The Burgess Shale

Acanthotretella spinosa

Reconstruction of Acanthotretella spinosa.

© MARIANNE COLLINS

Taxonomy:

Class: Lingulata (Order: Siphonotretida, stem group brachiopods)
Remarks:

Acanthotretella spinosa is probably related to a primitive group of brachiopods of the Order Siphonotretida (Holmer and Caron, 2006).

Described by: Holmer and Caron
Description date: 2006
Etymology:

Acanthotretella – from the Greek akantha, “thorn,” and tretos, “perforated,” and the Latin diminutive ella, describing the small, perforated, spiny shell.

spinosa – from the Latin spinosus, referring to the exterior spines.

Type Specimens: Holotype –ROM57749 in the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Canada.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: none.

Other deposits: Acanthotretella decaius from the early Cambrian Guanshan fauna, China.

Age & Localities:

Species name: Acanthotretella spinosa
Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott Quarry on Fossil Ridge.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Specimens were first illustrated as Lingulella sp. by Jin, et al. (1993), and formally described as Acanthotretella spinosa by Holmer and Caron (2006). New characters preserved in a related species from China (Acanthotretella decaius, Zhifei et al., 2010) reinforce the probable position of this genus within the Order Siphonotretida.

Description:

Morphology:

The shell of Acanthotretella is mainly organic in composition with probably only minor organo-phosphatic mineralization, and is ventri-biconvex. Both valves are covered in long, slender spines that penetrate the shell and are posteriorly inclined, angled obliquely away from the anterior margin. A long, flexible pedicle emerges from an external tube that extends from the pedicle foramen along the ventral valve. The pedicle is at least three to four times the length of the valves. The visceral area of both valves is short and triangular, and does not extend to mid-valve. Other interior features are poorly known.

Abundance:

Most specimens come from the Walcott Quarry and represent one of the rarest brachiopods with less than 0.05% of the entire fauna (Caron and Jackson, 2008).

Maximum Size:
8 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

The long, thin pedicle and overall shell shape probably preclude an infaunal habit. Pedicles of several specimens were found attached at the terminal bulb to organic structures, suggesting that Acanthotretella spinosa was epibenthic. The pedicle was likely able to maintain the shell in an upright position well above the sediment-water interface. Extraction of food particles from the water would have been possible thanks to a filter-feeding apparatus (located between the shells) called a lophophore.

References:

CARON, J.-B. AND D. A. JACKSON. 2008. Paleoecology of the Greater Phyllopod Bed community, Burgess Shale. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 258: 222-256.

HU, S. X., Z. F. ZHANG, L. E. HOLMER AND C. B. SKOVSTED. 2010. Soft-part preservation in a linguliform brachiopod from the lower Cambrian Wulongqing Formation (Guanshan Fauna) of Yunnan, South China. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 55: 495-505.

HOLMER, L. E. AND J.-B. CARON. 2006. A spinose stem-group brachiopod with pedicle from the Middle Cambrian Burgess Shale. Acta Zoologica (Stockholm), 87: 273-290.

JIN, Y. G, X. G. HOU. AND H. Y. WANG. 1993. Lower Cambrian pediculate lingulids from Yunnan, China. Journal of Paleontology, 67: 788-798.

Other Links:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1463-6395.2006.00241.x/abstract

Yohoia tenuis

3D animation of Yohoia tenuis.

ANIMATION BY PHLESCH BUBBLE © ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade Megacheira? (stem group arthropods)
Remarks:

Yohoia was originally considered to be a branchiopod crustacean (Walcott, 1912; Simonetta, 1970), but was also described as being closely related to the chelicerates (Briggs and Fortey, 1989; Wills et al., 1998; Cotton and Braddy, 2004). Other analyses suggest that Yohoia belongs in the group of “great appendage” arthropods, the Megacheira, together with LeanchoiliaAlalcomenaeus and Isoxys (Hou and Bergström, 1997; Budd, 2002). The megacheirans have been suggested to either be stem-lineage chelicerates (Chen et al. 2004; Edgecombe, 2010), or stem-lineage euarthropods (Budd, 2002).

Species name: Yohoia tenuis
Described by: Walcott
Description date: 1912
Etymology:

Yohoia – from the Yoho River, Lake, Pass, Glacier, Peak (2,760 m) and Park, British Columbia, Canada. “Yoho” is a Cree word expressing astonishment.

tenuis – from the Latin tenuis, “thin,” referring to its slender body.

Type Specimens: Lectoype –USNM57699 in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: none.

Other deposits: none.

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott, Raymond and Collins Quarries on Fossil Ridge.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Yohoia was first described by Walcott (1912), who designated the type species Y. tenuis based on six specimens, and a second species, Y. plena, based on one specimen. Additional specimens of Y. tenuis were described by Simonetta (1970), and a major redescription of Yohoia tenuis was then undertaken by Whittington (1974), based on over 400 specimens of this species. Whittington (1974) invalidated Y. plena, upgrading it to its own genus, Plenocaris plena, leaving Y. tenuis as the only species of YohoiaYohoia has since been included in several studies on arthropod phylogeny and evolution (e.g., Briggs and Fortey, 1989; Hou and Bergström, 1997; Wills et al., 1998; Budd, 2002; Chen et al., 2004; Cotton and Braddy, 2004).

Description:

Morphology:

The body of Yohoia consists of a head region encapsulated in a cephalic shield and 14 body segments, ending in a paddle-shaped telson. The dorsal head shield is roughly square and extends over the dorsal and lateral regions of the head. There is a pair of great appendages at the front of the head. Each appendage consists of two long, thin segments that bend like an elbow at their articulation, with four long spines at the tip. Three pairs of long, thin, segmented appendages project from beneath the head shield behind the great appendages.

The body behind the head consists of ten segments with tough plates, or tergites, that extend over the back and down the side of the animal, ending in backward-facing triangular points. The first of these body segments may have an appendage that is segmented and branches into two (biramous), with a segmented walking limb bearing a flap-like extension. The following nine body segments have only simple flap-shaped appendages fringed with short spines or setae. The next three body segments have no appendages, and the telson is a paddle-shaped plate with distal spines.

Abundance:

Over 700 specimens of Yohoia are known from the Walcott Quarry, comprising 1.3% of the specimens counted (Caron and Jackson, 2008) but only few specimens are known from the Raymond and Collins Quarries.

Maximum Size:
23 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

Yohoia is thought to have used its three pairs of cephalic appendages, and possibly the biramous limb on the first body segment, to walk on the sea floor. The animal could also swim by waving the flap-like appendage on the body trunk. The setae on these appendages may have been used for respiration. The pair of frontal appendages were likely used to capture prey or scavenge food particles from the sea floor.

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. FORTEY. 1989. The early radiation and relationships of the major arthropod groups. Science, 246: 241-243.

BUDD, G. E. 2002. A palaeontological solution to the arthropod head problem. Nature, 417: 271-275.

CARON, J.-B. AND D. A. JACKSON. 2008. Paleoecology of the Greater Phyllopod Bed community, Burgess Shale. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 258: 222-256.

