Jump to content

Yoda

Recommended Posts

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.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png.a47e14d65deb3f8b242019b3a81d8160.png MotM August 2023 - Eclectic Collector

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

 

 

image.png.adb3588570142281695c927d1fe6d685.png

text from:

 

Richter, R., Richter, E. 1931
Unterlagen zum Fossilium Catalogus, Trilobitae. V.
Senckenbergiana, 13:140-146.

 

 

image.png.1ec3b1e9726040a46343414c0ca205c6.png

text from:

 

Maximova, Z.A. 1965
Novye devonskie trilobity Severnogo Vietnama. [New Devonian trilobites from North Vietnam.]
Ezhegodnik Vsesouiznogo Paleontologicheskogo Obschchestva, 17:174-179

 

 

image.thumb.png.5168387eb89774e147634193c0b704f7.png

text from:

 

Chlupáč, I. 1977

The Phacopid trilobites of the Silurian and Devonian of Czechoslovakia.

Rozpravy Ústředního Ústavu Geologického, 43:1-172

  • I found this Informative 2

image.png.a84de26dad44fb03836a743755df237c.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...