Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T01:21:09.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Lower Pennsylvanian encrusting tabulate coral from a rocky shore environment developed on the Mississippian—Pennsylvanian unconformity surface in northwestern Arkansas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Gregory E. Webb
Gregory E. Webb*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Texas A & M University, College Station 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Paleozoic corals are very rare in rocky shore settings. The only Paleozoic encrusting coral so far reported from this environment is Favosites sp. from Ordovician rocky shore deposits in Manitoba, Canada (Johnson and Baarli, 1987). Reading and Poole (1961) reported corals and brachiopods that occur between, and “coating,” boulders from a Silurian rocky shore in England, but it appears that the corals and brachiopods only occur in the sediment enveloping the boulders, not as encrusters on the surfaces of the boulders. One reason for the sparse record of Paleozoic corals in rocky shore settings is the scarcity of described Paleozoic rocky shore deposits themselves. Johnson (1988) found only 20 examples of Paleozoic rocky shores in a compilation of references on ancient rocky shores from the literature. The paucity of described ancient rocky shores has been attributed to the prevalence in the past of epicontinental seas with little relief upon which to develop rocky shores and with higher wave attenuation farther from shore (Boucot, 1981; Harland and Pickerill, 1984). Johnson (1988) concluded that the major reason for the rarity of ancient rocky shores in the literature is the difficulty with which they are recognized and studied, owing to the relatively poor exposure of most unconformity surfaces. The rocky shore environment was also probably hostile to many Paleozoic coral genera. Recent scleractinian corals may serve as analogues because they are also not very abundant in rocky shore settings despite their great abundance in similar shallow-water, high-wave-energy reefal environments. Turbidity and relative substrate stability may be important limiting factors for corals in rocky shore environments. Many corals are known to be highly sensitive to sediment in the water column. Substrate stability (Wilson, 1987) and the scouring effects of sand in high-energy environments (Palmer and Palmer, 1977) also have been shown to affect the abundance and diversity of organisms encrusting cobbles and boulders.

Type
Paleontological Notes
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 67 , Issue 6 , November 1993 , pp. 1064 - 1068
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boucot, A. J. 1981. Principles of Benthic Marine Paleoecology. Academic Press, New York, 463 p.Google Scholar
de Koninck, L. G. 1841. Description des Animaux fossiles qui se trouvent dans le Terrain carbonifere de Belgique. H. Dessain, Liege, 48 p.Google Scholar
Frey, R. W., and Seilacher, A. 1980. Uniformity in marine invertebrate ichnology. Lethaia, 13:183–207.Google Scholar
Harland, T. L., and Pickerill, R. K. 1984. Ordovician rocky shoreline deposits—the basal Trenton Group around Quebec City, Canada. Geological Journal, 19:271–298.Google Scholar
Hill, D. 1981. Coelenterata, Part F, Supplement 1, Rugosa and Tabulata, p. F1–F762. In Teichert, C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Geological Society of America and the University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. E. 1988. Why are ancient rocky shores so uncommon? Journal of Geology, 96:469–480.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. E., and Baarli, B. G. 1987. Encrusting corals on a latest Ordovician to earliest Silurian rocky shore, southwest Hudson Bay, Manitoba, Canada. Geology, 15:15–17.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. E., Skinner, D. F., and MacLeod, K. G. 1988. Ecological zonation during the carbonate transgression of a Late Ordovician rocky shore (northeastern Manitoba, Hudson Bay, Canada). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 65:93–114.Google Scholar
Kissling, D. L. 1973. Circumrotary growth form in Recent and Silurian corals, p. 43–58. In Boardman, R. S., Cheetham, A. H., and Oliver, W. A. Jr. (eds.), Animal Colonies: Development and Function Through Time. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc., Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Lafuste, J., and Plusquellec, Y. 1985. Structure et microstructure de quelques Micheliniidae et michelinimorphes (Tabulata paleozoiques). Bulletin Museum d'Historie Naturelle, series 4, section C, no. 1:1–32.Google Scholar
Laub, R. S. 1979. The corals of the Brassfield Formation (mid-Llandovery; Lower Silurian) in the Cincinnati Arch region. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 75(305) 457 p.Google Scholar
Manger, W. L. 1977. Stop descriptions—first day, p. 11–17. In Sutherland, P. K. and Manger, W. L., (eds.), Upper Chesterian-Morrowan Stratigraphy and the Mississippian-Pennsylvanian Boundary in Northeastern Oklahoma and Northwestern Arkansas. Oklahoma Geological Survey Guidebook 18.Google Scholar
Milne-Edwards, H., and Haime, J. 1850. A monograph of the British Fossil Corals. Palaeontographical Society, London, 71 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, R. C., and Jeffords, R. M. 1945. Description of Lower Pennsylvanian corals from Texas and adjacent states. University of Texas Publication 4401:77–208.Google Scholar
Palmer, T. J., and Palmer, C. D. 1977. Faunal distribution and colonization strategy in a Middle Ordovician hardground community. Lethaia, 10:179–199.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. 1836. Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire, Pt 2, The Mountain Limestone District. John Murray, London, 253 p.Google Scholar
Plusquellec, Y., and Sando, W. J. 1987. The microstructure of Michelinia meekana Girty, 1910. Journal of Paleontology, 61:10–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reading, H. G., and Poole, A. B. 1961. A Llandovery shoreline from the southern Malverns. Geological Magazine, 98:295–300.Google Scholar
Rowett, C. L. 1966. Studies of Pennsylvanian corals in Oklahoma; Part I.—Tabulate corals of the Wapanucka Formation. Oklahoma Geological Circular, 72:5–34.Google Scholar
Sando, W. J. 1969. Revision of some of Girty's invertebrate fossils from the Fayetteville Shale (Mississippian) of Arkansas and Oklahoma—corals. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 606-B:9–14.Google Scholar
Sando, W. J., and Bamber, E. W. 1985. Coral zonation of the Mississippian System in the Western Interior Province of North America. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1334, 61 p.Google Scholar
Waagen, W. H., and Wentzel, J. 1886. Salt Range fossils. Vol. 1, Productus Limestone fossils, 6, Coelenterata. Palaeontologia Indica, 13:835–924.Google Scholar
Webb, G. E. 1987. The coral fauna of the Pitkin Formation (Chesterian), northeastern Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas. Journal of Paleontology, 61:462–493.Google Scholar
Webb, G. E. 1990. A new tabulate coral species from the Pitkin Formation (Chesterian) of north-central Arkansas. Journal of Paleontology, 64:664–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wedekind, R. 1937. Einfuhrung in die Grundlagen der historischen Geologie, II. Band. Microbiostratigraphie, Die korallen- und Foraminiferenzeit. Ferdinand Enke, Stuttgart, 136 p.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. A. 1987. Ecological dynamics on pebbles, cobbles, and boulders. Palaios, 2:594–599.Google Scholar