CHEN, J. Y., D. WALOSZEK AND A. MAAS. 2004. A new ‘great-appendage’ arthropod from the Lower Cambrian of China and homology of chelicerate chelicerae and raptorial antero-ventral appendages. Lethaia, 37: 3-20.

COTTON, T. J. AND S. J. BRADDY. 2004. The phylogeny of arachnomorph arthropods and the origin of the Chelicerata. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, 94: 169-193.

EDGECOMBE, G. D. 2010. Arthropod phylogeny: An overview from the perspectives of morphology, molecular data and the fossil record. Arthropod Structure and Development, 39: 74-87.

HOU, X. AND J. BERGSTRÖM. 1997. Arthropods of the Lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna, southwest China. Fossils and Strata, 45: 1-116.

SIMONETTA, A. M. 1970. Studies on non trilobite arthropods of the Burgess Shale (Middle Cambrian). Palaeontographia Italica, 66 (New series 36): 35-45.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1912. Cambrian Geology and Paleontology II. Middle Cambrian Branchiopoda, Malacostraca, Trilobita and Merostomata. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57(6): 145-228.

WHITTINGTON, H. B. 1974. Yohoia Walcott and Plenocaris n. gen. arthropods from the Burges

Other Links:

None

Wiwaxia corrugata

3D animation of Wiwaxia corrugata grazing on Morania confluens.

ANIMATION BY PHLESCH BUBBLE © ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade halwaxiids (stem group molluscs)
Remarks:

The relationship of Wiwaxia is hotly debated; its similarities to the molluscs have been highlighted (Conway Morris, 1985; Scheltema et al., 2003; Caron et al., 2006; Caron et al., 2007), but Matthew’s original view that it was related to the annelid worms (Matthew, 1899) still finds some adherents (Butterfield, 1990; Conway Morris and Peel, 1995; Butterfield, 2006; 2008). It is also possible that Wiwaxia branched off before the molluscs and annelids diverged (Eibye-Jacobsen, 2004). Wiwaxia has recently been placed in a group called the halwaxiids, along with the halkieriids, Orthrozanclus, and Odontogriphus (Conway Morris and Caron, 2007).

Species name: Wiwaxia corrugata
Described by: Matthew
Description date: 1899
Etymology:

Wiwaxia – from Wiwaxy Peaks (2,703 m) in Yoho National Park. The word wiwaxy is originally from the Stoney First Nation Nakoda language, meaning “windy.”

corrugata – from the Latin corrugis, “folded, or wrinkled,” in reference to the wrinkled aspect of the sclerites.

Type Specimens: Holotype –ROM8596 in the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Canada.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: none.

Other deposits: none described, although sclerites have been reported from a number of Middle Cambrian deposits extending from northern Canada (Butterfield, 1994) to China (Zhao et al., 1994).

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott and Raymond Quarries on Fossil Ridge. The Trilobite Beds, Tulip Beds (S7) and Collins Quarry on Mount Stephen. Additional smaller localities are known on Mount Field and Mount Odaray.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

In an early review of fossils collected from the Trilobite Beds on Mount Stephen by Walker, Canadian palaeontologist G. F. Matthew (1899) described several forms he thought represented tubes of various annelid worms, including one he named Orthotheca corrugata. At the time, Matthew did not know this particular fossil was only part of a much larger organism. It was only when Walcott (1911) discovered articulated and much better preserved specimens from the Phyllopod Bed that the morphology of this species became clearer. Walcott placed corrugata in his new genus Wiwaxia and interpreted it as a polychaete annelid worm (Walcott, 1911). The single best specimen of Walker’s “Orthotheca corrugata” remained unrecognized until it was “rediscovered” in the ROM collections in 1977.

Walcott’s interpretation was called into question in a comprehensive reassessment of the genus (Conway Morris, 1985), and Conway Morris’s link between Wiwaxia mouthparts and the molluscan radula was built upon by Scheltema et al. (2003) and Caron et al. (2006). Butterfield (1990), however, defended an annelid affinity mostly based on the study of individual sclerites, first at the crown-, and later at the stem-group level (Butterfield, 2003; 2006), but further work suggested that the evidence does not conclusively support a close relationship with annelids (Eibye-Jacobsen, 2004). A connection with the halkieriids was drawn early on (Bengtson and Morris, 1984; Conway Morris and Peel, 1995), and expanded more recently (Conway Morris and Caron, 2007).

Other studies have dealt more specifically with the ecology and taphonomy of this animal. The finely spaced patterning of ridges on the scale may have given Wiwaxia an iridescent aspect in life (Parker, 1998). Wiwaxia has proven useful in calculating the extent of decay in fossil assemblages (Caron and Jackson, 2006) and in reconstructing the longer term taphonomic processes responsible for the preservation of the Burgess Shale fossils (Butterfield et al., 2007).

Description:

Morphology:

Wiwaxia corrugata is a slug-like organism up to 5.5 cm in length almost entirely covered (except on the ventral surface) with an array of scale-like elements referred to as sclerites and spines. The body is roughly oval, and lacks evidence of segmentation. The body-covering sclerites are arranged in about 50 rows. In addition, two rows of 7–11 blade-like spines are present on the dorsal surface. Spines and sclerites were inserted directly into the body wall. Wiwaxia’s feeding apparatus consists of two (in rare cases three) toothed plates that have been compared to a molluscan radula or annelid jaws.

Abundance:

Wiwaxia is mostly known from the Walcott Quarry where it is relatively common, representing 0.9% of the specimens counted in the community (Caron and Jackson, 2008).

Maximum Size:
55 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

The similarity of Wiwaxia’s feeding apparatus to that of Odontogriphus suggests that it too fed on the cyanobacterial Morania mats growing on the Cambrian sea floor. Its sclerite armour-plating and long spines, sometimes found broken, suggest that it was targeted by unidentified predators.

References:

BENGSTON, S. AND S. CONWAY MORRIS, 1984. A comparative study of Lower Cambrian Halkieria and Middle Cambrian Wiwaxia. Lethaia, 17:307-329.

BUTTERFIELD, N. J. 1990. A reassessment of the enigmatic Burgess Shale fossil Wiwaxia corrugata (Matthew) and its relationship to the polychaete Canadia spinosa Walcott. Paleobiology: 287-303.

BUTTERFIELD, N. J. 1994. Burgess Shale-type fossils from a Lower Cambrian shallow-shelf sequence in northwestern Canada. Nature, 369(6480): 477-479.

BUTTERFIELD, N. J. 2003. Exceptional fossil preservation and the Cambrian Explosion. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 43:166-177.

BUTTERFIELD, N. J. 2006. Hooking some stem-group “worms”: fossil lophotrochozoans in the Burgess Shale. BioEssays, 28: 1161-1166.

BUTTERFIELD, N. J. 2008. An early Cambrian radula. Journal of Paleontology, 82(3): 543-554.

CARON, J.-B. AND D. A. JACKSON, 2008. Paleoecology of the Greater Phyllopod Bed community, Burgess Shale. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 258: 222-256.

