1996
DOI: 10.1080/10420949609380136
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SmallCruziana, rusophycus,and related ichnotaxa from eastern Canada: The nomenclatural debate and systematic ichnology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
54
0
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
4
54
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, C. problematica is widely reported and is considered the most stable ichnospecies (e.g., Mángano et al, 2002b). The specimens documented here are very similar to C. tenella described by Jensen (1997) from the Mickwitzia Sandstone, south-central Sweden and C. problematica described by Keighley and Pickerill (1996) from eastern Canada. The name C. problematica is preferred here over C. tenella for reasons of nomenclatural stability (Mángano et al, 2002b Description.-Horizontal, straight to slightly oblique, unbranched trails with trilobate upper surface consisting of two outer narrow lobes (each 1.7-2.6 mm wide) and one broad, flat central lobe (4.2-5.6 mm wide).…”
Section: Systematic Paleontologysupporting
confidence: 61%
“…However, C. problematica is widely reported and is considered the most stable ichnospecies (e.g., Mángano et al, 2002b). The specimens documented here are very similar to C. tenella described by Jensen (1997) from the Mickwitzia Sandstone, south-central Sweden and C. problematica described by Keighley and Pickerill (1996) from eastern Canada. The name C. problematica is preferred here over C. tenella for reasons of nomenclatural stability (Mángano et al, 2002b Description.-Horizontal, straight to slightly oblique, unbranched trails with trilobate upper surface consisting of two outer narrow lobes (each 1.7-2.6 mm wide) and one broad, flat central lobe (4.2-5.6 mm wide).…”
Section: Systematic Paleontologysupporting
confidence: 61%
“…They were later considered by Glaessner (1957) to be a junior synonym of the invertebrate ichnotaxon Isopodichnus, and were included as such in Häntzschel (1975). Species of Isopodichnus are now considered junior synonyms of either Cruziana or Rusophycus (Keighley and Pickerill 1996).…”
Section: Nanopus (?) Vetustus and Bipezia Bilobatamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The presence of discrete scratch marks and of uniformly shallow, narrow lobes is diagnostic of C. problematica (e.g. Keighley & Pickerill, 1996;Schlirf et al, 2001;Balistieri et al, 2002;Lermen, 2006). Cruziana is generally interpreted as produced by the locomotion activity (sometimes allied with feeding) of LIMA & NETTO -TRACE FOSSILS FROM THE TERESINA FORMATION arthropods, chiefly trilobites.…”
Section: Ichnogenusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The only ichnoespecies not attributed to trilobites is C. problematica, which results from the displacement of isopod and notostracan crustaceans and, possibly, myriapods (e.g. Bromley & Asgaard, 1979;Pollard, 1985;Keighley & Pickerill, 1996;Schlirf et al, 2001). In Upper Paleozoic rocks, C. problematica has been recorded mainly in non-marine deposits (Bromley & Asgaard, 1979;Gradzinski & Uchman, 1994;Schlirf et al, 2001;Balistieri et al, 2002;Lermen, 2006 For the same reason, it was not possible to characterize the spreiten of the studied specimens as retrusive or protrusive, leaving doubt about the activity by which the producer had left this record.…”
Section: Ichnogenusmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation