Taxonomy and ontogeny of the Lituitida (Cephalopoda) from Orthoceratite Limestone erratics (Middle Ordovician)
Author
Aubrechtová, Martina
CAF4231-8787-4051-8D76-F983332517EE
Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Faculty of Science, Charles University Prague, Albertov 6, Prague, 12843, Czech Republic. & Institute of Geology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Rozvojová 269, Prague, 16500, Czech Republic.
aubrech1@natur.cuni.cz,aubrechtova@gli.cas.cz
Author
Korn, Dieter
286CA4F3-7EBC-4AEF-A66A-B2508D001367
Museum für Naturkunde, Leibniz-Institut für Evolutions- und Biodiversitätsforschung, Invalidenstrasse 43, 10115 Berlin, Germany.
dieter.korn@mfn.berlin
text
European Journal of Taxonomy
2022
2022-03-08
799
1
1
108
http://dx.doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2022.799.1681
journal article
20271
10.5852/ejt.2022.799.1681
f53d5465-7162-45d6-892b-dfc0b8d99789
2118-9773
6341270
F52DBAB0-38C7-400F-9BA1-E2D8E6B19E7E
Lituites lituus
de Montfort, 1808
Figs 31–32
,
33A–B
,
34–35
,
Tables 9–10
Lituites lituus
de Montfort, 1808: 278
, text–fig. on p. 278.
Lituites lituus
–
Lossen 1860: 15
, pl. 1a–d. —
Remelé 1880: 432
; 1890: 7, pl. 1 fig. 1. —
Angelin 1880: 8
, pl. 9 fig. 8. —
Noetling 1882: 156
, pl. 11 fig. 1. —
Holm 1891: 20
, pl. 3 figs 1–2. —
Sweet 1958: 141
, pl. 14 fig. 5, pl. 15 fig. 4. —
Neben & Krueger 1971
: pl. 31 fig. 1. —
Dzik 1984: 137
, pl. 41 fig. 1. —
Aubrechtová & Meidla 2020: 279
, text-figs 9, 10f, h–i, k.
Lituites procerus
–
Balashov 1953: 233
, pl 14 fig. 2; 1962: pl. 7 fig. 9.
Diagnosis
Species of the genus
Lituites
with coiled conch ca
25–30 mm
in diameter; coiling tight or whorls slightly detached. Backcoiled part of the conch moderately to strongly curved, expansion angle ca 5°. Straight part of the conch orthoconic or slightly cyrtoconic with expansion angle ca 8°. Shell ornament with coarse annuli, clearly developed along the whole length of the conch including the coiled part and terminal body chamber; growth lines and lirae present in between the annuli. Ornament elements rectiradiate or weakly prorsiradiate (backcoiled part); ventral sinus moderately deep, lateral sinus comparatively wider and shallower, dorsolateral sinus shallow, dorsal projection low.
Type material
Neotype
GERMANY
•
Brandenburg
,
Oderberg
(Bralitz);
Ordovician (late Lasnamägi Regional Stage, late Darriwilian
), Upper Grey Orthoceratite Limestone;
Neben
and
Krueger
Coll.; previously illustrated by
Neben & Krueger (1971
: pl. 31 fig. 1), re-illustrated here in
Fig. 33A
;
MB.C.30527
.
Additional material
GERMANY
•
1 spec.
;
near Berlin
;
Ordovician
;
MB.C.11639
•
1 spec.
;
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern
,
Bansin (Gothensee, Usedom
);
Ordovician
;
v. Mensebach
Coll.;
MB.C.11657
•
2 specs
;
Mecklenburg- Vorpommern
,
Gross Zicker
(
Island of Rügen
);
Ordovician
,
Upper Grey Orthoceratite Limestone
;
Krueger
1966 Coll.;
MB.C.2497
,
MB.C.11990
.
SWEDEN
•
1 spec.
;
Södra Sandby
,
Skåne
;
Ordovician
,
Seby Limestone (transition between the Upper Red and Upper Grey Orthoceratite Limestone)
;
Bottke
Coll.;
MB.C.29650
.
ESTONIA
•
1 spec.
;
Karula
,
Lääne-Viru County
;
Ordovician
,
Upper Grey Orthoceratite Limestone
;
Dames
1876 Coll.;
MB.C.9714
.
COUNTRY UNKNOWN •
1 spec.