CARON, J.-B., A. H. SCHELTEMA, C. SCHANDER AND D. RUDKIN, 2006. A soft-bodied mollusc with radula from the Middle Cambrian Burgess Shale. Nature, 442(7099): 159-163.

CARON, J.-B., A. H. SCHELTEMA, C. SCHANDER AND D. RUDKIN. 2007. Reply to Butterfield on stem-group “worms:” fossil lophotrochozoans in the Burgess Shale. BioEssays, 29:200-202.

CONWAY MORRIS, S. 1985. The Middle Cambrian metazoan Wiwaxia corrugata (Matthew) from the Burgess Shale and Ogygopsis Shale Shale, British Columbia, Canada. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 307(1134): 507-582.

CONWAY MORRIS, S. AND J.-B. CARON, 2007. Halwaxiids and the Early Evolution of the Lophotrochozoans. Science, 315(5816): 1255-1258.

CONWAY MORRIS, S. AND J. S. PEEL, 1995. Articulated halkieriids from the Lower Cambrian of North Greenland and their role in early protostome evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 347(1321): 305-358.

EIBYE-JACOBSEN, D. 2004. A reevaluation of Wiwaxia and the polychaetes of the Burgess Shale. Lethaia, 37(3): 317-335.

MATTHEW, G. F. 1899. Studies on Cambrian Faunas, No. 3. Upper Cambrian fauna, Mount Stephen, British Columbia. The trilobites and worms. Transactions of the Royal Society, 5: 39-66.

PARKER, A. R. 1998. Colour in Burgess Shale animals and the effect of light on evolution in the Cambrian. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 265(1400): 967.

SCHELTEMA, A. H., K. KERTH AND A. M. KUZIRIAN, 2003. Original molluscan radula: Comparisons among Aplacophora, Polyplacophora, Gastropoda, and the Cambrian fossil Wiwaxia corrugata. Journal of Morphology, 257(2): 219-245.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1911. Middle Cambrian annelids. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57(2): 109-144.

ZHAO, Y.-l., Y. QIAN AND X.-S. LI, 1994. Wiwaxia from Early-Middle Cambrian Kaili Formation in Taijiang, Guizhou. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 33:359-366.

Other Links:

http://www.paleobiology.si.edu/burgess/wiwaxia.html

Sidneyia inexpectans

3D animation of Sidneyia inexpectans.

ANIMATION BY PHLESCH BUBBLE © ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade (stem group arthropods)
Remarks:

Sidneyia is usually considered to be closely related to the chelicerates, but its exact position relative to this group remains unclear (Budd and Telford, 2009). Sidneyia has been variously placed as the sister group to the chelicerates (Hou and Bergström, 1997), close to the crown on the chelicerate stem lineage (Bruton, 1981; Edgecombe and Ramsköld, 1999; Hendricks and Lieberman, 2008), or basal in the chelicerate stem lineage (Briggs and Fortey, 1989; Wills et al., 1998; Cotton and Braddy, 2004).

Species name: Sidneyia inexpectans
Described by: Walcott
Description date: 1911
Etymology:

Sidneyia – after Walcott’s son Sidney, who discovered the first specimen in August of 1910.

inexpectans – from the Latin inexpectans, “unexpected,” since Walcott did not expect to find such a fossil in strata older than the Ordovician.

Type Specimens: Lectotype –USNM57487 (S. inexpectans) in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: none.

Other deposits: A single specimen from the Chengjiang Fauna in China was used to describe a second species, Sidneyia sinica (Zhang et al. 2002), however this was later shown to be incorrectly attributed to Sidneyia (Briggs et al. 2008).

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: The Walcott, Raymond and Collins Quarries on Fossil Ridge, Mount Field and Mount Stephen – Tulip Beds (S7) and other smaller localities – Odaray Mountain and Stanley Glacier.

Other deposits: Sidneyia has been described from the Wheeler Formation (Briggs and Robison, 1984) and the Spence Shale (Briggs et al. 2008) in Utah, and the Kinzers Formation in Pennsylvania (Resser and Howell, 1938).

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Sidneyia was the first fossil to be described by Walcott (1911) from the Burgess Shale. Further details were added by Walcott the following year (Walcott, 1912), and Strømer (1944) and Simonetta (1963) made minor revisions to Walcott’s reconstruction. A large appendage found in isolation was originally suggested to be the large frontal appendage of Sidneyia (Walcott, 1911), but this was later found to belong to the anomalocaridid Laggania (Whittington and Briggs, 1985). A major study by Bruton (1981) redescribed the species based on the hundreds of available specimens.

Description:

Morphology:

Sidneyia has a short, wide head shield that is convexly domed and roughly square. The two front lateral corners are notched to allow an antenna and a stalked eye to protrude. Other than the pair of antennae, which are long and thin with at least 20 segments, there are no cephalic appendages. The hemispherical and highly reflective eyes are above and posterior to the antennae.

The thorax of Sidneyia has nine wide, thin body segments that widen from the first to the fourth segment and then get progressively narrower posteriorly. The first four thoracic segments bear appendages with a large, spiny basal segment (the coxa) and 8 thinner segments, ending in a sharp claw. The next five thoracic appendages have a similar appendage but also have flap-like filaments in association with the limbs.

The abdomen consists of three circular rings that are much narrower than the thorax, with a terminal, triangular telson. The last segment of the abdomen has a pair of wide flaps that articulate with the telson to form a tail fan. A trace of the straight gut can be seen in some specimens extending from the anterior mouth to the anus on the telson, and pieces of broken trilobites are sometimes preserved in the gut.

Abundance:

Sidneyia is a relatively common arthropod in the Walcott Quarry, comprising 0.3% of the specimens counted (Caron and Jackson, 2008). Hundreds of specimens have been collected from the Walcott Quarry (Bruton, 1981) and in other nearby localities.

Maximum Size:
160 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

Sidneyia walked and swam above the sea floor. Its anterior four thoracic appendages were used for walking, and the spiny basal coxa would crush food items and move them towards the mouth. The posterior five thoracic appendages were used for swimming, with the flap-like filaments undulating through the water column to create propulsion. These filaments were also likely used for breathing, like gills.

The predatory nature of Sidneyia is indicated by its spiny coxa used to masticate food, and the presence of crushed fossil debris in its gut. Sidneyia would have walked or swam above the sea floor, using its eyes and antennae to seek out prey, which it would capture and crush with its anterior appendages.

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. FORTEY. 1989. The early radiation and relationships of the major arthropod groups. Science, 246: 241-243.

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. ROBISON. 1984. Exceptionally preserved non-trilobite arthropods and Anomalocaris from the Middle Cambrian of Utah. The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, 111: 1-24.

BRIGGS, D. E. G., B. S. LIEBERMAN, J. R. HENDRICKS, S. L. HALGEDAHL AND R. D. JARRARD. 2008. Middle Cambrian arthropods from Utah. Journal of Paleontology, 82(2): 238-254.

BRUTON, D. L. 1981. The arthropod Sidneyia inexpectans, Middle Cambrian, Burgess Shale, British Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 295: 619-653.

BUDD, G. E. AND M. J. TELFORD. 2009. The origin and evolution of arthropods. Nature, 457(7231): 812-817.

