Open Access
How to translate text using browser tools
30 June 2022 New records of injured Cambrian and Ordovician trilobites
Russell D.C. Bicknell, Patrick M. Smith, Thomas F. Howells, John R. Foster
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Records of abnormal fossil arthropods present important insight into how extinct forms responded to traumatic damage and developmental complications. Trilobites, bearing biomineralized dorsal exoskeletons, have arguably the most well-documented record of abnormalities spanning the Cambrian through the end-Permian. As such, new records of malformed, often injured, trilobites are occasionally identified. To further expand the documentation of abnormal specimens, we describe malformed specimens of Lyriaspis sigillum Whitehouse, 1939, Zacanthoides sp. indet., Asaphiscus wheeleri Meek, 1873, Elrathia kingii (Meek, 1870), and Ogygiocarella debuchii (Brongniart, 1822) from lower Paleozoic deposits. In considering these forms, we propose that they illustrate examples of injuries, and that the majority of these injuries reflect failed predation. We also considered the origin of injuries impacting singular segments, suggesting that these could reflect predation, self-induced damage, or intraspecific interactions during soft-shelled stages. Continued examination of lower Paleozoic trilobite injuries will further the understanding of how trilobites functioned as prey and elucidate how disparate trilobite groups recovered from failed attacks.

Introduction

Abnormal trilobites represent a primary means of understanding how a group of wholly extinct euarthropods responded to, and recovered from, injuries and developmental or genetic malfunctions (Owen, 1985; Babcock, 1993, 2007; Bicknell and Pates, 2020). The historical record of abnormal trilobites extends back to the middle nineteenth century (Portlock, 1845) with more detailed documentation arising during the later twentieth century (see Bergström and Levi-Setti, 1978; Šnajdr, 1978a, 1979, 1985; Rudkin, 1979, 1985; Conway Morris and Jenkins, 1985; Owen, 1985; Babcock and Robison, 1989; Babcock, 1993). In the last decade alone, a marked surge in publications documenting these abnormal specimens has occurred. The majority of these works have considered abnormal specimens in the context of trilobite paleobiology and paleoecosystems (Budil et al., 2010; Zamora et al., 2011; Fatka et al., 2015, 2021; Cheng et al., 2019; Bicknell and Pates, 2020; Bicknell and Smith, 2021; Bicknell et al., 2021b; Foster, 2021; Zong, 2021a, b). Population-based data have been presented to explore injury patterns and lateralization in the trilobite fossil record (Pates et al., 2017; Bicknell et al., 2019; Pates and Bicknell, 2019). Finally, limited publications have collated these observations to understand patterns of predation across the Paleozoic (Bicknell and Paterson, 2018; Vinn, 2018; Klompmaker et al., 2019). To further the examination of abnormal trilobites, and bolster evidence that is useful for large meta-analyses, we present seven new examples of abnormal specimens: one Lyriaspis sigillum Whitehouse, 1939 from the Wuliuan of Australia; one Zacanthoides sp. indet. (of Walcott, 1888) from the Wuliuan of the USA; two Asaphiscus wheeleri Meek, 1873, and two Elrathia kingii (Meek, 1870) from the Drumian of the USA; and one Ogygiocarella debuchii (Brongniart, 1822) from the Darriwilian of Wales.

Geological context

The Lyriaspis sigillum specimen (AM F33980 and AM F34209) was collected from the Beetle Creek Formation, Georgina Basin at the type section (proximal to the Templeton River headwaters), Mt. Isa, western Queensland, Australia. There the unit consists of 15 m of siliceous shale, fine sandstone, thin calcareous beds, and chert horizons that were likely deposited below a storm wave base, at the oceanward shelf edge of a large epeiric sea (Fleming, 1977; Kruse, 2002). This portion of the formation is occasionally referred to as the ‘Lower Siltstone Member’ (Russell, 1967), or the ‘undifferentiated Beetle Creek Formation’ (sensu Dunster et al., 2007). At the type locality, the unit unconformably overlies the Proterozoic rocks of the basin and is overlain by the Wuliuan-aged Inca Formation (Southgate and Shergold, 1991; Dunster et al., 2007). Presence of the trilobite species Deiradonyx sp. aff. D. collabrevis Öpik, 1982 (likely D. collabrevis) suggests placement in the Pentagnostus praecurrens Biozone—the latter taxon co-occurs with the eponym in the ‘White Shale’ member of the Coonigan Formation, Gnalta Shelf, western New South Wales (originally described as P. veles Öpik, 1979, later synonymized by Laurie, 1988). Further support comes from close faunal ties to the Jigaimara Formation (Laurie, 2006b), Arafura Basin, Northern Territory and the lithological correlations to the lower Arthur Creek Formation, southeastern Georgina Basin (Laurie, 2004, 2006a; Dunster et al., 2007). The Australian Pentagnostus praecurrens Zone sits within early Templetonian Stage, equivalent to the Wuliuan Stage (Sundberg et al., 2016, Peng et al., 2020 and references therein).

