Yoda Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 I have seen similar looking Trilobites from China listed as Illaenula vietnamica & Ductina vietnamica (on different websites) Are both these names the same species? MotM August 2023 - Eclectic Collector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevonianDigger Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 I believe that they are the same species. If I understand correctly, it was originally classified as I. vietnamica, but was later reclassified as D. Vietnamica (Maximova, 1965). @piranha, can you shed any light on this, perhaps with some documentation so that I can understand it better as well. I had a hard time researching this one. Jay A. Wollin Lead Fossil Educator - Penn Dixie Fossil Park and Nature Reserve Hamburg, New York, USA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 Ductina was erected by Ricter in 1931. Chlupac erected Illaenula in 1977. Maximova erected the species Ductina vietnamica in 1965. Sometime in 1977 or later the species was transferred to I. vietnamica. My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevonianDigger Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, DPS Ammonite said: Ductina was erected by Richter in 1931. Chlupac erected Illaenula in 1977. Maximova erected the species Ductina vietnamica in 1965. Sometime in 1977 or later the species was transferred to I. vietnamica. So it went from Ductina to Illaenula? I thought it went the other way around. Do you have a link to any of those documents by chance? Jay A. Wollin Lead Fossil Educator - Penn Dixie Fossil Park and Nature Reserve Hamburg, New York, USA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 It theoretically could have gone back to Ductina from Illaenula , but it did start out as Ductina since Illaenula did not exist in 1965. I have not found the actual papers. I found info on Fossilworks re the two genuses. http://fossilworks.org/bridge.pl?a=taxonInfo&taxon_no=21547 http://fossilworks.org/bridge.pl?a=taxonInfo&taxon_no=21608 Also see: http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1210470 http://bionames.org/references/56a9e4ae75893e25c22a6d92ec819424 My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevonianDigger Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 6 minutes ago, DPS Ammonite said: It theoretically could have gone back to Ductina from Illaenula , but it did start out as Ductina since Illaenula did not exist in 1965. I have not found the actual papers. I found info on Fossilworks re the two genuses. http://fossilworks.org/bridge.pl?a=taxonInfo&taxon_no=21547 http://fossilworks.org/bridge.pl?a=taxonInfo&taxon_no=21608 Also see: http://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1210470 Thanks for those links. I don't know why, but I wasn't finding them on Fossilworks, which was my stumbling point. *EDIT - oh, I see what you did on Fossilworks. I thought you had found the actual species on there, which I could not. Jay A. Wollin Lead Fossil Educator - Penn Dixie Fossil Park and Nature Reserve Hamburg, New York, USA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 This reference might show if it has been transferred to a new genus: Chlupac, I. 1977. The phacopid trilobites of the Silurian and Devonian of Czechoslavakia. Rozpravy Ustfedmho Ustavu Geologickeho 43: 1-172 My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 Thanks everyone for the info. MotM August 2023 - Eclectic Collector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 As a rule PBDB is not very precise or thorough on invertebrates. Chlupac 1977 established the subgenus Illaenula but there are published papers in China that have continued to classify it as Ductina. Han & Chen 2007 cited Chlupac 1977 and discussed the species concept of Ductina but did not use the name Illaenula. As the overall consensus of literature follows Chlupac 1977, including Jell & Adrain 2003, Illaenula is the preferred classification. Han, N, Chen, G.Y. 2007 Moulting Variability in the Middle Devonian Trilobite Ductina from Nandan, Guanxi, China. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 46(2):167-182 text from: Richter, R., Richter, E. 1931 Unterlagen zum Fossilium Catalogus, Trilobitae. V. Senckenbergiana, 13:140-146. text from: Maximova, Z.A. 1965 Novye devonskie trilobity Severnogo Vietnama. [New Devonian trilobites from North Vietnam.] Ezhegodnik Vsesouiznogo Paleontologicheskogo Obschchestva, 17:174-179 text from: Chlupáč, I. 1977 The Phacopid trilobites of the Silurian and Devonian of Czechoslovakia. Rozpravy Ústředního Ústavu Geologického, 43:1-172 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts