."

• •

•

•

Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology

Volume 13, Number 1

FIELD METHODS IN

PALAEONTOLOG Y

by

SAMUEL J. NELSON

University of Alberta

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

1965

FIELD METHODS IN P ALAEONTOLOGy l

S AM UEL J. NELSON

University of Alberta Calgary, Alberta, Canada

T A BLE OF CONTEN TS

Page ABSTRACT ________________________________________________________________ 1

INTR,oDUCTION 1 M,oRPH,oL,oGIC P ALAEONTOL,oGY ______________________________________ _ 5

Phylum Protozoa _________________________________________________ _ 5 Phylum Porifera __________________________________________________ _ 5 Phylum Coelenterata ______________________________________________ _ 6

Stromatoporoids ___________________________________________ _ 6 Graptolites ________________________________________________ _ 7 Corals ____________________________________________________ _ 9

Tabulate Corals ___________________________________ _ 9 Septate Corals ____________________________________ _ 11

12 13 13 13

Phylum Brachiopoda ______________________________________________ _ Inarticulate Brachiopods _________ __________________________ _ Articulate Brachiopods ____________________________________ _

,orthids ____________________________________________ _ Dalmanellids _____________________________________ _ 13 P entamerids ______________________________________ _ 14

14 14

Strophomenids ____________________________________ _ Productids ________________________________________ _

15 16 16 17 17 17

Rhynchonellids ___________________________________ _ Spiriferids ________________________________________ _ Punctospiriferids __________________________________ _ Rostrospiriferids __________________________________ _ Atrypids __________________________________________ _ Ter ebratulids _____________________________________ _

Phylum Bryozoa CPolyzoa) _______________________________________ _ 18 _Phylum E chinodermata ___________________________________________ _ 18

19 19 20 21 21

Phylum Mollusca _________________________________________________ _ Gastropods ________________________ ~ ______________________ _ P elecypods ________________________________________________ _ Cephalopods ______________________________________________ _

Nautiloids ________________________________________ _ Ammonoids _______________________________________ _ 22 B elemnoids _______________________________________ _ 23

23 23

Phylum Arthropoda _______________________________________________ _ Trilobites _________________________________________________ _ ,ostracods _________________________________________________ _ 24

Phylum Chordata _________________________________________________ _ 25 Marine Plants ____________________________________________ ________ _ 25

25 25 26 26 27

STRATIGRAPHIC PALAEONTOLOGY - - - - - - - - --------- ------ --------------Cambrian System _________________________________________________ _ ,ordovician and Silurian Systems __________________________________ _

Shaly Facies _____________________________________ _ Shelly Facies ______________________________________ _

27 28 29 30 30 30

Devonian System _________________________________________________ _ P ermo-Carboniferous Systems - ---------------------------- ---------Triassic System ___________________________________________________ _ Jurassic System ___________________________________________________ _ Cretaceous System _______ ~-----------------------------------------T ertiary and Quaternary Systems ---------- ---- -------- ---- - - - - - ---

ANN,oTATED REFERENCES - ------------------- -------------------- ----- - 39 INDEX ______________________________________________________ ---------------- 136

IManuscript r eceived ,october 16, 1964. Inquiries concerning orders of this r eprint - should be addressed t o Riley's R eproductions Ltd., 631 - 8th Ave. S.W., Calgary, Alberta.

ii.

-.

•

•

ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATES Pages

1_

2. 3.

4 .

5. 6.

7. 8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13. 14_

15.

16.

17. 18.

19. 20.

21. 22_

23.

24.

25.

26. 27.

28. 29_

30_

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36. 37.

38. 39_

40.

41.

42.