The Zacanthoides sp. indet. specimen (FHPR 17618) was collected from the Half Moon Mine locality, Chisholm Formation, Lincoln County, eastern Nevada. The Chisholm Formation there consists of 17–35 m of tan to gray to light reddish calcareous shale with some thin (0.05–3 m) interbedded carbonates (Sundberg, 2011). It is a relatively thin, slope-forming unit overlying the Lyndon Limestone and underlying the Highland Peak Formation. The examined specimen co-occured with trilobite genera, e.g., Amecephalus Walcott, 1924, Athabaskia Raymond, 1928, and Glossopleura Poulsen, 1927; echinoderms (Gogia Walcott, 1917); and the edrioasteroid Totiglobus Bell and Sprinkle, 1978 (Sundberg, 2011; Foster and Gaines, 2016). This fauna indicates that, at the Half Moon Mine, the Chisholm Formation is from the Glossopleura walcotti and Pentagnostus praecurrens biozones of the Wuliuan Stage (Sundberg, 2011; Peng et al., 2020).

The Asaphiscus wheeleri and Elrathia kingii specimens were collected from the Wheeler Formation, Millard County, western Utah, USA. The A. wheeleri (FHPR 16702, MWC 9973) and one E. kingii (MWC 9972) are from the House Range (Wheeler Amphitheater site), whereas another E. kingii (FHPR 16640) is from the Wheeler Formation in the Drum Mountains. The Wheeler Formation is up to 277 m of gray to olive to pinkish calcareous shale (Hintze and Davis, 2002, 2003). The formation overlies the Swasey Limestone and underlies the Marjum Formation in the House Range and the Pierson Cove Formation (a carbonate-rich, Marjum Formation equivalent) in the Drum Mountains. Restriction of the Wheeler Formation to the House Range and Drum Mountains reflects infilling of the middle Cambrian House Range Embayment—a fault-bounded, deep-water bathymetric feature of the Laurentian shelf that was surrounded on three sides by shallow carbonate belt deposits (Rees, 1986; Foster and Gaines, 2016). The deeper-water setting of the Wheeler Formation within the embayment allowed preservation of articulated trilobites and soft-bodied taxa (Robison et al., 2015). The examined specimens from the House Range are from the upper Wheeler Formation, and the Drum Mountains specimen is also from the upper portion of the same formation, ∼7 m below the Pierson Cove Formation. This places the material in the Bolaspidella and Ptychagnostus atavus biozones of the Drumian Stage (Babcock et al., 2007; Peng et al., 2020).

The Ogygiocarella debuchii specimen (AM F128230) originated from a Llanfawr quarry near the township of Llandrindod Wells, central Wales, UK. These quarries are known for complete O. debuchii specimens, as well as other well-preserved trilobites (Hughes, 1969, 1971, 1979; Owens, 1981, 2002; Sheldon, 1987a). The specimen was from the lower Llanfawr Mudstones (Sheldon, 1987b; Owens, 2002) of the Builth Inlier. The Llanfawr Mudstones layer is relatively thick (> 200 m at some localities) and dominated by fine mudstone and siltstone that were deposited in relatively quiet, middle to outer shelf depths (Fortey and Owens, 1987; Owens, 2002). Ogygiocarella debuchii ranges through the entire formation, between the upper Didymograptus murchisonii and lower Nemagraptus gracilis biozones. However, the specimens reported here are likely from the regional Llandeilian Stage (Hustedograptus? teretiusculus Biozone) (Sheldon, 1987b), correlating with the upper Middle Ordovician, Darriwilian (Bettley et al., 2001; Cooper and Sadler, 2012; Bicknell et al., 2021b).

Materials and methods

Trilobite specimens within the AM, FHPR, and MWC were reviewed for abnormalities by RDCB and JRF. A total of seven specimens were identified. Specimens were coated in magnesium oxide and photographed under low angle LED light with a Canon EOS 5DS (AM specimens) or a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (FHPR and MWC specimens). All measurements of specimens were made using ImageJ (Schneider et al., 2012).

Repositories and institutional abbreviations.—AM = Australian Museum, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; FHPR = Utah Field House of Natural History State Park Museum, Vernal, Utah, USA; MWC = Museums of Western Colorado, Dinosaur Journey Museum, Fruita, Colorado, USA.

Results

The Lyriaspis sigillum specimen is articulated internal (AM F34209) and external (AM F33980) molds, and AM F33980 is more complete (Fig. 1). The specimen has a U-shaped indentation on the left thoracic pleural lobe (Fig. 1.1, 1.2). The indentation impacts thoracic segments 3–6, truncates pleurae by 1 mm, and is 2.6 mm long. The abnormality margin is cicatrized and thoracic segments 4 and 5 are pinched distally (Fig. 1.1, 1.4).

The Zacanthoides sp. indet. specimen is a partial internal mold showing the anterior right cephalic and thoracic regions (FHPR 17618; Fig. 2.3, 2.4). The first thoracic pleural spine of the specimen has been truncated by 1.3 mm (Fig. 2.3, 2.4). The spine also has a U-shaped indentation with a reduced, posteriorly directed spine (Fig. 2.4). This reduced section likely records abnormal regrowth of the segment through subsequent molting events.