CARON, J.-B. AND D. A. JACKSON. 2008. Paleoecology of the Greater Phyllopod Bed community, Burgess Shale. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 258: 222-256.

CARON, J.-B., R. GAINES, G. MANGANO, M. STRENG, AND A. DALEY. 2010. A new Burgess Shale-type assemblage from the “thin” Stephen Formation of the Southern Canadian Rockies. Geology, 38: 811-814.

COTTON, T. J. AND S. J. BRADDY. 2004. The phylogeny of arachnomorph arthropods and the origin of the Chelicerata. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, 94: 169-193.

EDGECOMBE, G. D. AND L. RAMSKÖLD. 1999. Relationships of Cambrian Arachnata and the systematic position of Trilobita. Jounral of Paleontology, 73: 263-287.

HENDRICKS , J. R. AND B. S. LIEBERMAN. 2008. Phylogenetic insights into the Cambrian radiation of arachnomorph arthropods. Journal of Paleontology, 82: 585-594.

HOU, X. AND J. BERGSTRÖM. 1997. Arthropods of the Lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna, southwest China. Fossils and Strata, 45: 1-116.

RASSER, C. E. AND B. F. HOWELL. 1938. Lower Cambrian Olenellus zone of the Appalachians. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 49: 195-248.

SIMONETTA, A. M. 1963. Osservazioni sugli artropodi non trilobiti della Burgess Shale (Cambriano medio). II. Contributo: I Generai Sidneyia ed Amiella Walcott 1911. Monitore Zoologico Italiano, 70: 97-108.

STØMER, L. 1944. On the relationships and phylogeny of fossil and recent Arachnomorpha. Norsk Videnskaps-Akademi Skrifter I. Matematisk-Naturvidenskaplig Klasse, 5: 1-158.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1911. Middle Cambrian Merostomata. Cambrian geology and paleontology II. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57: 17-40.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1912. Cambrian Geology and Paleontology II. Middle Cambrian Branchiopoda, Malacostraca, Trilobita and Merostomata. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57(6): 145-228.

WHITTINGTON, H. B. AND D. E. G. BRIGGS. 1985. The largest Cambrian animal, Anomalocaris, Burgess Shale, British-Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 309: 569-609.

WILLS, M. A., D. E. G. BRIGGS, R. A. FORTEY, M. WILKINSON AND P. H. A. SNEATH. 1998. An arthropod phylogeny based on fossil and recent taxa, pp. 33-105. In G. D. Edgecombe (ed.), Arthropod fossils and phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.

ZHU, X., H. JIAN AND S. DEGAN. 2002. New occurrence of the Burgess Shale arthropod Sidneyia in the Early Cambrian Chengjiang Lagerstätte (South China), and revision of the arthropod Urokodia. Alcheringa: An Australasian Journal of Palaeontology, 26: 1-18.

Other Links:

http://paleobiology.si.edu/burgess/sidneyia.html

Sarotrocercus oblita

Reconstruction of Sarotrocercus oblita.

© MARIANNE COLLINS

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade (stem group arthropods)
Remarks:

The phylogenetic affinity of Sarotrocercus is uncertain because its morphology is too poorly known to make a definitive designation. Fryer (1998) suggested it was the most primitive of all arthropods, and it was placed within the Arachnomorpha by Cotton and Braddy (2004). Sarotrocercus has also been aligned with Megacheiran taxa such as Yohoia (e.g. Briggs and Fortey, 1989) and Leanchoilia (e.g., Wills et al. 1995; 1998).

Species name: Sarotrocercus oblita
Described by: Whittington
Description date: 1981
Etymology:

Sarotrocercus – from the Greek sarotes, “sweeper”, and kerkops, “a long tailed-monkey”, in reference to the feathery aspect of the tail.

oblita – from the Latin oblitus, “forgotten”, perhaps in reference to the fact that the few specimens of this species were described as part of another species.

Type Specimens: Holotype –USNM144890 (part) and UNSM 272171 (counterpart) in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: none.

Other deposits: none.

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott Quarry on Fossil Ridge.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

The genus Sarotrocercus was erected by Harry Whittington in 1981 based on seven specimens originally included within Molaria spinifera (Simonetta and Delle Cave, 1975). No further research has been performed on the fossil material since then, although Sarotrocercus has been included in many studies of arthropod relationships (e.g. Briggs and Fortey, 1989; Wills et al., 1995; Fryer, 1998).

Description:

Morphology:

Sarotrocercus has an oval body consisting of a head shield and nine overlapping trunk segments; a cylindrical posterior segment carries a relatively short, narrow spine ending in a fan-shape cluster of small spikes. The whole animal was about 1.5 cm long. Although the head shield was not very strongly developed, it did bear a pair of large, stalked eyes that poked out from beneath the margin, and a pair of jointed appendages. Each of the nine body segments bore a pair of lobate appendages, with comb-like fringes which might have functioned as gills.

Abundance:

S. oblita is rare in the Burgess Shale. It was originally described on the basis of 7 specimens (Whittington, 1981), and 28 further specimens have been recovered from the Walcott Quarry representing less than 0.1% of the community (Caron and Jackson, 2008).

Maximum Size:
16 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

The absence of walking limbs combined with an inferred flexibility of the body imply that the organism swam, probably in an inverted position, using its paddle-like appendages and long tail. Its rarity in the Burgess Shale suggests that it may have spent much time in the water column, thus avoiding submarine landslides that trapped animals living on the sea floor. The absence of sediment in its gut suggest that Sarotrocercus was a filter feeder (Briggs and Whittington, 1985; Whittington, 1981).

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. FORTEY, 1989. The Early radiation and relationships of the major arthropod groups. Science, 246: 241-243.

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND H. B. WHITTINGTON, 1985. Modes of life of arthropods from the Burgess Shale, British Columbia. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Earth Sciences, 76(2-3): 149-160.

CARON, J.-B. AND D. A. JACKSON, 2008. Paleoecology of the Greater Phyllopod Bed community, Burgess Shale. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 258: 222-256.

COTTON, T. J. AND S. J. BRADDY, 2004. The phylogeny of arachnomorph arthropods and the origin of the Chelicerata. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 94(03): 169-193.

FRYER, G. 1998. A defence of arthropod polyphyly, p. 23. In R. A. Fortey and R. H. Thomas (eds.), Arthropod relationships. Springer, London.

SIMONETTA, A. M. AND L. DELLE CAVE, 1975. The Cambrian non-trilobite arthropods from the Burgess shale of British Columbia: A study of their comparative morphology, taxonomy and evolutionary significance. Palaeontographia Italica, 69: 1-37.

WHITTINGTON, H. B. 1981. Rare arthropods from the Burgess Shale, Middle Cambrian, British Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 292(1060): 329-357.

WILLS, M. A., D. E. G. BRIGGS, R. A. FORTEY AND M. WILKINSON, 1995. The significance of fossils in understanding arthropod evolution. Verhandlungen den deutschen zoologischen Gesellschaft, 88: 203-216.