Protozoa - fusulinids _________________________________________ ________ 53

Porifera - archaeocyathids, Receptaculites and sponge spicules ________ 55 Porifera - Receptaculites _________________________________________ ____ 57

Coelenterata - stromatoporoids (including Amphipora) _________________ 59 Coelenterata - stromatoporoids _______________________________________ 61

Coelenterata - graptoloid graptolites ___________________________________ 63

Coelenterata - graptoloid graptolites __________________________________ 65

Coelenterata - graptoloid and dendroid graptolites _____________________ 67 Coelenterata - halysitid corals _________________________________ ________ 69

Coelenterata - favositid corals ____________________________________ _____ 71

Coelenterata - favositid, heliolitid and syringoporid corals _____________ 73 Coelenterata - solitary septate corals __________________________________ 75

Coelenterata - colonial septate corals __________________________________ 77

Brachiopoda - inarticulates, orthids and dalmanellids ___________________ 79 Brachiopoda - pentamerids and strophomenids _________________________ 81

Brachiopoda - productids (dictyoclostids) and strophomenids ___________ 83 Brachiopoda - productids (linoproductids and dictyoclostids) ___________ 85

Brachiopoda - productids (horridonids and linoproductids) _____________ 87

Brachiopoda - productids (horridonids and echinoconchids) ____________ 89

Brachiopoda - productids (waagenoconchids, productellids) and rhyn-chonellids ___________________________________________________________ 91

Brachiopoda - rhynchonellids (including leiorhynchids) _________________ 93 Brachiopoda - spiriferids _____________________________________________ 95

Brachiopoda - spiriferids and punctospiriferids ______________________ ___ 97 Brachiopoda - rostrospiriferids and terebratulids _______________________ 99 Brachiopoda - atrypids (Atrypa) _____________________________________ _ 101

Brachiopoda - terebratulids Bryozoa and Echinodermata - Archimedes, fenestellids and crinoid stems Mollusca - gastropods (including tentaculitids) and pelecypods ______ _

Mollusca - pelecypods Mollusca - nautiloid cephalopods Mollusca - nautiloid cephalopods Mollusca - nautiloid cephalopods

103 105

107

109 111

113 115

Mollusca - goniatite, ceratite and ammonite cephalopods ______________ 117 Mollusca - ammonite cephalopod _____________________________________ 119

Mollusca - ceratite cephalopods and belemnites _____________ ____ _______ 121 Arthropoda - trilobites _________________________________ _____________ 123

Arthropoda - trilobites ______________________________ ________________ 125

Arthropoda - trilobites ______________________________________________ 127

Arthropoda - trilobites Arthropoda - trilobites and ostracods ________________________________ _ Chordata - fish remains _____________________________________________ _

Marine plants

• •• lll.

129

131

133

135

'ill

•

FIGURES Pages

1. Geologic time table of the Phanerozoic Eon ____________________________ 4

2. Range chart for protozoa, porifera, stromatoporoids and graptolites ____ 31

3. Range chart for tabulate corals _______________________________________ 32

4. Range chart for septate corals ________________________________________ 33

5. Range chart for inarticulate and articulate brachiopods _________________ 34

6. Range chart for articulate brachiopods _________________________________ 35

7. Range chart for bryozoa, gastropods and pelecypods ___________________ 36

8. Range chart for nautiloid, ammonoid and belemnoid cephalopods _______ 37

9. Range chart for trilobites, ostracods, chordates and marine plants ______ 38

iv.

-

ABSTRACT

Palaeozoic, Mesozoic and Cenozoic guide fossils, chronologically important within the areas of western and northern Canada and Alaska, are described and illustrated. Most generalizations can also be applied to eastern Canada and the United States. Emphasis is upon fossil groups rather than genera and species, and particularly upon those which a geologist may identify in the field with minimum chances for error. The groups stressed are fusulinid foraminifera. stromatoporoids, graptolites, corals, brachiopods, pelecypods, cephalopods and trilobites. Finer divisions are established for most of these groups, alone with trends, genera and species, which can safely be used in correlation.