; “
West Prussia
”;
Ordovician
,
Echinosphaerites
Limestone
;
Kiesow
1901 Coll.;
MB.C.30528
•
1 spec.
;
Ordovician
;
MB.C.11640
.
Description
Neotype
MB.C.30527 (
Figs 33A
,
34A–E
) consists of the coiled part (2.5 tightly coiled volutions; dm =
29 mm
; WER
dm
= 2.17, WER
ah
= 2.14; WWI = 0.86 at wh =
9 mm
) and the moderately curved uncoiled part (length =
220 mm
; EA ~ 6°). The terminal aperture is not preserved. The shell ornament in the penultimate whorl consists of shallow annuli standing
1.6 mm
apart. These annuli bear five sharp growth lines, while the interspaces between the annuli are either smooth or occupied by very delicate growth lines. The annuli weaken on the last whorl and are only barely visible at the beginning of the backcoiled part. In the middle of the backcoiled part, about
50 mm
apart from the beginning, the shell ornament shows raised lirae in distances of
0.8–1.1 mm
; between them there are four or five delicate growth lines. The lirae are imprinted on the internal mould and appear as shallow undulation. They extend with shallow ventral sinus, low and symmetric ventrolateral projection, wide and very shallow lateral sinus and low dorsal projection. In the backcoiled part of the conch, narrow annuli appear again (up to
4 mm
apart) and are covered by lirae (up to
0.7 mm
apart); ventral sinus is deep but rounded. The phragmocone chambers are variable in length but the CLR generally decreases towards the aperture from 0.56–0.42.
Fig. 31.
Lituites lituus
de Montfort, 1808
; reproductions from the literature.
A
. Reproduction of the illustration by
Noetling (1882
: pl. 11 fig. 1).
B
. Reproduction of the illustration by
Dzik (1984
: pl. 41 fig. 1). Scale bar units = 1 mm.
Specimens MB.C.11990 (
Fig. 32
) and MB.C.2497 (
Fig. 33B
) are rather well-preserved conchs which consist of the coiled parts (2.25–2.5 tightly coiled volutions; dm =
30 mm
;
Fig. 34
) and the moderately curved uncoiled parts (length more than
200 mm
; EA ~ 5°). The whorl expansion rate is between 2.10 and 2.20 (
Fig. 34F–O
). Terminal apertures are not preserved. In specimen MB.C.2497, the coiled part has regularly spaced annuli standing
1.5 mm
apart. Sharp growth lines occur on the annuli and also in their interspaces. In contrast to the annuli, the growth lines are not imprinted on the internal mould. The backcoiled part is ornamented with irregularly spaced, rectiradiate to prorsiradiate lirae (
0.2–0.4 mm
apart) that do not leave traces on the internal mould; strong annuli are not developed. The straight part of the conch bears lirae (up to
0.5 mm
apart) and the internal mould bears imprints or relatively narrow annuli; ventral sinus is deep, lateral sinus is comparatively shallow. The phragmocone chambers are variable in length, both within individual specimens and between the
two specimens
. In specimen MB.C.11990, the chamber length ratio varies between 0.18 and 0.56 without any ontogenetic trend. Only the chambers in front of the body chamber are shorter (
Fig. 35C–D
). In specimen MB.C.2497, the phragmocone chambers are much longer (CLR = 0.33–0.69) and shorter chambers are usually restricted to an earlier ontogenetic stage, while longer chambers occur later in ontogeny (
Fig. 35A–B
).
Fig. 32.
Lituites lituus
de Montfort, 1808
from the Upper Grey Orthoceratite Limestone; specimen MB.C.11990 (Helms 1966 Coll.) from Gross Zicker (Island of Rügen, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern). Scale bar units = 1 mm.
Fig. 33.
Lituites lituus
de Montfort, 1808
(A–B) and
Lituites
cf.
lituus
de Montfort, 1808
(C) from the Upper Grey Orthoceratite Limestone.
A
. Neotype MB.C.30527 (Neben & Krueger Coll.) from Oderberg, Bralitz (Brandenburg); previously figured by
Neben & Krueger (1971
: pl. 31 fig. 1); magnification of the coiled part on the right.
B
. Specimen MB.C.2497 (Helms 1966 Coll.) from Gross Zicker (Island of Rügen, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern); magnification of the coiled part on the right.