WILLS, M. A., D. E. G. BRIGGS, R. A. FORTEY, M. WILKINSON AND P. H. A. SNEATH, 1998. An arthropod phylogeny based on fossil and recent taxa, p. 33-105. In G. D. Edgecombe (ed.), Arthropod fossils and phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.

Other Links:

None

Hurdia victoria

3D animation of Hurdia victoria.

Animation by Phlesch Bubble © Royal Ontario Museum

Taxonomy:

Class: Dinocarida (Order: Radiodonta, stem group arthropods)
Remarks:

Hurdia is an anomalocaridid, and is usually considered to represent either a basal stem-lineage euarthropod (e.g. Daley et al., 2009), a member of the crown-group arthropods (e.g. Chen et al., 2004), or a sister group to the arthropods (Hou et al., 2006).

Species name: Hurdia victoria
Described by: Walcott
Description date: 1912
Etymology:

Hurdia – from Mount Hurd (2,993 m), a mountain northeast of the now defunct Leanchoil railway station on the Canadian Pacific Railway in Yoho National Park. The peak was named by Tom Wilson for Major M. F. Hurd, a CPR survey engineer who explored the Rocky Mountain passes starting in the 1870s.

victoria – unspecified; perhaps from Mount Victoria (3,464 m) on the border of Yoho and Banff National Parks, named by Norman Collie in 1897 to honour Queen Victoria.

Type Specimens: Lectotypes –USNM57718 (H. victoria) andUSNM57721 (H. triangulata) in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: Hurdia triangulata.

Other deposits: Potentially other species are represented in Utah (Wheeler Formation) (Briggs et al., 2008), the Jince Formation in the Czech Republic (Chlupáč and Kordule 2002) and the Shuijingtuo Formation in Hubei Province, China (Cui and Huo, 1990) and possibly Nevada (Lieberman, 2003).

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott, Raymond and Collins Quarries on Fossil Ridge. Also known from other localities on Mount Field, Mount Stephen – Tulip Beds (S7) – and near Stanley Glacier.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Hurdia is a relative newcomer to the anomalocaridids. Although isolated parts of its body were first identified in the early 1900s, no affinity could be determined until the description of whole body specimens by Daley et al. in 2009. Hurdia victoria was the name originally given to an isolated triangular carapace that Walcott (1912) suggested belonged to an unknown arthropod. Proboscicaris, another isolated carapace, was originally described as a phyllopod arthropod (Rolfe, 1962). Hurdia’s frontal appendages were first described by Walcott (1911a) as the feeding limbs of Sidneyia, but were later removed from this genus and referred to as “Appendage F” with unknown affinity (Briggs, 1979).

Like other anomalocaridids, the mouth parts were first described as the jellyfish Peytoia nathorsti (Walcott, 1911b). When Whittington and Briggs (1985) discovered the first whole body specimens of Anomalocaris, the mouth part identity of Peytoia was recognized and “Appendage F” was determined to be the frontal appendage of Anomalocaris nathorsti (later renamed Laggania cambria by Collins (1996). When describing Anomalocaris, Whittington and Briggs (1985) also figured a mouth apparatus with extra rows of teeth.

After two decades of collecting at the Burgess Shale, Desmond Collins from the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) discovered that this extra-spiny mouth part actually belonged to a third type of anomalocaridid, which also had an “Appendage F” pair and a frontal carapace structure consisting of one Hurdia carapace and two Proboscicaris carapaces (Daley et al., 2009). This is the Hurdia animal. ROM specimens of “Appendage F” showed that it has three distinct morphologies, two of which belongs to the Hurdia animal (known from two species, victoria and triangulata) and one to Laggania cambria.

Description:

Morphology:

Hurdia has a bilaterally symmetrical body that is broadly divisible into two sections of equal lengths. The anterior region is a complex of non-mineralized carapaces consisting of one dorsal triangular H-element (previously called Hurdia) and two lateral subrectangular P-elements (or Proboscicaris). This complex is hollow and open ventrally. It attaches near the anterior margin of the head and protrudes forward. The surfaces of the H- and P-elements are covered in a distinctive polygonal pattern similar to that seen on Tuzoia carapaces. A pair of oval eyes on short stalks protrudes upwards through dorsal-lateral notches in the overlapping posterior corners of the H- and P-elements.

Mouth parts are on the ventral surface of the head, and consist of a circlet of 32 tapering and overlapping plates, 4 large and 28 small, with spines lining the square inner opening. Within the central opening are up to five inner rows of toothed plates. A pair of appendages flanks the mouth part, each with nine thin segments with short dorsal spines and seven elongated ventral spines. The posterior half of the body consists of a series of seven to nine reversely imbricated lateral lobes that extend ventrally into triangular flaps. Dorsal surfaces of the lateral lobes are covered in a series of elongated blades interpreted to be gill structures. The body terminates abruptly in two rounded lobes, and lacks a tailfan. Complete specimens are up to 20 cm in length, although disarticulated fragments may suggest a larger body size up to 50 cm long. Hurdia triangulata differs from Hurdia victoria by having a wider and shorter H-element.

Abundance:

Over 700 specimens of Hurdia have been identified, most of which are disarticulated. Hurdia is found in all Burgess Shale quarries on Fossil Ridge, and is particularly abundant in Raymond Quarry, where it makes up almost 1% of the community (240 specimens). A total of 7 complete body specimens exist.

Maximum Size:
500 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

Hurdia was likely nektonic, since there are no trunk limbs for walking, and the numerous gills suggest an active swimming lifestyle. The animal propelled itself through the water column by waving its lateral lobes and gills. The large eyes, prominent appendages and spiny mouth parts suggest that Hurdia actively sought out moving prey items. Although the function of the frontal carapace remains unknown, it may have played a role in prey capture. If Hurdia were swimming just above the sea floor, it could have used the tip of its frontal carapace to stir up sediment and dislodge prey items, which would then be trapped beneath its frontal carapace. Prey items were funneled towards the mouth by a sweeping motion of the long ventral blades of the frontal appendages, which formed a rigid net or cage. Like other anomalocaridids, Hurdia likely ingested soft-bodied prey.

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. 1979. Anomalocaris, the largest known Cambrian arthropod. Palaeontology, 22: 631-663.

BRIGGS, D. E. G., B. S. LIEBERMAN, J. R. HENDRICK, S. L. HALGEDAHL AND R. D. JARRARD. 2008. Middle Cambrian arthropods from Utah. Journal of Paleontology, 82: 238-254.

CHEN, J. Y., D. WALOSZEK AND A. MAAS. 2004. A new ‘great-appendage’ arthropod from the Lower Cambrian of China and homology of chelicerate chelicerae and raptorial antero-ventral appendages. Lethaia, 37: 3-20.

CHLUPÁČ, I. AND V. KORDULE. 2002. Arthropods of Burgess Shale type from the Middle Cambrian of Bohemia (Czech Republic). Bulletin of the Czech Geological Survey, 77: 167-182.

COLLINS, D. 1996. The “evolution” of Anomalocaris and its classification in the arthropod class Dinocarida (nov) and order Radiodonta (nov). Journal of Paleontology, 70: 280-293.