INTRODUCTION

The philosophy of this article is perhaps best expressed by quoting the writer's remarks to the National Advisory Committee in 1962:

"In this modern era of helicopters the geologist in a single day often runs the gamut of geological systems ranging from Cambrian to [those of the] Mesozoic or Cenozoic. I have found that many of these scientists are well versed in morphology, being able to recognize graptolites, brachiopods and the like, but all too often are ignorant of their stratigraphic significance. Usually they prefer to wait for age identifications by professional palaeontol­ogists rather than make their own rough determinations in the field where it will do the most good. "In part, the blame for this situation can be laid on the palaeontology or stratigraphy courses of Canadian universities where the emphasis is on morphology and memorization of genera and species rather than on the stratigraphic significance of the various fossil groups. For example, many geologists can recognize at a glance Tetragraptus or Olimacograptus but how many know that the former indicates Lower Ordovician; and the latter (or the various biserial types) indicate Middle or Upper Ordovician, if present in abundance? How many are inclined to call the first chain coral they see Halysites without realizing that there is a very abundant fauna of related but easily differentiated genera in the Upper Ordovician? ... "I think this ignorance can be counteracted in two ways. The first is that the palaeontology and stratigraphy collections of the universities should con­tain much more fragmentary material such as tiny pieces of generically un­identifiable graptolites, productid shells and belemnites, etc. with instructions on how to use this material. After all, this is often the way fossils are pre­served in the field! "The second is that a pamphlet with suitable illustrations should be prepared, describing, with a minimum of technical language, how to use fossils for horizon identification throughout the Phanerozoic* . . . Tips that branched Favosites are likely Middle Devonian; graptolite fragments Ordovician or Silurian; colonial corals with a lonsdaleoid dissepimentarium are probably Permo-Carboniferous (and almost always Mississippian) in western Canada; and that belemnite fragments suggest Jurassic strata could be included, along with more specific information."

In the past decade numerous publications have appeared covering the prin­ciple fossils of the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic (Frebold, 1964a; J eletzky, 1964a, 1964b; McLaren et aZ., 1962; Nelson, 1959, 1961a, 1961b, 1962c; Norford, 1962b; Tozer, 1962 ; Warren and Stelck, 1956) and the reader is urged to refer to these both for more specific information and as a supplement to the present article. Most have been directed toward the specialist and the emphasis has been on pictorial representation of genera and species, rather than the crit­ical and cautionary data needed to identify them. The present article is

*Italicized for the present article.

1

r 2

orient d toward the field geologist with only basic training in palaeontology and the information given is that which he should use in the field when dating rocks. It was written specifically for the unexplored and relatively un­explored portions of North America comprising much of Alaska, western and northern Canada. Most generalizations presented, however, can be applied to eastern Canada and the United States.

Emphasis is thus on the use of marine fossil groups in chronology. Some genera and species are described but only those very diagnostic and easy to identify. Formal taxonomic break-down into classes, orders and families has been avoided so that the article can be used to supplement palaeontology courses, without being at odds with the instructor's classification. For this reason a geologic time table (Fig. 1) is also enclosed: the numerous technical time-rock terms like Cincinnatian, Eifelian, Osagean, Leonardian, Scythian and the like are included because both the student and field geologist are bound to deal with these terms if they study the palaeontology of any system in depth.

The article reflects the writer's personal opinion as to which are the crit­ical fossils needed to date rocks in the field. Although at first glance there may appear a definite bias toward fossils of the Palaeozoic it should be first of all remembered that the Palaeozoic does contain the majority of Phanero­zoic systems and is areally the most widespread in Canada. Secondly it is the writer's o.pinion that there are many more Palaeozoic fossil groups capable of accurate field analysis by the geologist than in the Mesozoic or Cenozoic. For example such an individual can probably make intra-Palaeozoic delimita­tion between the orthid and spiriferid brachiopod groups. In contrast dis­tinction between the various groups of Mesozoic pelecypods or ammonites is usually so uncertain and dangerous that the services of a specialist are re­quired- an individual to whom the present article is most emphatically not directed.