Two abnormal Asaphiscus wheeleri specimens were considered. The first specimen is a complete internal mold (MWC 9973; Fig. 3.1–3.3). MWC 9973 has two abnormalities on the left thoracic pleural lobe. The anterior abnormality truncates the thoracic pleurae 1–4 by ∼1.5 mm when compared to the right pleural lobe and shows an L-shaped morphology (sensu Bicknell and Pates, 2020). This region shows evidence of possible regrowth of the anteriormost pleurae. Further, the fourth thoracic pleura has a pinched region (Fig. 3.2). The posterior abnormality is a U-shaped indentation that impacts thoracic pleurae 7–9 and the anteriormost pygidium. The edge of this indentation shows marked cicatrization (Fig. 3.3) and truncates pleurae by 2.5 mm. The second specimen is an internal mold with a damaged cephalon (FHPR 16702; Fig. 3.4, 3.5). The specimen has a single segment injury (SSI) on the eighth pleura on the right pleural lobe. This truncates the pleural spine by 1.7 mm.

Figure 1.

Malformed Lyriaspis sigillum Whitehouse, 1939, Beetle Creek Formation (Miaolingian, Wuliuan): (1, 2) AM F34209: (1) complete specimen; (2) detail of abnormality in box in (1) showing U-shaped injury; (3, 4) AM F33980: (3) complete specimen; (4) detail of abnormality in box in (3) showing injury. All specimens coated. All images converted to grayscale.

img-z3-1_921.jpg

Figure 2.

Malformed Ogygiocarella debuchii (Brongniart, 1822) and Zacanthoides sp. indet. (of Walcott, 1888): (1, 2) Ogygiocarella debuchii from the Llanfawr Mudstones (Middle Ordovician, Darriwilian), AM F128230: (1) complete specimen; (2) detail of abnormality in box in (1) showing W-shaped indentation on the left side of the pygidium; (3, 4) Zacanthoides sp. indet. from the Half Moon Mine, Chisholm Formation (Miaolingian, Wuliuan), FHPR 17618: (3) complete specimen; (4) detail of abnormality in box in (3) showing abnormally developed pleural spine (white arrow). All specimens coated. All images converted to grayscale.

img-z4-1_921.jpg

Figure 3.

Malformed Asaphiscus wheeleri Meek, 1873, House Range, Wheeler Formation (Miaolingian, Drumian): (1–3) MWC 9973: (1) complete specimen; (2) detail of abnormality in box in (1) showing L-shaped injury and pinched pleural region (black arrow); (3) detail of abnormality in box in (1) showing U-shaped injury; (4, 5) FHPR 16702: (4) complete specimen; (5) detail of abnormality in box in (4) showing SSI (white arrow). All specimens coated. All images converted to grayscale.

img-z5-1_921.jpg

Figure 4.

Malformed Elrathia kingii (Meek, 1870), Wheeler Formation (Miaolingian, Drumian): (1, 2) MWC 9972, House Range outcrop: (1) complete specimen; (2) detail of abnormality in box in (1) showing large W-shaped indentation; (3, 4) FHPR 16640, Drum Mountains outcrop: (3) complete specimen; (4) detail of abnormality in box in (3) showing V-shaped indentation (dotted white line, white arrow). All specimens coated. All images converted to grayscale.

img-z6-1_921.jpg

Two abnormal Elrathia kingii specimens were identified. The first specimen is a complete internal mold (MWC 9972; Fig. 4.1, 4.2). MWC 9972 has a large W-shaped indentation on the left thoracic pleural lobe impacting thoracic pleurae 1–7. The indentation extends up to 4.3 mm into the specimen and shows evidence of cicatrization (Fig. 4.2). The second specimen is an internal mold and likely represents a molt (Daley and Drage, 2016; Drage et al., 2018; Drage, 2019) (FHPR 16640; Fig. 4.3, 4.4). The specimen has a V-shaped indentation with limited cicatrization that impacts thoracic pleurae 7 and 8 on the right pleural lobe (Fig. 4.4). This indentation truncates pleurae by 4.6 mm.

The Ogygiocarella debuchii specimen is an articulated internal mold (AM F128230; Fig. 2.1, 2.2). The specimen has a large W-shaped indentation on the left side of the pygidium that extends across ∼75% of the pygidium (Fig. 2.1, 2.2). The malformation is 17.1 mm long and the margin shows extensive fusion of the damaged pygidium. This results in an inflated pygidial border relative to other exoskeletal regions (Fig. 2.2).

Discussion

The abnormal trilobites documented here show evidence of removal of exoskeletal sections. Furthermore, no specimens have abnormal growths indicative of genetic malformations (Owen, 1980, 1985; Babcock, 1993; Bicknell and Smith, 2021) or circular/ovate structures indicative of pathologies (Šnajdr, 1978b; Babcock, 1993; De Beats et al., 2021). These specimens therefore show examples of injuries (Owen, 1985; Babcock, 1993; Pates et al., 2017; Bicknell et al., 2021b) that occurred through failed predation, a molting complication, or some other traumatic injury. Trilobites with overdeveloped thoracic spines, e.g., Nevadia weeksi (Walcott, 1910), likely experienced molting complications and would have damaged the hypertrophied spines (Conway Morris and Jenkins, 1985; Bicknell et al., 2022). The examined specimens lack these morphologies. Furthermore, L-, U-, V-, and W-shaped indentations are commonly attributed to failed predation (Šnajdr, 1981, 1985; Owen, 1985; Babcock, 1993, 2007; Fatka et al., 2009, 2015; Pates et al., 2017; Bicknell and Holland, 2020). As such, the indentations likely record failed predation.