CUI, Z. AND S. HUO. 1990. New discoveries of Lower Cambrian crustacean fossils from Western Hubei. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 29: 321-330.

DALEY, A. C., G. E. BUDD, J. B. CARON, G. D. EDGECOMBE AND D. COLLINS. 2009. The Burgess Shale anomalocaridid Hurdia and its significance for early euarthropod evolution. Science, 323: 1597-1600.

HOU, X., J. BERGSTRÖM AND P. AHLBERG. 1995. Anomalocaris and other large animals in the Lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna of Southwest China. GFF, 117: 163-183.

HOU, X., J. BERGSTRÖM AND Y. JIE. 2006. Distinguishing anomalocaridids from arthropods and priapulids. Geological Journal, 41: 259-269.

LIEBERMAN, B. S. 2003. A new soft-bodied fauna: The Pioche Formation of Nevada. Journal of Paleontology, 77: 674-690.

ROLFE, W. D. I. 1962. Two new arthropod carapaces from the Burgess Shale (Middle Cambrian) of Canada. Breviora Museum of Comparative Zoology, 60: 1-9.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1911a. Middle Cambrian Merostomata. Cambrian Geology and Paleontology II. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57: 17-40.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1911b. Middle Cambrian holothurians and medusae. Cambrian Geology and Paleontology II. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57: 41-68.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1912. Middle Cambrian Branchiopoda, Malacostraca, Trilobita and Merostomata. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57: 145-228.

WHITTINGTON, H. B. AND D. E. G. BRIGGS. 1985. The largest Cambrian animal, Anomalocaris, Burgess Shale, British-Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 309: 569-609.

Other Links:

Habelia? brevicauda

Habelia? brevicauda (USNM 144910) – Holotype. Complete individual preserved without appendages. Total specimen length = 50 mm. Specimen dry – polarized light. Walcott Quarry.

© Smithsonian Institution – National Museum of Natural History. Photo: Jean-Bernard Caron

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade (stem group arthropods)
Affinity:

Habelia? brevicauda is too poorly known to definitively determine its affinities. It has been aligned in some studies with the arachnomorphs (a group including chelicerates and trilobites), and has been suggested to be closely related to lamellipedians such as Naraoia and the trilobites (Briggs and Fortey, 1989), or placed within Megacheira as a close relative of Leanchoilia (Wills et al., 1998).

Species name: Habelia? brevicauda
Described by: Simonetta
Description date: 1964
Etymology:

Habelia – from Mount Habel (3,161 m), today known as Mount Des Poilus, at the head of Yoho Valley, named in 1900 by Norman Collie in honour of Jean Habel, a German mountaineer. The name Mount Habel is now applied to a peak north of Mount Des Poilus.

brevicauda – from the Latin brevis, “short,” and cauda, “tail.”

Type Specimens: Holotype –USNM144910 in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: Habelia optata from Walcott Quarry, Fossil Ridge and The Monarch in Kootenay National Park.

Other deposits: none.

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott and Raymond Quarries on Fossil Ridge.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Habelia optata was first described by Walcott in 1912, to which Simonetta added the possible second species Habelia? brevicauda in 1964. This second species was later restudied by Whittington (1981). Phylogenetic analyses suggest a position within the arachnomorphs (Briggs and Fortey, 1989; Wills et al., 1998). If this is confirmed, Habelia probably represent a stem group of the Mandibulata, which includes crustaceans, myriapods, and hexapods (Scholtz and Edgecombe, 2006).

Description:

Morphology:

The body ranges in size from 1.8 – 5.4 cm and consists of a half-circle head shield and a trunk with twelve segments, the last of which bears a posterior spine. The head shield is smooth and featureless. The trunk segments have a broad, convex axial region, with blade-shaped elements (pleura) extending from either side. The pleura are short and round at the anterior of the body, but become progressively wider and have increasingly backward-pointing tips towards the posterior. The short, broad posterior spine tapers with a bluntly rounded tip.

In the type species, Habelia optata, the exoskeleton is covered in small tubercules , and appendages include a pair of antennae, two pairs of head appendages that are segmented and branch into two (biramous), and six pairs of possibly gnathobasic biramous trunk appendages (i.e., with a robust and spiny basal podomere or segment used for crushing food items). Tubercules and appendages have not been described in Habelia? brevicauda, which is why its placement in the genus is uncertain.

Abundance:

Habelia? brevicauda was originally described from fewer than ten specimens.

Maximum Size:
54 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

Habelia? brevicauda is assumed to have walked on trunk limbs, using its head appendages to manipulate food items. If gnathobases were present, they may have served to masticate food. The frontal antennae were presumably sensory. Considerable flexure of the head may have been possible, which may have allowed Habelia to use its cephalon to dig into the sediment in search of food. It walked along the sea floor while digging and scavenging food items.

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. FORTEY. 1989. The early radiation and relationships of the major arthropod groups. Science, 246: 241-243.

ELLIOTT, D. K. AND D. L. MARTIN. 1987. A new trace fossil from the Cambrian Bright Angel Shale, Grand Canyon, Arizona. Journal of Paleontology, 61: 641-648.

SCHOLTZ, G. AND G. D. EDGECOMBE. 2006. The evolution of arthropod heads: reconciling morphological, developmental and palaeontological evidence. Development Genes and Evolution, 216: 395-415.

SIMONETTA, A. M. 1964. Osservazioni sugli artropodi non trilobiti della ‘Burgess Shale’ (Cambriano medio). III conributo. Monitore Zoologico Italiano, 72: 215-231.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1912. Middle Cambrian Branchiopoda, Malacostraca, Trilobita and Merostomata. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57: 145-228.

WILLS, M. A., D. E. G. BRIGGS, R. A. FORTEY, M. WILKINSON AND P. H. A. SNEATH. 1998. An arthropod phylogeny based on fossil and recent taxa, p. 33-105. In G. D. Edgecombe (ed.), Arthropod fossils and phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.

WHITTINGTON, H. B. 1981. Rare arthropods from the Burgess Shale, Middle Cambrian, British Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 292: 329-357.

Other Links:

None

Habelia optata

Reconstruction of Habelia optata.

© Marianne Collins

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade (stem group arthropods)
Remarks:

Habelia optata is an arthropod, but its exact relationships remain poorly understood. It has been aligned in some studies to the arachnomorphs (a group including chelicerates and trilobites), and has either been allied with lamellipedians such as Naraoia and the trilobites (Briggs and Fortey, 1989), or placed within Megacheira as closely related to Leanchoilia (Wills et al., 1998).

Species name: Habelia optata
Described by: Walcott
Description date: 1912
Etymology:

Habelia – from Mount Habel (3,161 m), today known as Mount Des Poilus, at the head of Yoho Valley. Named in 1900 by Norman Collie in honour of Jean Habel, a German mountaineer. The name Mount Habel is now applied to a peak north of Mount Des Poilus.

optata – unspecified; may derive from the Latin optatus, “wish or desire.”

Type Specimens: Holotype –USNM57693 in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: Habelia? brevicauda from Walcott Quarry and Raymond Quarry, Fossil Ridge.

Other deposits: none.