C
. Specimen MB.C.30529 (Münchner Coll.) from the Island of Chrząszczewska (former Gristow), West Pomerania, Poland. Scale bar units = 1 mm.
Fig. 34.
Lituites lituus
de Montfort, 1808
.
A
. Outline of coiled conch part of neotype MB.C.30527.
B–E
. Conch proportions and coiling rates of neotype MB.C.30527.
F
. Outline of coiled conch part of specimen MB.C.2497.
G–J
. Conch proportions and coiling rates of specimen MB.C.2497.
K
. Outline of coiled conch part of specimen MB.C. 11990.
L–O
. Conch proportions and coiling rates of specimen MB.C. 11990. Scale bar units = 1 mm.
Table 9.
Conch measurements (in mm), ratios and rates of coiled conch parts of
Lituites
Bertrand, 1763
.
taxon
|
catalogue nr
|
dm
|
wh
|
uw
|
WERdm
|
WERah
|
UWI
|
L. lituus
|
MB.C.9714 |
27.0 |
8.0 |
12.7 |
– |
2.02 |
0.47 |
L. lituus
|
MB.C.11657 |
24.0 |
6.5 |
12.2 |
2.31 |
1.88 |
0.51 |
L. lituus
|
MB.C.2497 |
29.8 |
9.7 |
13.4 |
2.18 |
2.20 |
0.45 |
L. lituus
|
MB.C.11990 |
29.8 |
9.5 |
13.4 |
2.13 |
2.15 |
0.45 |
L. lituus
|
MB.C.30527 |
28.7 |
9.1 |
13.2 |
2.17 |
2.14 |
0.46 |
L. lituus
|
ZPAL N/851 |
24.7 |
7.2 |
12.1 |
2.14 |
1.99 |
0.49 |
L.
cf.
lituus
|
MB.C.30529 |
27.0 |
9.0 |
11.6 |
2.25 |
2.25 |
0.43 |
L.
cf.
lituus
|
MB.C.30530 |
22.1 |
7.4 |
9.3 |
2.42 |
2.26 |
0.42 |
L. toernquisti
|
MB.C.30533 |
18.0 |
7.0 |
7.4 |
– |
2.68 |
0.41 |
L. toernquisti
|
MB.C.30535 |
– |
9.0 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
L. baculus
|
MB.C.29654 |
20.8 |
8.2 |
7.7 |
2.81 |
2.73 |
0.37 |
L. bottkei
|
MB.C.29651 |
25.5 |
7.6 |
12.5 |
2.20 |
2.03 |
0.49 |
L. clavis
|
MB.C.30537 |
34.4 |
9.5 |
16.9 |
1.94 |
1.91 |
0.49 |
L. dewitzi
|
MB.C.30538 |
26.5 |
8.6 |
12.7 |
2.43 |
2.19 |
0.48 |
L. fallax
|
MB.C.11672.2 |
40.0 |
9.3 |
– |
– |
1.70 |
– |
L. kruegeri
|
MB.C.30539 |
33.4 |
10.0 |
17.0 |
2.71 |
2.04 |
0.51 |
L.
cf.