Explanations for SSIs are therefore worth considering. When SSIs are observed with larger injuries on the opposing side (Conway Morris and Jenkins, 1985; Nedin, 1999; Bicknell et al., 2022), they likely reflect a bilateral predatory attack. When SSIs are not identified with larger injuries, further explanation is needed. It seems unlikely that predators large enough to consume trilobites would damage only one segment (Babcock, 1993). However, smaller predators could have removed a single section while a trilobite was in a soft-shelled stage. Failed predation as an explanation for unpaired SSIs is therefore plausible. An SSI could occur during enrollment—if an individual enrolled too quickly or on an abnormal angle, a segment could be nicked. Furthermore, intraspecific competition during feeding or seeking communal shelter during the postecdysal, soft-shell phase could have resulted in minor damage. As such, consideration of broader paleoecology is needed when proposing explanations for SSIs.

The injured Lyriaspis sigillum documented here represents the first record of a malformed trilobite from the Beetle Creek Formation and the second example of predation from the deposit (see Jones and McKenzie, 1980). The degree of exoskeletal warping around the injury in AM F34209/F33980 indicates that the specimen was damaged during a soft-shelled phase and also suggests that durophages were present in the Beetle Creek Formation biota. One of the co-occurring Xystridura spp. (four are currently known from the unit) is a possible injury-maker, given the size of the genus (Öpik, 1975). Appendage data is unknown for Xystridura Öpik, 1975; however, it was likely comparable to other predatory artiopodans and used gnathobasic spines on walking legs to masticate prey (Zacaï et al., 2016; Bicknell et al., 2018, 2021a). Alternatively, large, nonbiomineralized artiopodans with gnathobasic spines might have produced the injury and the lack of soft-bodied preservation in the Beetle Creek Formation precludes the identification of these forms. Regardless, the rarity of injured L. sigillum reflects either an occasional diet of smaller trilobites, or the complete consumption of prey. Shelly coprolites from equivalent Xystridura-bearing units (e.g., the Giles Creek Dolostone in the neighboring Amadeus Basin, Northern Territory) would support the second theory (unpublished data, Smith, 2022).

Prior to documentation of the injured Asaphiscus wheeleri specimen considered here, only malformed Asaphiscus wheeleri pygidia were known (Vorwald, 1984; Babcock, 1993; Bicknell and Paterson, 2018). The addition of thoracic injuries illustrates that Asaphiscus wheeleri was subject to more substantial predation than previously thought. Previous records of predation within the Wheeler Formation have been assigned to the activities of priapulid worms (Conway Morris and Robison, 1986), radiodonts (Babcock, 1993), and artiopodans with gnathobasic spines on walking legs (Bicknell and Pates, 2020). However, biomechanical and functional morphological evidence suggest that the last group were the most effective at breaking exoskeletons (Bruton, 1981; Stein, 2013; Zacaï et al., 2016; Bicknell et al., 2018, 2021a; Holmes et al., 2020). Further examination of the morphology and predatory ability of other possible predators from these sites is needed to present more complete paleoecological reconstructions and aid in understanding the role of predation during the earliest marine ecosystems.

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by an Australian Research Council grant (DP200102005), a University of New England Postdoctoral Fellowship (to RDCB), a Karl Hirsch Memorial Grant (to RDCB), and an Australian Museum AMF/AMRI Visiting Research Fellowship (to RDCB). Field work facilitated in part by US Bureau of Land Management permits UT16-014S and N-86224 (to JRF), with thanks to field crew members A.R.C. Milner, R. Hunt-Foster, J. Lehane, M. Perry, and T. Lawrence. MWC specimens were collected by D. Dayvault, and we thank J. McHugh for loan of this material. We thank S. Pates for discussions regarding causes of trilobite injuries. Finally, we thank R.-W. Zong and D. Rudkin for their thorough reviews that substantially improved the text.

References

1.

Babcock, L.E., 1993, Trilobite malformations and the fossil record of behavioral asymmetry: Journal of Paleontology, v. 67, p. 217–229. Google Scholar

2.

Babcock, L.E., 2007, Role of malformations in elucidating trilobite paleobiology: A historical synthesis, in Mikulic, D.G., Landing, E., and Kluessendorf, J., eds., Fabulous Fossils—300 Years of Worldwide Research on Trilobites: Albany, New York, University of the State of New York, State Education Dept., New York State Museum, p. 3–19. Google Scholar

3.

Babcock, L.E., and Robison, R.A., 1989, Preferences of Palaeozoic predators: Nature, v. 337, p. 695–696. Google Scholar

4.

Babcock, L.E., Robison, R.A., Rees, M.N., Peng, S., and Saltzman, M.R., 2007, The Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) of the Drumian Stage (Cambrian) in the Drum Mountains, Utah, USA: Episodes, v. 30, p. 84–92,  https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2007/v30i2/003Google Scholar

5.

Bell, B.M., and Sprinkle, J., 1978, Totiglobus, an unusual new edrioasteroid from the middle Cambrian of Nevada: Journal of Paleontology, v. 52, p. 243–266. Google Scholar

6.