Certain time-honoured genera like Hallopora, F'isi1{lipora, Retiolites, Pentre­mites, Astraeospongia, Streptelasma, Zaphrentis, Caninia, Strophomena, L ep­taena, Rhynchotrerna, Athyris, Calymen.e Ogygopsis, and Arcestes are either totally ignored or given short shrift. Although excellent and indispensable in the teaching of palaeontology their value is almost nil in Canadian and Alaskan correlation because of their rarity or uncertain identity. In addi­tion many highly diagnostic genera have been ignored because, in the writer 's opinion, a non-specialist can so easily misidentify and confuse them with similar ap;pearing fossils of other systems. Regrettable as it may be, genera like Palaeophyllu'Yll) F'avistella, U taratuia, H exag1onar·ia, Ekvasophyllurn, Elm­thina, Scaphites and Arctica have thus been deliberately excluded from this article. Hence the meaning of the term "index" or "guide fossil," in its classical sense defined as being (1) common, (2) easily recognizable and (3) with short stratigraphic range, is used with more fluidity in this article. Al­though all three attributes are deemed highly desirable, number 2 is consid­ered most important, followed in order by numbers 1 and 3.

It must be clearly and firmly stressed that the information given here is not a panacea which will guarantee one-hundred percent accuracy in the field. All identifications should be checked later by a professional palaeontologist. Some generalizations are going to Ibe changed with new information. They have, however, been applied by the writer during a period of nearly twenty years in field areas extending from Newfoundland to Vancouver Island and from the International Boundary to the Arctic Islands and Alaska. The fossils stressed are those which he has found to be readily identifiable and,

-

•

3

on a statistical basis, to occur most commonly both in his own collections and in those of numerous oil companies.

The fossil illustrations on plates 1 to 42 were based, wherever possible, upon the writer's collections. In most instances these show both idealized preserva­tion, and the actual preservation to be expected in the field. Unless otherwise stated the size shown is the normal one for the fossil. Whenever there is any uncertainty in the reader's mind regarding his generic or specific identifica­tions he should always refer to a palaeontology text. Particularly recom­mended are "Invertebrate Fossils" by Moore, Lalicker and Fisher, "Prin­ciples of Invertebrate Paleontology" by Shrock and Twenhofel, "Inverte­brate Paleontology" by Easton, "The Fossil Book" by Fenton and Fenton, , , Text-Book of Palaeontology" by Zittel, and the perennially useful "Index Fossils of North America" by Shimer and Shrock. Highly specialized, but nevertheless useful references in depth are the treatises on invertebrate palaeon­tology currently being produced hy the Geological Society of America in cooperation with various palaeontological societies. As this article went to press the following volumes, pertinent to the text, had been published:

"Part C Protista 2" (Foraminifera) by Loeblich and Tappan (1964). "Part E Archaeocyatha and Porifera" by Okulitch and Laubenfels (1955). "Part F Coelenterata" by Bayer et al. (1956). "Part G Bryozoa" by Bassler (1953), "Part I Mollusca I" (Gastropods et al.) by Knight et al. (1960). "Part K Mollusca 3" (Nautiloid Cephalopods) by Teichert et al. (1964). "Part L Mollusca 4" (Ammonoid Cephalopods) by Arkell et al. (1957). "Part 0 Arthropoda I" (Trilobites) by Harrington et al. (1959). "Part Q Arthropoda 3" (Ostracods et al.) by Benson et al. (1961). "Part V Graptolithina" (Graptolites) by Bulman (1955), "Part W Miscellanea" (Tentaculitids et al.) by Hass et al. (1962).

The main body of the text is divided into two broad, somewhat overlapping sections which go under the resounding titles of Morphologic Palaeontology and Stratigraphic Palaeontology. In the first emphasis is on recognition of fossils by shape. Stratigraphic Palaeontology, on the other hand, is concerned with how to use these fossils to determine horizon within the Phanerozoic­Cambrian, Devonian, Triassic and the like-and wherever possible how to recognize intra-systemic divisions. Figures 2 to 9 show the stratigraphic ranges of the fossils discussed in this text. These ranges can generally be divided into : (1) the overall distribution; and (2) those in which the fossils are most abundant and thus likely to ,be collected by the field geologist. This text is concerned primarily with the second, indicated by thick lines on the figures.