kruegeri
|
MB.C.30540 |
27.5 |
9.3 |
12.4 |
2.62 |
2.28 |
0.45 |
L. lasaulxii
|
MB.C.11678 |
28.0 |
9.5 |
11.2 |
– |
2.29 |
0.40 |
L. nebeni
|
MB.C.30541 |
23.7 |
7.2 |
11.4 |
2.01 |
2.06 |
0.48 |
L. perfectus
|
MB.C.30544 |
39.0 |
10.9 |
19.5 |
2.09 |
1.93 |
0.50 |
L. perfectus
|
MB.C.30542 |
33.8 |
10.1 |
17.2 |
2.20 |
2.03 |
0.51 |
L. perfectus
|
MB.C.30545 |
32.1 |
9.0 |
16.7 |
2.05 |
1.93 |
0.52 |
L. perfectus
|
MB.C.30543 |
28.9 |
9.1 |
13.6 |
2.49 |
2.13 |
0.47 |
L. perfectus
|
MB.C.11646 |
29.0 |
8.9 |
14.5 |
2.26 |
2.08 |
0.50 |
L. procerus
|
MB.C.2498 |
29.5 |
9.7 |
13.6 |
2.31 |
2.22 |
0.46 |
L. procerus
|
MB.C.30546 |
24.5 |
7.6 |
12.0 |
2.20 |
2.10 |
0.49 |
L. procerus
|
MB.C.30547 |
28.6 |
9.4 |
12.9 |
2.22 |
2.22 |
0.45 |
L. tenuicaulis
|
MB.C.5389 |
27.9 |
8.7 |
13.1 |
2.25 |
2.11 |
0.47 |
L. tenuicaulis
|
MB.C.30550 |
29.7 |
9.8 |
13.4 |
2.23 |
2.23 |
0.45 |
L. tenuicauli
s
|
MB.C.30548 |
29.4 |
9.2 |
13.8 |
2.23 |
2.12 |
0.47 |
L. tenuicaulis
|
MB.C.30551 |
24.7 |
8.3 |
– |
2.32 |
2.27 |
– |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.9716 |
25.3 |
8.1 |
–– |
– |
– |
– |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.29649 |
22.6 |
8.9 |
9.5 |
3.38 |
2.72 |
0.42 |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.11653 |
31.0 |
8.6 |
15.5 |
1.92 |
0.50 |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.30570 |
28.0 |
9.3 |
12.6 |
2.75 |
2.24 |
0.45 |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.30572 |
28.0 |
8.9 |
13.2 |
2.17 |
2.15 |
0.47 |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.30576 |
20.4 |
7.2 |
9.0 |
2.39 |
2.39 |
0.44 |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.29648 |
26.2 |
9.1 |
11.5 |
2.32 |
2.35 |
0.44 |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.30569 |
23.9 |
8.9 |
9.1 |
2.79 |
2.54 |
0.38 |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.30575 |
29.5 |
9.2 |
– |
2.24 |
2.11 |
– |
L.
sp.
|
MB.C.30568 |
32.0 |
11.0 |
– |
– |
2.32 |
– |
Specimen MB.C.11657 consists of the coiled conch (dm =
24 mm
; the whorls are only very slightly detached from the preceding, detachment increases gradually and the maximum interspace width is
0.70 mm
just before uncoiling) and the moderately curved backcoiled part of the conch (length =
100 mm
; wh =
20 mm
). The shell ornament of the coiled part consists of annuli and very fine growth lines (preserved only on the inner half of the last whorl). In the innermost whorl, the annuli appear only as imprints on the internal mould and are
1.3 mm
apart. In the remaining coiled conch, the annuli are up to
1.9 mm
apart. The lateral sinus is shallow and disappears towards the end of the coiled part. At the end of the backcoiled part and in the straight part, the ornament consists of annuli, which become wider (up to ca
7 mm
apart) and flat; the intercalated lirae have distances of up to
0.5 mm
. Annuli as well as lirae are visible on the internal mould. The lateral sinus of the ornament elements is very shallow in the straight conch, but its depth increases during ontogeny; the dorsal projection is low and flanked by a shallow dorsolateral sinus.
Remarks
Modéer (1796)
introduced the name
Orthocera lituus
(without referring to or depicting any specimens); some authors consequently considered
Modéer (1796)
the author of
Lituites lituus
and the
type
species of
Lituites
. Most researchers, however, regarded
de Montfort (1808)
as the author as he was the first to use the name
Lituites lituus
and is herein assumed as the author of the species name.
De Montfort (1808)
himself did not refer to the work of
Modéer (1796)
.
De Montfort (1808)
made only a general description of the species and did not mention or describe any particular
type
specimens and any
type
locality. The only provided illustration shows a lituiticonic conch with tightly coiled apical part and a sigmoidal backcoiled part. However, since the illustration is only an artistic representation, it cannot be determined whether it shows a particular specimen of
Lituites lituus
or only a general conch morphology based on multiple specimens; moreover, there are several species of the genus
Lituites
with tightly coiled apical part of the conch, such as
L. lasaulxii
.
Fig. 35.
Septum distances in
Lituites lituus
de Montfort, 1808
from the Upper Grey Orthoceratite Limestone. A, C = empirical data points; B, D = three data points averaged.
A–B
. Specimen MB.C.2497 (Helms 1966 Coll.) from Gross Zicker (Island of Rügen, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern).
C–D
. Specimen MB.C.11990 (Helms 1966 Coll.) from Gross Zicker (Island of Rügen, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern).