Bergström, J., and Levi-Setti, R., 1978, Phenotypic variation in the middle Cambrian trilobite Paradoxides davidis Salter at Manuels, SE Newfoundland: Geologica et Palaeontologica, v. 12, p. 1–40. Google Scholar

7.

Bettley, R.M., Fortey, R.A., and Siveter, D.J., 2001, High-resolution correlation of Anglo-Welsh Middle to Upper Ordovician sequences and its relevance to international chronostratigraphy: Journal of the Geological Society, v. 158, p. 937–952,  https://doi.org/10.1144/0016-764900-193Google Scholar

8.

Bicknell, R.D.C., and Holland, B., 2020, Injured trilobites within a collection of dinosaurs: Using the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology to document Cambrian predation: Palaeontologia Electronica, v. 23, p. a33,  https://doi.org/10.26879/1087Google Scholar

9.

Bicknell, R.D.C., and Paterson, J.R., 2018, Reappraising the early evidence of durophagy and drilling predation in the fossil record: Implications for escalation and the Cambrian Explosion: Biological Reviews, v. 93, p. 754–784,  https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12365Google Scholar

10.

Bicknell, R.D.C., and Pates, S., 2020, Exploring abnormal Cambrian-aged trilobites in the Smithsonian collection: PeerJ, v. 8, p. e8453,  https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8453Google Scholar

11.

Bicknell, R.D.C., and Smith, P.M., 2021, Teratological trilobites from the Silurian (Wenlock and Ludlow) of Australia: The Science of Nature, v. 108, p. 1–11,  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-021-01766-6Google Scholar

12.

Bicknell, R.D.C., Ledogar, J.A., Wroe, S., Gutzler, B.C., Watson, W.H. III , and Paterson, J.R., 2018, Computational biomechanical analyses demonstrate similar shell-crushing abilities in modern and ancient arthropods: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, v. 285, p. 20181935,  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.1935Google Scholar

13.

Bicknell, R.D.C., Paterson, J.R., and Hopkins, M.J., 2019, A trilobite cluster from the Silurian Rochester Shale of New York: Predation patterns and possible defensive behavior: American Museum Novitates, v. 39, p. 1–16,  https://doi.org/10.1206/3937.1Google Scholar

14.

Bicknell, R.D.C., Holmes, J.D., Edgecombe, G.D., Losso, S.R., Ortega-Hernández, J., Wroe, S., and Paterson, J.R., 2021a, Biomechanical analyses of Cambrian euarthropod limbs reveal their effectiveness in mastication and durophagy: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, v. 288, p. 20202075,  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2020.2075Google Scholar

15.

Bicknell, R.D.C., Smith, P.M., Bruthansová, J., and Holland, B., 2021b, Malformed trilobites from the Ordovician and Devonian: PalZ,  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12542-021-00572-9Google Scholar

16.

Bicknell, R.D.C., Holmes, J.D., Pates, S., García-Bellido, D.C., and Paterson, J.R., 2022, Cambrian carnage: Trilobite predator-prey interactions in the Emu Bay Shale of South Australia: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 591, p. 110877,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2022.110877Google Scholar

17.

Brongniart, A., 1822, Sur la classification et la distribution des végétaux fossiles: Mémoires du Museum d'Histoire Naturelle (Paris), v. 8, p. 203–348. Google Scholar

18.

Bruton, D.L., 1981, The arthropod Sidneyia inexpectans, middle Cambrian, Burgess Shale, British Columbia: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, v. 295, p. 619–656. Google Scholar

19.

Budil, P., Fatka, O., Zwanzig, M., and Rak, Š., 2010, Two unique Middle Ordovician trilobites from the Prague Basin, Czech Republic: Journal of the National Museum (Prague), Natural History Series, v. 179, p. 95–104. Google Scholar

20.

Cheng, M.R., Han, J., Ou, G., Zhang, Z.F., Guo, J., and Zhang, X.L., 2019, Injured trilobite Eoredichia intermedia from the early Cambrian Chengjiang biota: Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, v. 58, p. 425–435,  https://doi.org/10.19800/j.cnki.aps.2019.04.001Google Scholar

21.

Conway Morris, S., and Jenkins, R.J.F., 1985, Healed injuries in early Cambrian trilobites from South Australia: Alcheringa, v. 9, p. 167–177. Google Scholar

22.

Conway Morris, S., and Robison, R., 1986, Middle Cambrian priapulids and other soft-bodied fossils from Utah and Spain: University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, v. 117, p. 1–22. Google Scholar

23.

Cooper, R.A., and Sadler, P.M., 2012, The Ordovician Period, in Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M., and Ogg, G., eds., The Geologic Time Scale 2012: Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 489–524. Google Scholar

24.

Daley, A.C., and Drage, H.B., 2016, The fossil record of ecdysis, and trends in the moulting behaviour of trilobites: Arthropod Structure & Development, v. 45, p. 71–96,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2015.09.004Google Scholar

25.

De Baets, K., Budil, P., Fatka, O., and Geyer, G., 2021, Trilobites as hosts for parasites: From paleopathologies to etiologies, in De Baets, K., and Huntley, J.W., eds., The Evolution and Fossil Record of Parasitism: Coevolution and Paleoparasitological Techniques: Cham, Switzerland, Springer International Publishing, p. 173–201,  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52233-9_6Google Scholar

26.