Concepts and opinions presented in this article are the soJ.e responsibility of the author and have been the basis of stratigraphy and palaeontology courses given by him during the past twelve years. The writer expresses his grati­tude to Dr. H. S. Armstrong of the University of Alberta, Calgary for assist­ance from the President's Fund and the California Standard Company for help which enabled completion of the article. It goes without saying that a great debt is due the illustrators of this text: Mr. D. Grant and Miss R. Grant of Edmonton, Misses A. Haeseker, A. Mansell and Mr. K. Samuelson of Calgary. Mr. Harry Kiyooka of the Department of Fine Arts greatly assisted the writer in securing completion of the illustrations.

Very special thanks are due Mrs. Loraine McKerron for her kindness and patience dUTing all typographical phases of this stUdy.

-

r •

I

4

IE IE ' PERIOD DIVISIONS AGE IN

~~ FOR THE PAL AEOZOIC ERA AND QUATERNARY PERIOD "'" I ION'

SYSTEM EUROPEAN DIVI SIONS ARE L EFT, AND AM ERICAN OF

DI VISION S RI GHT OF THE DOUBLE LI NE. YEARS

,

QUATERNARY e~' & u ' I n, rs (II - ~ I

0 Pliocene r- 13

N , Miocene ..

0 , , <,> ~ I- 25 w

Z TERTIARY ;I ompion Chalt ia n ~

Oligocene .. Ir ion Rupellon or I- 36

0-

W ':~\~~"" ~ 0

~:7,~;~;;""- , z

U Eocene ,

'!;

0 I- 5B w

Ard ui na (1760) ~

Paleocene ~

it-> ~

Senonion z , 0

I- 84 UPPER CRETA CEOUS ~ , ~

U I 0 I- 90

CRETACEOUS u

i I- 11 0 w - ~

0 .. I- 120 LOWER CRETACEOUS ~

N , w

d' Hal la y (1 822) Neocomion ~

• w'ci,'" .. U z I- 135

0 z - UPPER JURASSIC ..

en w

0 JURASSIC ~ 0 , ~

I ~ I- 165

N W w i

JURASSIC(Lios) w

~ van Humboldt (J 795) LOWER ~

w

0 or I- 181 >-

TRIASSIC , UPPER TRIAS SIC (Keuper)

I 0:: ,

198 , , M. " k\

van Alber ti ~ W Ooh,," 220 ,

UPPER PER MIAN

PE RM I ~~~ ;isa n 1184 11

,

Z ,

LOW ER PERMIAN , 260 , Woll , 280 « .~ IPENNSYLV~NIA \

S tephan io n UPPER PENNSYLVANIAN

~ I Westpha lian MIDDLE JIAN

~ . wiil (J 9 1 I Luw lo" PEl LVANIAN a.. Namurian UPPER MI SS ISS IPPIAN , 320

U ,I MISSISSI~Et~J~-!) Visean =Tennesseeon Meramec ian

LOW"": ~,~S.~ I I I IN Tou rno ision - 'n ,

345

0 UPPER ,

, DEV"''' A

N 365

DEVONIAN , . ; E~i~~UNIAN

0 , 390

LOWER DEVONIAN

W M, )n and l ick (18 39) , = Ulsterian 405

« SILURIAN Lu dl ov ian UPPER ~ILUR I AN

. =Coyugon

-1 MIDD L E SILUR IAN No stoges defined

(=Gothlan£lJ9n) Wenlockian = Niagara n

« Llandover ian :Medinon

• 425

a.. A,h,II"" UPPER vlwvoIlCIAN - Ci ncinnatian

ORDOVICIAN Ca rad oci on 445 MIDDLE ORDOVI CIAN

~ = Chomplolnion

I (1 8 ( "', :~ No stoges defioed

500 UPPER ,F ; ~i;

£AMBRIAN Lio9u lella F laos ~ 530

, Me nevi an I MIDDLI; ~~~_~I'l!AN No sloges defined

:k (1835) Horlechion ~ 600 .. ...

Fig. 1.-Geologic time table of the Phanerozoic Eon.

•

•

-.'