Lituites lituus
and
L. perfectus
(discussed below) were the first and for quite some time the only species assigned to
Lituites
. Their initial descriptions were only very general and indicated that the distinction between the two species is the tightly (
L. lituus
) or loosely (
L. perfectus
) coiled apical part of the conch. The use of the names
L. lituus
and
L. perfectus
was inconsistent during the 19
th
century, when many authors developed own ideas for the species definition.
Remelé (1880)
attempted to draw firm lines between the two species based on the degree of coiling, the coiled conch diameter, the shape of whorl profile, the shape of the backcoiled conch part, the expansion angle and the ornament. He also defined some new species (
Remelé 1880
, 1890) of
Lituites
.
Noetling (1882)
and
Holm (1891)
stressed out the great intraspecific variation and ontogenetic changes of the characters and questioned their validity for the separation of
L. lituus
and
L. perfectus
.
Not much was added to the discussion on this particular matter during the 20
th
century, but several specimens were illustrated and described (
Balashov 1953
;
Sweet 1958
;
Neben & Krueger 1971
;
Dzik 1984
). In their study of Estonian lituitids,
Aubrechtová & Meidla (2020)
synonymised
Lituites lituus
and
L. perfectus
because of transitional morphologies between the two species and a great amount of ontogenetic variation in their material.However, the presently studied collection contains more completely preserved specimens, particularly specimens from the Neben & Krueger and the Bottke collections. The study of these specimens enabled the revision of the concepts of
L. lituus
and
L. perfectus
. Since the type material of the two species is not sufficiently known,
neotypes
were selected for both taxa.
Fig. 36.
Lituites
cf.
lituus
de Montfort, 1808
.
A
. Outline of coiled conch part of specimen MB.C.30529.
B–E
. Conch proportions and coiling rates of specimen MB.C.30529.
F
. Outline of coiled conch part of specimen MB.C.30530.
G–J
. Conch proportions and coiling rates of specimen MB.C.30530. Scale bar units = 1 mm.
The
neotypes
were chosen based on the most reliable and detailed descriptions and illustrations in previous literature, i.e.,
Remelé (1880
, 1890),
Noetling (1882)
(
Fig. 31A
),
Holm (1891)
and
Dzik (1984)
(
Fig. 31B
).
Lituites lituus
differs from
L. perfectus
in having a smaller diameter of the coiled conch (up to
30 mm
but up to
40 mm
in
L. perfectus
) and tightly or almost tightly coiled volutions (openly coiled in
L. perfectus
); in addition, the backcoiled part of
L. lituus
is moderately to strongly curved (weakly curved or straight in
L. perfectus
), the conch has a greater expansion angle (5°–8° but 1°–4° in
L. perfectus
) and the shell has a coarser ornament (annuli along the whole conch length).
The species most similar to
L. lituus
is
L. lasaulxii
, which has more strongly curved backcoiled part and the shell ornament lacks annuli at the coiled part of the conch and the straight part only has growth lines (not lirae) on the surface of the annuli.
Lituites procerus
Remelé, 1890
also has a tightly coiled conch up to
30 mm
in diameter as
L. lituus
, but its uncoiled part is only weakly curved or straight; the shell of the coiled part has ribs instead of annuli in some specimens.
Lituites bottkei
sp. nov.
has loosely coiled volutions and a finer ornament with biconvex ornament elements in the coiled part.
Lituites clavis
is tightly coiled but its coiled part has a greater diameter (
34 mm
) than that in
L. lituus
, the backcoiled part expands rather slowly (expansion angle of ~2°) and the uncoiled part is ornamented with flat (instead of prominent) annuli. The uncoiled part in
L. nebeni
sp. nov.
is only weakly curved and very slender (almost tubular upon uncoiling) with expansion angle up to 4°; the shell ornament consists of flat (instead of prominent) annuli.
Geographic and stratigraphic occurrence
Norway
,
Sweden
,
Estonia
(in situ) and northern
Germany
, northern
Poland
and the
Kaliningrad Region
(
Russia
) (in erratics within Pleistocene gravels); Darriwilian to early Sandbian (Middle to early Late Ordovician).
Lituites lituus
is a stratigraphically significant species in Baltoscandia indicating a mid-Lasnamägian age (e.g.,
Jaanusson 1960
;
Evans
et al.
2014
).