Manticocerasman Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 This weekend Natalie found an intriguing fossil: a Hypoturrillites whit an epibiont on the shell. I've rarely seen this kind of association and it makes me wonder if the epibiont was already on the shell when the ammonite was alive or dit it grow on it after it fell on the sea floor. If anyone has papers on the subject it would be greatly apriciated ( @doushantuo maybe? ) 4 growing old is mandatory but growing up is optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Siphuncle Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Cool. Guessing this was a post mortem attachment. Grüße, Daniel A. Wöhr aus Südtexas "To the motivated go the spoils." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manticocerasman Posted June 12, 2019 Author Share Posted June 12, 2019 I got a paper relating to the phenomenom on this ammonite, thx to Hervé. ( the paper is in French ) https://www.scienceaction.asso.fr/sites/default/files/doc_publication/epibiontesammonites-breton-02102006.pdf growing old is mandatory but growing up is optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 18 hours ago, Manticocerasman said: This weekend Natalie found an intriguing fossil: a Hypoturrillites whit an epibiont on the shell. I've rarely seen this kind of association and it makes me wonder if the epibiont was already on the shell when the ammonite was alive or dit it grow on it after it fell on the sea floor. If anyone has papers on the subject it would be greatly apriciated ( @doushantuo maybe? ) In my experience you can have both situations, but it’s not always easy to determine which is the case. If the shell is covered with them mostly on just one side, then they most certainly took up residence after the animal had died and its corpse had sunk to the sea floor. If they have disturbed the growth of the shell in any obvious way, then they settled down before the creature had died. It’s hard to tell in the case of your Hypoturrilites though, although I would hazard the guess that it happened after death, since the tube worm is quite large. 2 Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herve Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 Hello Thanks you J collecting only fossils since 30 years old,ammonites,heteromorphe ammonite,crabs,fish trilobit, sea urshins, mammals, etc...J am married . Sorry for my enghish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manticocerasman Posted June 12, 2019 Author Share Posted June 12, 2019 4 hours ago, Ludwigia said: In my experience you can have both situations, but it’s not always easy to determine which is the case. If the shell is covered with them mostly on just one side, then they most certainly took up residence after the animal had died and its corpse had sunk to the sea floor. If they have disturbed the growth of the shell in any obvious way, then they settled down before the creature had died. It’s hard to tell in the case of your Hypoturrilites though, although I would hazard the guess that it happened after death, since the tube worm is quite large. Thx for your insight Roger. the worm tube was at the underside of the ammonite ( I found it in situ ) I would expect that epibionts would have rather grown on top of it. But I don’t now if that is the case for tube worms. So this might be an indication that it was on the animal before its death, but then again the shell might have rolled over before being burrowed in the sediments. I’ll probably never know. 1 growing old is mandatory but growing up is optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 7 hours ago, Manticocerasman said: Thx for your insight Roger. the worm tube was at the underside of the ammonite ( I found it in situ ) I would expect that epibionts would have rather grown on top of it. But I don’t now if that is the case for tube worms. So this might be an indication that it was on the animal before its death, but then again the shell might have rolled over before being burrowed in the sediments. I’ll probably never know. I have many ammonites where the epibionts are on both sides, indicating a turbulent environment at the very beginning of the fossilization process, but I think you’re right in saying we’ll never really know. 1 Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 some of you may like: misakuheteromammolepi0.pd COMMENSAL ANOMIID BIVALVES ON LATE CRETACEOUS HETEROMORPH AMMONITES FROM SOUTH-WEST JAPAN by AKIHIRO MISAKI*,HARUYOSHI MAEDA, TARO KUMAGAE and MASAHIRO ICHIDA Palaeontology, Vol. 57, Part 1, 2014, pp. 77–95] @Heteromorph @Manticocerasman 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manticocerasman Posted June 13, 2019 Author Share Posted June 13, 2019 22 minutes ago, doushantuo said: some of you may like: misakuheteromammolepi0.pd COMMENSAL ANOMIID BIVALVES ON LATE CRETACEOUS HETEROMORPH AMMONITES FROM SOUTH-WEST JAPAN by AKIHIRO MISAKI*,HARUYOSHI MAEDA, TARO KUMAGAE and MASAHIRO ICHIDA Palaeontology, Vol. 57, Part 1, 2014, pp. 77–95] @Heteromorph @Manticocerasman Thx Ben growing old is mandatory but growing up is optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 if heteromorphs were actively moving animals,during its lifetime this encrustation would/might have disrupted water flow around the shell of the animal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.JPG.3a1778fd4fed4623e03d62617112cc00.JPG)
Recommended Posts