5

PART I. MORPHOLOGIC 'PALAEONTOLOGY

PHYLUM PROTOZOA

(Plate 1) As fossils the microscopic single celled protozoans are represented mainly

by foraminifera. Although they can be very good age indicators in the hands of micropalaeontologists, their extremely small size almost always precludes field use. One group, the easily recognizable fusulinid, does attain large sizes and is diagnostic for Pennsylvanian and particularly Permian strata in western, northern Canada and Alaska. A well preserved fusulinid is gen­m"ally between one-quarter and three-quarter inches long and resembles a grain of wheat or rugby ball (PI. 1, Fig. 5). They often occur in swarms on a rock face and are easy to identify when the matrix has a different colour. More commonly they are almost indistinguishable from the rock matrix and only a magnifying glass will bring out the characteristic structure of finely concentric to spiralling lines. If the field geologist suspects he is on Permo­Pennsylvanian strata, he is advised to spend considerable time looking at fresh rock surfaces-both wet and dry-for fusulinid structures like those shown in Fig. 6 of PI. 1. In the laboratory a much more accurate age date should be obtained.

PHYLUM PORIFERA (Plates 1-3)

Poriferans (sponges) are almost useless as index fossils. Either the animal will decompose upon death so that spicules are spread far and wide over the sea floor (PI. 2, Fig. 3) j or else the skeleton may cohere; but be such a non­descript shapeless blob that identification is very uncertain and probably meaningless .

It is an anomaly that the two groups of sponge-like animals about which strongest disagreement exists regarding affinities, are the best index fossils for the phylum. These are the archaeocyathids or pleosponges, and the receptaculitids.

Archaeocyathids are excellent Lower Cambrian index fossils and superfi­cially resemble cup corals. In simplest form an archaeocyathid consists of inner and outer conical walls joined by vertical septal-like plates called parieties. Both walls and parieties are perforated by pores which specialists interpret as indicating affinities with sponges.

In the field usually all one finds are poorly preserved archaeocyathid cross­sections like those shown on Fig. 2 of PI. 2: a vague outer and inner wall joined by radial parieties which are often quite irregular. Although this is about the best that can be expected it is good enough to indicate Lower Cam­brian. The reader is warned to be very certain about the presence of an inner wall, otherwise the fossil he is examining may turn out to be a cross­section of one of the ubiquitous and chronologically perfidious cup corals of younger strata.

The genetic affinities of the receptaculitids are even more debatable than those of the archaeocyathids. Receptaculites is the most common genus of this group in western Canada and is popularly referred to as the "sunflower coral. " Its structure is peculiar in that is consists of quadrangular calcite plates arranged in a spiral pattern. Two layers of these plates are present, joined by hollow, spicule-like columns. Most Re.ceptacuZites are poorly pre­served so that all one will see are the spirally arranged quadrangular plates, or more often cross-sections of the hollow columns. The latter can be mis-

•

r 6

taken for the coral genus Syringopora, but the spiral pattern is sufficient to distinguish Receptaculites (see PI. 3, Fig. 1).

Receptaculites ranges from Middle Ordovician to Devonian but in western Canada the chances are very strong that the containing strata are late Middle or early Late Ordovician, coeval with the Red River Formation of southern Manitoba. Locally they occur in older and younger rocks such as the Middle Ordovician Sunblood Formation and the Middle Devonian Hume Formation of the Nahanni River area.

When Receptaculites is .part of the Red River interval, one should expect to find associated chain corals (e.g. Cate1tipora) and large cephalopods and gastropods.

PHYLUM COELENTERATA

The Phylum lC~oelenterata includes a diverse group of animals represented by hydrozoans, jelly-fish, sea anemones, stromatoporoids, corals and grapto­lites of which only the last three are important as fossils. At present grapto­lite affinities are subject to considerable debate: some authorities think they should be removed from the coelenterates and .placed with the hemichordates -a primitive vertebrate group. They will arbitrarily be discussed here under the coelenterates.

Stromatoporoids (Plates 4-5)

Stromatoporoids are an extremely difficult group with which to work, because of the uncertainty as to what qualities ,define true species and genera. They cannot be ignored, however, because they are locally very abundant and often are important Silurian and Devonian reef formers.

