Annotated Index of Fossil and Recent Silicoflagellates and Ebridians With Descriptions and Illustrations of Validly Proposed Taxa

Loeblich, Laurel A.; Tappan, Helen; Loeblich, Alfred R.

doi:10.1130/mem106-p1

Cited by 68 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This agrees with their reported absence in the other Late Cretaceous siliceous assemblages described so far (Loeblich et al, 1968).…”

Section: Late Cretaceoussupporting

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Late Cretaceous to Pleistocene Archaeomonads, Ebridians, Endoskeletal Dinoflagellates, and Other Siliceous Microfossils from the Subantarctic Southwest Pacific, DSDP, Leg 29

Perch-Nielsen¹

1975

Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Late Cretaceous, late Eocene, and Neogene archaeomonads, ebridians, endoskeletal dinoflagellates, and some siliceous microfossils of uncertain affinity found in the siliceous sequences penetrated on DSDP Leg 29 are described and illustrated. As much as possible, their stratigraphic distribution on Leg 29 is indicated, discussed, and compared with other reports. Some new archaeomonads and two new ebridians are described. INTRODUCTIONRecently (Dumitrica, 1973), presented a thorough investigation of the Cenozoic endoskeletal dinoflagellates from the southwestern Pacific sediments cored during DSDP Leg 21. On DSDP Leg 29, in an area immediately to the south of Leg 21 (Figure 1), cored sediments range in age from Late Cretaceous to Pleistocene and contain siliceous spicules of endoskeletal dinoflagellates. The same sediments usually contain common to abundant diatoms, and often radiolarians (Petrushevskaya, this volume), as well as archaeomonads and ebridians. The latter were discussed by Ling (1973), from DSDP Leg 19 in the North Pacific. Dumitrica (1973) described and discussed the few genera and species of Actiniscidae and has given their stratigraphic distribution from the middle Oligocene to the middle Pleistocene. In this report, the siliceous spicules of the endoskeletal dinoflagellates of Late Cretaceous and late Eocene to Pleistocene age are illustrated on Plate 10, and their stratigraphic distribution is shown in Tables 1 to 3. On the same tables the distribution of the archaeomonads and ebridians illustrated on Plates 1 to 9 and 12 is also shown. In the following discussion each group is considered separately. Methods of StudyThe samples studied for this report were either smear slides prepared for coccolith investigations, or slides prepared from samples treated with diluted HC1, and then washed several times by centrifuging. In this manner, the very small forms could be observed. For some samples an extra slide was prepared from material washed through a 53µ sieve to permit an easier survey of the larger forms. Canada balsam was used as a mounting medium. ARCHAEOMONADSThe Archaeomonadaceae are a family of fossil marine chrysomonadins and probably have led a planktonic life in the photic zone of the oceans. During their life cycle the single cells formed cysts consisting of SiCh which may be considered as resting stages. The cysts have an opening of different size and form, which served as an escape tunnel for the protoplasmatic cell content. This was after the resting stage in the protective Siθ2 sphere was over (Stradner, 1971).Archaeomonads are known from the Late Cretaceous to the Miocene. So far no archaeomonads have been described from the Oligocene and the Pliocene (Tynan, 1971). It is therefore of special interest to note their occurrence in the Oligocene at Sites 278 and 280 and in the (?)Pliocene at Site 278. The siliceous Upper Cretaceous sequence penetrated at Site 275 yielded few to common archaeomonads. The most well known and common, Micrampulla parvula Hanna, has been descr...

show abstract

“…This agrees with their reported absence in the other Late Cretaceous siliceous assemblages described so far (Loeblich et al, 1968).…”

Section: Late Cretaceoussupporting

confidence: 94%

“…The morphologic terms used are those commonly employed and summarized by Deflandre (1951). Extensive use was made of the descriptions and illustrations collected in Loeblich et al (1968), where the original literature was not available.…”

Section: Systematic Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Late Cretaceous to Pleistocene Archaeomonads, Ebridians, Endoskeletal Dinoflagellates, and Other Siliceous Microfossils from the Subantarctic Southwest Pacific, DSDP, Leg 29

Perch-Nielsen¹

1975

Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…biapiculata have a narrow apical bar, typical for this species. The basal body ring, however, is often shorter than the illustrated specimens of N. biapiculata in Ling (1972) and Loeblich et al (1968). On the other hand, these forms have longer radial spines than N. iberica Deflandre and their basal body ring is not so square or broad, as in N. quadrata (Ehrenberg) Ling, or N. lata (Deflandre) Frenguelli.…”

Section: Naviculopsis Biapiculata Sl (Lemmermann) Frenguelli 1940mentioning

confidence: 87%

“…35, fig. 15 in Loeblich et al, 1968) Remarks: The single specimen illustrated (Plate 3, Figure 18) was found in the late Eocene of Site 277, while C. lamellifera hastata was originally described from the early Eocene. The forms are similar in the fiat, broad apical structure, and in the presence of flat triangular sustaining spines at the two sidelines of the triangle, while a spine seems to be missing on the base of the triangle.…”

Section: Corbisema Inermis Disymmetrica Dumitrica 1973mentioning

confidence: 99%

Late Cretaceous to Pleistocene Silicoflagellates from the Southern Southwest Pacific, DSDP, Leg 29

Perch-Nielsen¹

1975

Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Because general usage (Deflandre, 1950;Mandra, 1968;Martini, 1971;Ling, 1972) of the name Dictyocha fibula has been for a third type of symmetric silicoflagellate that dominates the illustrations of D. fibula in Ehrenberg (1854), several possible solutions exist: (1) If the type of D. fibula is as described in Loeblich et al (1968), then taxa in this report that are tabulated and illustrated as D. stapedia aspinosa and D. stapedia stapedia could be the original D. fibula and could be placed in synonomy with emendation for secondary structural variation. (2) If the type is as discussed by Dumitrica (1973b), then specimens tabulated in this report as D. brevispina should be assigned to D. fibula; the D. stapedia group could remain as cited; but, the form tabulated here as D. fibula fibula, based on Ehrenberg (1854), would require a different name, perhaps as a subspecies within the D. perlaevis group.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Silicoflagellate and Coccolith Stratigraphy, Southeastern Pacific Ocean, Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 34

Bukry¹

1976

Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Annotated Index of Fossil and Recent Silicoflagellates and Ebridians With Descriptions and Illustrations of Validly Proposed Taxa

Cited by 68 publications

References 0 publications

Late Cretaceous to Pleistocene Archaeomonads, Ebridians, Endoskeletal Dinoflagellates, and Other Siliceous Microfossils from the Subantarctic Southwest Pacific, DSDP, Leg 29

Late Cretaceous to Pleistocene Archaeomonads, Ebridians, Endoskeletal Dinoflagellates, and Other Siliceous Microfossils from the Subantarctic Southwest Pacific, DSDP, Leg 29

Late Cretaceous to Pleistocene Silicoflagellates from the Southern Southwest Pacific, DSDP, Leg 29

Silicoflagellate and Coccolith Stratigraphy, Southeastern Pacific Ocean, Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 34

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About