Drage, H.B., 2019, Quantifying intra- and interspecific variability in trilobite moulting behaviour across the Palaeozoic: Palaeontologia Electronica, v. 22, p. 1–39,  https://doi.org/10.26879/940Google Scholar

27.

Drage, H.B., Holmes, J.D., García-Bellido, D.C., and Daley, A.C., 2018, An exceptional record of Cambrian trilobite moulting behaviour preserved in the Emu Bay Shale, South Australia: Lethaia, v. 51, p. 473–492,  https://doi.org/10.1111/let.12266Google Scholar

28.

Dunster, J.N., Kruse, P.D., Duffett, M.L., and Ambrose, G.J., 2007, Geology and resource potential of the southern Georgina Basin: Northern Territory Geological Survey, Digital Information Package DIP007, CD-ROM. Google Scholar

29.

Fatka, O., Szabad, M., and Budil, P., 2009, Malformed agnostids from the middle Cambrian Jince Formation of the Pøíbram-Jince Basin, Czech Republic: Bulletin of Geosciences, v. 84, p. 121–126,  https://doi.org/10.3140/bull.geosci.1107Google Scholar

30.

Fatka, O., Budil, P., and Grigar, L., 2015, A unique case of healed injury in a Cambrian trilobite: Annales de Paléontologie, v. 101, p. 295–299,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annpal.2015.10.001Google Scholar

31.

Fatka, O., Budil, P., and Zicha, O., 2021, Exoskeletal and eye repair in Dalmanitina socialis (Trilobita): An example of blastemal regeneration in the Ordovician?: International Journal of Paleopathology, v. 34, p. 113–121,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpp.2021.05.011Google Scholar

32.

Fleming, P.J.G., 1977, Faunas, lithologies, and the origin of phosphorites in parts of the middle Cambrian Beetle Creek Formation of northwest Queensland: Geological Survey of Queensland Publication, v. 364, p. 21. Google Scholar

33.

Fortey, R.A., and Owens, R.M., 1987, The Arenig Series in South Wales: Bulletin of the British Museum, Natural History (Geology), v. 41, p. 69–307. Google Scholar

34.

Foster, J.R., 2021, Abnormal pygidial spine in an injured (?) trilobite (Tricrepicephalus texanus) from the Weeks Formation (Cambrian, Guzhangian), House Range, Utah: New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin, v. 82, p. 71–74. Google Scholar

35.

Foster, J.R., and Gaines, R.R., 2016, Taphonomy and paleoecology of the ‘middle’ Cambrian (Series 3) formations in Utah’s West Desert: Recent finds and new data: Utah Geological Association Publication, v. 45, p. 291–336. Google Scholar

36.

Hintze, L.F., and Davis, F.D., 2002, Geologic map of the Tule Valley 30' x 60' quadrangle and parts of the Ely, Fish Springs, and Kern Mountains 30' x 60' quadrangles, northwest Millard County, Utah: Utah Geological Survey, Map 186, scale 1:100,000, 1 sheet, 1 p. text. Google Scholar

37.

Hintze, L.F., and Davis, F.D., 2003, Geology of Millard County, Utah: Utah Geological Survey, Bulletin, v. 133, p. 1–305. Google Scholar

38.

Holmes, J.D., Paterson, J.R., and García-Bellido, D.C., 2020, The trilobite Redlichia from the lower Cambrian Emu Bay Shale Konservat-Lagerstätte of South Australia: Systematics, ontogeny and soft-part anatomy: Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, v. 18, p. 295–334,  https://doi.org/10.1080/14772019.2019.1605411Google Scholar

39.

Hughes, C.P., 1969, Ordovician trilobite faunas from central Wales, part I: Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Geology), v. 18, p. 39–103. Google Scholar

40.

Hughes, C.P., 1971, Ordovician trilobite faunas from central Wales, part II: Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Geology), v. 20, p. 115–182. Google Scholar

41.

Hughes, C.P., 1979, Ordovician trilobite faunas from central Wales, part III: Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Geology), v. 32, p. 109–181. Google Scholar

42.

Jones, P.J., and McKenzie, K.G., 1980, Queensland middle Cambrian Bradoriida (Crustacea): New taxa, palaeobiogeography and biological affinities: Alcheringa, v. 4, p. 203–225. Google Scholar

43.

Klompmaker, A.A., Kelley, P.H., Chattopadhyay, D., Clements, J.C., Huntley, J.W., and Kowalewski, M., 2019, Predation in the marine fossil record: Studies, data, recognition, environmental factors, and behavior: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 194, p. 472–520,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2019.02.020Google Scholar

44.

Kruse, P.D., 2002, Biostratigraphic potential of middle Cambrian hyoliths from the eastern Georgina Basin: Alcheringa, v. 26, p. 353–398,  https://doi.org/10.1080/03115510208619263Google Scholar

45.

Laurie, J.R., 1988, Revision of some Australian Ptychagnostinae (Agnostida, Cambrian): Alcheringa, v. 12, p. 169–205. Google Scholar

46.