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott and Raymond Quarries on Fossil Ridge.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Habelia optata was first described by Walcott in 1912, and a possible second species Habelia? brevicauda was added to the genus by Simonetta in 1964. Habelia was later restudied by Whittington (1981). Habelia has been included in some phylogenetic analyses of arthropod relationships (Briggs and Fortey, 1989; Wills et al., 1998) and unusual zig-zag fossil tracks from the Middle Cambrian of the Grand Canyon have been ascribed to an arthropod similar to Habelia (Elliott and Martin, 1987).

Description:

Morphology:

Habelia optata is unusual in that its entire body is covered in tubercles (small, rounded nodules) that are particularly dense on the head shield and the axis of the body trunk. Its body consists of a convex head shield without eyes, and twelve body tergites with a long, jointed posterior spine projecting from the twelfth segment. The first three tergites have a thick median spine that bore tubercles. The head has a pair of multi-segmented setose antennae at the front, and two pairs of possibly biramous appendages with segmented walking limbs and dark sheets that may be filamentous branches.

The twelve body segments have a thick, blunt median spine on the dorsal surface. The first six body segments have appendages that are segmented and branch into two (biramous), including long stout segmented gnathobasic walking limbs (i.e., with a robust and spiny basal podomere or segment used for crushing food items) and a lobed outer branch with lamellae (small elongated structures) along the margin. The lobes are also present on the posterior segments, but no walking branches are associated with them. The tail is a long spine with a single joint midway along its length.

Abundance:

Extremely rare

Maximum Size:
41 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

Habelia optata probably used its six trunk limbs for walking, reserving the head appendages for manipulating food items. It is likely that the frontal antennae were used to sense the environment since there are no obvious eyes. The size and shape of the posterior margin of the head suggests that there was considerable flexure possible between the head and the body, indicating that Habelia may have dug in the sediment for food items. It lived on the muddy seafloor and was heavily protected against predators by its thick body armor and pointed posterior spine, the latter of which would make it difficult for predators to attack from behind.

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. FORTEY. 1989. The early radiation and relationships of the major arthropod groups. Science, 246: 241-243.

ELLIOTT, D. K. AND D. L. MARTIN. 1987. A new trace fossil from the Cambrian Bright Angel Shale, Grand Canyon, Arizona. Journal of Paleontology, 61: 641-648.

SIMONETTA, A. M. 1964. Osservazioni sugli artropodi non trilobiti della ‘Burgess Shale’ (Cambriano medio). III conributo. Monitore Zoologico Italiano, 72: 215-231.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1912. Middle Cambrian Branchiopoda, Malacostraca, Trilobita and Merostomata. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57: 145-228.

WILLS, M. A., D. E. G. BRIGGS, R. A. FORTEY, M. WILKINSON AND P. H. A. SNEATH. 1998. An arthropod phylogeny based on fossil and recent taxa, p. 33-105. In G. D. Edgecombe (ed.), Arthropod fossils and phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.

WHITTINGTON, H. B. 1981. Rare arthropods from the Burgess Shale, Middle Cambrian, British Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 292: 329-357.

Other Links:

None

Pikaia gracilens

3D animation of Pikaia gracilens.

ANIMATION BY PHLESCH BUBBLE © ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade (stem group chordates)
Remarks:

Pikaia is considered to represent a primitive chordate (Conway Morris, 1979; Conway Morris et al., 1982) possibly close to craniates (Janvier, 1998); a stem-chordate (Smith et al., 2001); or a cephalochordate (Shu et al., 1999). Its exact position within the chordates is still uncertain and this animal awaits a full redescription.

Species name: Pikaia gracilens
Described by: Walcott
Description date: 1911
Etymology:

Pikaia – from the pika, a small alpine mammal and cousin of the rabbits. Pikas live in the Rocky Mountains, including near the Burgess Shale.

gracilens – from the Latin gracilens, “thin, simple,” in reference to the shape of the body.

Type Specimens: Syntypes –USNM57628b, 57629 in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: none.

Other deposits: none.

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott Quarry on Fossil Ridge.

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Pikaia was first described by Walcott based on a couple of specimens in a 1911 monograph dealing with various Burgess Shale worms. Two additional specimens were figured in a posthumous publication (Walcott, 1931). Walcott placed Pikaia in a now defunct group called the Gephyrea with other vermiform fossils such as BanffiaOttoia and OesiaPikaia was later considered to be a primitive chordate (Conway Morris, 1979; Conway Morris et al., 1982), an interpretation which has since been followed to some degree in most discussions about early chordate evolution (e.g., Janvier, 1998). Pikaia played a major part in Gould’s interpretations of the Burgess Shale fossils in Wonderful Life (Gould, 1989; see also Briggs and Fortey, 2005). A full redescription of this animal is currently under way (Conway Morris and Caron, in prep.).

Description:

Morphology:

Pikaia resembles Metaspriggina in outline, another chordate animal from the Burgess Shale, with an elongate body and a small anterior region bearing the head. The body is laterally flattened and there is evidence of a ventral fin towards the posterior. Numerous V-shaped or ziz-zag segments interpreted as myomeres or muscle bands are visible in all specimens. A narrow dorsal structure which runs down the length of the organism might represent a notochord, but this interpretation remains to be confirmed. The head bears two equal lobes and a pair of short and slender tentacle-like structures. There is no evidence of eyes. Just behind the head, on the ventral side of the body, there is a series of up to twelve pairs of small, short, pointed structures on either side of the midline. These are thought to be related to gill openings. The gut is narrow and the anus is terminal.

Abundance:

Pikaia is relatively rare, known from more than 60 specimens, all from the Walcott Quarry where it represents 0.03% of the specimens counted in the community (Caron and Jackson, 2008).

Maximum Size:
55 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

The eel-like morphology and musculature of the animal suggest that it was likely free-swimming, although it probably spent time on the sea floor. The tentacles may have had a sensory function, and the presence of mud in its gut suggests that Pikaia was potentially a deposit feeder.

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. FORTEY. 2005. Wonderful strife: Systematics, stem groups, and the phylogenetic signal of the Cambrian radiation. Paleobiology, 31(SUPPL.2 ): 94-112.

CONWAY MORRIS, S. 1979. The Burgess Shale (Middle Cambrian) fauna. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 10(1): 327-349.

CARON, J.-B. AND D. A. JACKSON. 2008. Paleoecology of the Greater Phyllopod Bed community, Burgess Shale. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 258: 222-256.

CONWAY MORRIS, S. H. B. WHITTINGTON, D. E. G. BRIGGS, C. P. HUGHES AND D. L. BRUTON. 1982. Atlas of the Burgess Shale. Palaeontological Association, 31 p. + 23 pl.

GOULD, S. J. 1989. Wonderful Life. The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. Norton, New York, 347 p.

JANVIER, P. 1998. Les vertébrés avant le Silurien. GeoBios, 30: 931-950.

SHU, D.-G,. H. L. LUO, S. CONWAY MORRIS, X. L. ZHANG, S. X. HU, L. CHEN, J. HAN, M. ZHU, Y. LI AND L. Z. CHEN. 1999. Lower Cambrian vertebrates from south China. Nature, 402(4 November 1999): 42-46.

