. 

[mediterranic]

Meanwhile, more pictures from this plate. At the back side, there is another huge incomplete specimen

[mediterranic]

nop, uploads still failing. Sorry

 

Miguel

[piranha]

7 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

It looks like what we would call Acanthoparadoxides mureroensis here. 

I understand these have been described from Spain, but not officially from Morocco. 

Yet. As Piranha says, they need more study and revision here in Morocco.

 

 

Geyer & Vincent 2015 have already formally described Acadoparadoxides cf. mureroensis from Morocco.  And most recently, Álvaro et al. 2017 have emended the diagnosis of A. mureroensisis to include the following Moroccan species of Geyer & Vincent 2015: A. cf. mureroensis, A. levisettii, A. ovatopyge, A. pampalius, suggested as synonyms of Acadoparadoxides mureroensis.

[Tidgy's Dad]

28 minutes ago, piranha said:

 

 

Geyer & Vincent 2015 have already formally described Acadoparadoxides cf. mureroensis from Morocco.  And most recently, Álvaro et al. 2017 have emended the diagnosis of A. mureroensisis to include the following Moroccan species of Geyer & Vincent 2015: A. cf. mureroensis, A. levisettii, A. ovatopyge, A. pampalius, suggested as synonyms of Acadoparadoxides mureroensis.

Thank you! 

I saw that Geyer and Vincent 2015 said the species could be "at best" A. cf. mureroensis, but haven't read Alvaro et al. Do you have this one, please? 

And therefore, that the above specimen could be A. mureroensis? 

[piranha]

56 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

I saw that Geyer and Vincent 2015 said the species could be "at best" A. cf. mureroensis, but haven't read Alvaro et al. Do you have this one, please? 

And therefore, that the above specimen could be A. mureroensis? 

 

 

You are overlooking other Moroccan species: Acadoparadoxides briareus Geyer 1993 and Acadoparadoxides nobilis Geyer 1998.  Considering the sophisticated landmark-based geometric morphometric statistical analysis utilized by Álvaro et al., I still think it is best to apply a conservative ID when attempting to evaluate this example based only on photographic evidence. 

 

 

Geyer, G. (1998)

Intercontinental, trilobite-based correlation of the Moroccan early Middle Cambrian.

Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 35(4):374-401

[mediterranic]

Thank you @piranha

Also interested on Álvaro, J.J., Esteve, J., & Zamora, S. (2017), if possible, to see if measures are possible to take.

 

Miguel 

[Tidgy's Dad]

46 minutes ago, piranha said:

 

 

You are overlooking other Moroccan species: Acadoparadoxides briareus Geyer 1993 and Acadoparadoxides nobilis Geyer 1998.  Considering the sophisticated landmark-based geometric morphometric statistical analysis utilized by Álvaro et al., I still think it is best to apply a conservative ID when attempting to evaluate this example based only on photographic evidence. 

 

 

Geyer, G. (1998)

Intercontinental, trilobite-based correlation of the Moroccan early Middle Cambrian.

Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 35(4):374-401

No, I am quite familiar with A. briareus and A. nobilis , but this doesn't seem to match either, especially the latter which is a bit smaller?  Genuinely hope to be able to learn from you. 

Thanks again. 

 

[piranha]

5 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

No, I am quite familiar with A. briareus and A. nobilis , but this doesn't seem to match either, especially the latter which is a bit smaller?  Genuinely hope to be able to learn from you. 

Thanks again. 

 

 

Then why did you exclude them as possibilities?  Geyer's original concept of Acadoparadoxides briareus has 18 thoracic segments, modified to 17 segments (matches OP specimen) in Geyer & Vincent 2015.  Additionally, the example posted here is lacking important glabellar features, another reason for a cautious ID.  Given the ambiguity from Geyer to Alvaro et al., it seems imprudent for anyone but the experts to elaborate further. 

 

[Tidgy's Dad]

Very cautious.

First step. 

But both Geyer and Vincent 2015 and Alvaro et al. 2017 agree that Acadoparadoxides nobilis has a notched median indentation to the pygidium which is not present in the OPs well preserved pygidium, though part of the margin may be missing. A. nobilis also exhibits a shorter, very triangular/ trapezoidal shape to the pygidium while A. mureroensis and A. briareus have a much more rounded pygidium as does the specimen here. Also, A. nobilis doesn't get as big as the specimen pictured by the OP. 

Tentatively,I would suggest it's not A. nobilis.