Laurie, J.R., 2004, Early middle Cambrian trilobite faunas from NTGS Elkedra 3 corehole, southern Georgina Basin, Northern Territory: Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists, v. 30, p. 221–260. Google Scholar

47.

Laurie, J.R., 2006a, Early middle Cambrian trilobites from Pacific Oil & Gas Baldwin 1 well, southern Georgina Basin, Northern Territory: Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists, v. 32, p. 127–204. Google Scholar

48.

Laurie, J.R., 2006b, Early middle Cambrian trilobites from the Jigaimara Formation, Arafura Basin, Northern Territory: Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists, v. 32, p. 103–126. Google Scholar

49.

Meek, F.B., 1870, Descriptions of fossils collected by the US Geological Survey under the charge of Clerence King, Esq.: Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, v. 14, p. 56–64. Google Scholar

50.

Meek, F.B., 1873, Preliminary paleontological report, consisting of lists and descriptions of fossils, with remarks on the ages of the rocks in which they were found, in U.S. Geological Survey of the Territories, 6th Annual Report: Washington, DC, United States Geological Survey, p. 429–518. Google Scholar

51.

Nedin, C., 1999, Anomalocaris predation on nonmineralized and mineralized trilobites: Geology, v. 27, p. 987–990. Google Scholar

52.

Öpik, A.A., 1975, Templetonian and Ordian xystridurid trilobites of Australia: Bulletin of the Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology & Geophysics, v. 121, p. 1–84. Google Scholar

53.

Öpik, A.A., 1979, Middle Cambrian agnostids: Systematics and biostratigraphy: Bulletin of the Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology & Geophysics, v. 172, p. 1–188. Google Scholar

54.

Öpik, A.A., 1982, Dolichometopid trilobites of Queensland, Northern Territory, and New South Wales: Bulletin of the Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology & Geophysics, v. 175, p. 1–85. Google Scholar

55.

Owen, A.W., 1980, An abnormal cranidium of the trilobite Calyptaulax norvegicus : Norsk Geologisk Tidsskrift, v. 60, p. 87–88. Google Scholar

56.

Owen, A.W., 1985, Trilobite abnormalities: Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Earth Sciences, v. 76, p. 255–272. Google Scholar

57.

Owens, R.M., 1981, The Ordovician proetacean trilobite Rorringtonia : Geological Magazine, v. 118, p. 89–94. Google Scholar

58.

Owens, R.M., 2002, Cyclopygid trilobites from the Ordovician Builth-Llandrindod Inlier, central Wales: Palaeontology, v. 45, p. 469–485. Google Scholar

59.

Pates, S., and Bicknell, R.D.C., 2019, Elongated thoracic spines as potential predatory deterrents in olenelline trilobites from the lower Cambrian of Nevada: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 516, p. 295–306,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2018.12.013Google Scholar

60.

Pates, S., Bicknell, R.D.C., Daley, A.C., and Zamora, S., 2017, Quantitative analysis of repaired and unrepaired damage to trilobites from the Cambrian (Stage 4, Drumian) Iberian Chains, NE Spain: Palaios, v. 32, p. 750–761,  https://doi.org/10.2110/palo.2017.055Google Scholar

61.

Peng, S., Babcock, L.E., and Ahlberg, P., 2020, The Cambrian Period, in Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., and Ogg, G.M., eds., Geologic Time Scale 2020, Volume 2: Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 565–629. Google Scholar

62.

Portlock, J.E., 1845, Report on the Geology of the county of Londonderry and of parts of Tyrone and Fermanagh: Dublin, A. Milliken, 784 p., 38 pls. Google Scholar

63.

Poulsen, C., 1927, The Cambrian, Ozarkian and Canadian faunas of northwest Greenland: Meddelelser om Grønland, v. 70, p. 233–243. Google Scholar

64.

Raymond, P.E., 1928, Two new Cambrian trilobites: American Journal of Science, v. 5, p. 309–313. Google Scholar

65.

Rees, M.N., 1986, A fault-controlled trough through a carbonate platform: The Middle Cambrian House Range embayment: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 97, p. 1054–1069. Google Scholar

66.

Robison, R.A., Babcock, L.E., and Gunther, V.G., 2015, Exceptional Cambrian fossils from Utah: A window into the age of trilobites: Utah Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Publication 15-1, 99 p. Google Scholar

67.

Rudkin, D.M., 1979, Healed injuries in Ogygopsis klotzi (Trilobita) from the middle Cambrian of British Columbia: Royal Ontario Museum, Life Sciences Occasional Paper, v. 32, p. 1–8. Google Scholar

68.

Rudkin, D.M., 1985, Exoskeletal abnormalities in four trilobites: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 22, p. 479–483. Google Scholar

69.

Russell, R.T., 1967, Discovery of major phosphate deposits in northwest Queensland: Queensland Government Mining Journal, v. 68, p. 153–157. Google Scholar

70.

Schneider, C.A., Rasband, W.S., and Eliceiri, K.W., 2012, NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis: Nature Methods, v. 9, p. 671–675,  https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089Google Scholar

71.

Sheldon, P.R., 1987a, Parallel gradualistic evolution of Ordovician trilobites: Nature, v. 330, p. 561–563. Google Scholar

72.