SMITH, M. P., I. J. SANSOM AND K. D. COCHRANE. 2001. The Cambrian origin of vertebrates, p. 67-84. In P. E. Ahlberg (ed.), Major Events in Early Vertebrate Evolution: Palaeontology, Phylogeny, Genetics and Development. Taylor and Francis, London.

WALCOTT, C. 1911. Cambrian Geology and Paleontology II. Middle Cambrian annelids. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57(5): 109-145.

WALCOTT, C. 1931. Addenda to descriptions of Burgess Shale fossils. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 85(3): 1-46.

Other Links:

http://paleobiology.si.edu/burgess/pikaia.html

Emeraldella brocki

Reconstruction of Emeraldella brocki.

© Marianne Collins

Taxonomy:

Class: Unranked clade (stem group arthropods)
Remarks:

Emeraldella is of uncertain phylogenetic affinity due to the paucity of specimens. It was previously placed in the arachnomorphs, as closely allied either with the chelicerates (Wills et al. 1998; Cotton and Braddy, 2004; Hendricks and Lieberman, 2008) or the trilobites and lamellipedians (Hou and Bergström, 1997; Edgecombe and Ramsköld, 1999; Scholtz and Edgecombe, 2006), but it has also been considered as a stem-lineage euarthropod (Budd, 2002).

Species name: Emeraldella brocki
Described by: Walcott
Description date: 1912
Etymology:

Emeraldella – from Emerald Lake, Peak, Pass, River and Glacier north of Burgess Pass, British Columbia, Canada. Emerald Lake was named by guide Tom Wilson in 1882 for the remarkable deep green colour of the water.

brocki – for Reginald Walter Brock, Director of the Geological Survey of Canada from 1907 to 1914.

Type Specimens: Lectotype –USNM57702 in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Other species:

Burgess Shale and vicinity: none.

Other deposits: Emeraldella sp? from the Marjum Formation, House Range, Utah, USA.

Age & Localities:

Period:
Middle Cambrian, Bathyuriscus-Elrathina Zone (approximately 505 million years ago).
Principal localities:

The Walcott Quarry on Fossil Ridge

History of Research:

Brief history of research:

Emeraldella brocki was first described by Walcott (1912). Bruton and Whittington (1983) restudied the material in detail, clarifying many aspects of the animal’s morphology. One possible specimen of Emeraldella has also been described from the Marjum Formation in Utah (Briggs and Robison, 1984). Further work examining the phylogenetic placement of Emeraldella and the arachnomorphs has been conducted by Hou and Bergström (1997), Wills et al.(1998), Edgecombe and Ramsköld (1999), Budd (2002), Cotton and Braddy (2004), Scholtz and Edgecombe (2006) and Hendricks and Lieberman (2008).

Description:

Morphology:

The body consists of a semicircular head shield, segmented trunk and elongated posterior spine, with total body length (excluding spine and antennae) ranging between 1.1 cm and 6.5 cm. With antennae and spine the entire animal would have reached up to 15 cm in length. The body is convex in cross-section and tapers along the posterior half of the trunk. The head shield is smooth, with no evidence of eyes. A pair of long, flexible antennae consisting of over 110 short segments with bristled junctions is attached to the ventral surface at the front of the head. The mouth is ventral and faces backwards. Behind the antennae are five pairs of biramous limbs with a segmented inner branch and a lobed outer branch. The inner branch has six podomeres, including the gnathobase (a robust and spiny basal podomere or segment used for crushing food items), four adjacent podomeres that also bear spines, and a slender terminal podomere armed with three sharp claws. The outer branch of the biramous limb is broad and has three main lobes with filaments and blades.

The trunk of Emeraldella has eleven broad segments with curved, smooth margins. Each segment has a pair of biramous limbs similar to the ones of the head. Behind the trunk segments are two cylindrical body tergites and a long, tapering posterior spine. A dark band running the length of the trunk and into the base of the posterior spine may be the alimentary canal. In the head region, the alimentary canal is U-shaped as it leads forward and upwards from the backward-facing mouth.

Abundance:

Emeraldella brocki is very rare in the Walcott Quarry (less than 0.01% of the community, Caron and Jackson, 2008).

Maximum Size:
202 mm

Ecology:

Ecological Interpretations:

The inner branches of the biramous limbs were likely used for walking on the sea floor, especially the middle eight or nine limbs, which were longer than the posterior limbs. Spines on the inner margin of the walking limbs could have been used to grasp soft prey items, and the terminal claws would push food towards the ventral gnathobases. These strong spiny plates would then shred the food and pass it along the underside of the body towards the mouth. The antennae were used to explore the environment and search for live prey or carcasses, perhaps by ploughing through the soft sediment. While the head was tilted down in the search for food, the posterior segments of the body and the posterior spine may have flexed upwards for balance. The outer limb lobes likely served as gills for respiration. The animal might have been capable of short bursts of swimming, using its broad outer limb branches to propel itself through the water using a wave-like motion.

References:

BRIGGS, D. E. G. AND R. A. ROBISON. 1984. Exceptionally preserved non-trilobite arthropods and Anomalocaris from the Middle Cambrian of Utah. The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, 111: 1-24.

BRUTON, D. L. AND H. B. WHITTINGTON. 1983. Emeraldella and Leanchoilia, two arthropods from the Burgess Shale, Middle Cambrian, British Columbia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 300: 553-582.

BUDD, G. E. 2002. A palaeontological solution to the arthropod head problem. Nature, 417: 271-275.

CARON, J.-B. AND D. A. JACKSON. 2008. Paleoecology of the Greater Phyllopod Bed community, Burgess Shale. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 258: 222-256.

COTTON, T.J. AND S. J. BRADDY. 2004. The phylogeny of arachnomorph arthropods and the origin of the Chelicerata. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh-Earth Sciences, 94: 169-193.

EDGECOMBE, G. D. AND L. RAMSKÖLD. 1999. Relationships of Cambrian Arachnata and the systematic position of Trilobita. Journal of Paleontology, 73: 263-287.

HENDRICKS , J. R. AND B. S. LIEBERMAN. 2008. Phylogenetic insights into the Cambrian radiation of arachnomorph arthropods. Journal of Paleontology, 82: 585-594.

HOU, X. AND J. BERGSTRÖM. 1997. Arthropods of the Lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna, southwest China. Fossils and Strata, 45: 1-116.

SCHOLTZ, G. AND G. D. EDGECOMBE. 2006. The evolution of arthropod heads: reconciling morphological, developmental and palaeontological evidence. Development Genes and Evolution, 216: 395-415.

WALCOTT, C. D. 1912. Middle Cambrian Branchiopoda, Malacostraca, Trilobita and Merostomata. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 57: 145-228.

WILLS, M. A., D. E. G. BRIGGS, R. A. FORTEY, M. WILKINSON, AND P. H. SNEATH. 1998. An arthropod phylogeny based on fossil and recent taxa. pp. 33-105. In G. D. Edgecombe (ed.), Arthropod Fossils and Phylogeny. Columbia University Press, New York.

Other Links:

None