Sheldon, P.R., 1987b, Trilobite evolution and faunal distribution in some Ordovician rocks of the Builth Inlier, central Wales [Ph.D. thesis]: Cambridge, UK, University of Cambridge, 256 p. Google Scholar

73.

Šnajdr, M., 1978a, Anomalous carapaces of Bohemian paradoxid trilobites: Sborník Geologických Věd Paleontologie, v. 20, p. 7–31. Google Scholar

74.

Šnajdr, M., 1978b, Pathological neoplasms in the fringe of Bohemoharpes (Trilobita): Věstník Ústředního Ústavu Geologického, v. 53, p. 49–50. Google Scholar

75.

Šnajdr, M., 1979, Two trinucleid trilobites with repair of traumatic injury: Věstiník Ústředního Ústavu Geologického, v. 54, p. 49–50. Google Scholar

76.

Šnajdr, M., 1981, Bohemian Proetidae with malformed exoskeletons (Trilobita): Sborník Geologických Věd Paleontologie, v. 24, p. 37–61. Google Scholar

77.

Šnajdr, M., 1985, Anomalous exoskeletons of Bohemian encrinurine trilobites: Věstník Ústředního Ústavu Geologického, v. 60, p. 303–306. Google Scholar

78.

Southgate, P.N., and Shergold, J.H., 1991, Application of sequence stratigraphic concepts to middle Cambrian phosphogenesis, Georgina Basin, Australia: BMR Journal of Australian Geology and Geophysics, v. 12, p. 119–144. Google Scholar

79.

Stein, M., 2013, Cephalic and appendage morphology of the Cambrian arthropod Sidneyia inexpectans : Zoologischer Anzeiger, v. 253, p. 164–178,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcz.2013.05.001Google Scholar

80.

Sundberg, F.A., 2011, Chisholm Shale (Glossopleura walcotti Zone, upper Delamaran, Global Stage 5) at the Half Moon Mine, Pioche, Nevada, in Hollingsworth, J.S., Sundberg, F.A., and Foster, J.R., eds., Cambrian Stratigraphy and Paleontology of Northern Arizona and Southern Nevada: Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin, v. 67, p. 224–226. Google Scholar

81.

Sundberg, F.A., Geyer, G., Kruse, P.D., McCollum, L.B., Pegel, T.V., Zylinska, A., and Zhuravlev, A.Y., 2016, International correlation of the Cambrian Series 2-3, Stages 4-5 boundary interval: Australasian Palaeontological Memoirs, v. 49, p. 83–124. Google Scholar

82.

Vinn, O., 2018, Traces of predation in the Cambrian: Historical Biology, v. 30, p. 1043–1049,  https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2017.1329305Google Scholar

83.

Vorwald, G.R., 1984, Paleontology and paleoecology of the upper Wheeler Formation (late middle Cambrian), Drum Mountains, west-central Utah [M.S. thesis]: Lawrence, University of Kansas, 176 p. Google Scholar

84.

Walcott, C.D., 1888, Cambrian fossils from Mount Stephen, northwest territory of Canada: American Journal of Science, ser. 3, v. 36, p. 163–166. Google Scholar

85.

Walcott, C.D., 1910, Cambrian geology and paleontology, no. 6: Olenellus and other genera of the Mesonacidae: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, v. 53, p. 231–422. Google Scholar

86.

Walcott, C.D., 1917, Cambrian geology and paleontology, 4, Fauna of the Mount Whyte Formation: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, v. 67, p. 61–114. Google Scholar

87.

Walcott, C.D., 1924, Cambrian and Ozarkian trilobites: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, v. 75, p. 53–60. Google Scholar

88.

Whitehouse, F.W., 1939, The Cambrian faunas of north-eastern Australia, part 3: The polymerid trilobites: Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, v. 21, p. 179–282. Google Scholar

89.

Zacaï, A., Vannier, J., and Lerosey-Aubril, R., 2016, Reconstructing the diet of a 505-million-year-old arthropod: Sidneyia inexpectans from the Burgess Shale fauna: Arthropod Structure & Development, v. 45, p. 200–220,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2015.09.003Google Scholar

90.

Zamora, S., Mayoral, E., Esteve, J., Gámez-Vintaned, J.A., and Santos, A., 2011, Exoskeletal abnormalities in paradoxidid trilobites from the Cambrian of Spain, and a new type of bite trace: Bulletin of Geosciences, v. 86, p. 665–673,  https://doi.org/10.3140/bull.geosci.1275Google Scholar

91.

Zong, R.-W., 2021a, Abnormalities in early Paleozoic trilobites from central and eastern China: Palaeoworld, v. 30, p. 430–439,  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palwor.2020.07.003Google Scholar

92.

Zong, R.-W., 2021b, Injuries and molting interference in a trilobite from the Cambrian (Furongian) of South China: PeerJ, v. 9, p. e11201,  https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.11201Google Scholar
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Paleontological Society.
Russell D.C. Bicknell, Patrick M. Smith, Thomas F. Howells, and John R. Foster "New records of injured Cambrian and Ordovician trilobites," Journal of Paleontology 96(4), 921-929, (30 June 2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/jpa.2022.14
Accepted: 10 February 2022; Published: 30 June 2022
Back to Top