Stromatoporoids are of two distinct types, referred to as the labechids and the stromatoporids.

Although not common labechids are easy to identify and typically define strata coeval with the Stony Mountain Formation of southern Manitoba. This interval is considered very high in the Ordovician, probably Richmondian or Gamachian. Experience has shown that Silurian strata sl10uld be expected several hundred feet higher in sections where labechids occur.

A typical labechid is columnar and six inches to a foot long, and one to two inches wide. The surface will be either longitudinally or spirally fluted as in Aulacera or nodose as in B eatricea. When well preserved a central canal is present, surrounded by finely concentric calcite layers.

Often Ordovician and Silurian strata carry poorly preserved orthocone cephalopods which, except for having a smooth surface, closely mimic labe­chids. Thus the field geologist should be certain that his specimen is nodose or fluted before assigning it to the hlihechids.

Stromato,porids are the most common representatives of the stromatoporoids, and in nearly all cases indicate the Silurian to lower Upper Devonian interval. For practical purposes they are absent from younger strata but do occur rarely in the Middle and Upper Ordovician.

It is difficult to succinctly describe stromatoporid external shape because it is so variable. To say that they are shapeless would perhaps be a better , but nevertheless dangerous, generalization. They can, however, vary from spheroidal down to encrusting amorphous masses with dimensions typically less than one foot. Since stromatoporids apparently liked turbulent water, the colonies often break into fragments and this is probably part of the reason for their common lack of form.

•

,-

7

To identify a stromatoporid one must examine internal structure with a high powered magnifying glass. In cross-section it consists of very finely con­centric lines joined by small pillar-like structures. This is the basic stromato­porid pattern but variation should be expected, even as far as a vesicular ono. Field differentiation of genera and hence age on the basis of this pattern are not advised. All that should be assumed is that containing strata are Silurian or Devonian.

Commonly stromatoporoids are dolomitized or silicified, and most internal structure destroyed. Thus all one sees is external outline, with vague sug­gestions of interior concentricity. In such cases one should suspect a Siluro· Devonian interval but be on his guard in case the fossils are long ranging algal structures. A dangerous generalization, but one that does seem valid in many instances, is that Silurian stromatoporids are more commonly silicified than Devonian ones.

A11'''phipora is a small rod-like fossil usually occurring in swarms. Each rod is about an inch long and one-quarter inch wide, and has as internal structure a hollow axis surrounded >by rather vesicular tissue. The genetic affinities are questionable, being considered neither labechid nor stromatoporid. Most authorities, however, do consider that it belongs somewhere within the stromatoporoids. Whatever its systematic position it is a good index fossil for Middle and law Upper Devonian.

Because of their rather similar outlines, poorly preserved Amphipora and fusulinid foraminifera may be confused. In such cases the field worker should make a determined attempt to identify internal structure, fundament­ally different in both groups (cf. Fig. 1, PI. 4 and Fig. 6, PI. 1).

Graptolites (Plates 6-8)

To most geology students graptolites must appear as very vague fossils hardly deserving of the professorial rapture which often accompanies their description. Their teacher's enthusiasm, however, is merited because they are usually extremely good index fossils even in the hands of a cautious amateur. To begin with they are confined to the Ordovician and Silurian systems.~' Thus they indicate only two periods and, as the reader may remember, occur nearly always abundantly in black shale of these ages. Their absence from this lithology should be regarded with suspicion and after a prolonged but un­successful search for them in such shale, the hypothesis should be entertained that the rock is either pre-Ordovician or post-Silurian.

Graptolites are divided into two broad groups: dendroids and graptoloids. Dendroid graptolites are poor index fossils and should be used only to

indicate Siluro-Ordovician, although they agpear with most frequency in the Lower Ordovician. As the name implies the colony has a rather bushy appearance with branches typically dichotomizing in a rather irregular man­ner. Because of their plant-like appearance dendroids may indeed be con­fused with post-Silurian plant fossils, and unless preservation is excellent, considerable difficulty may ensue in distinguishing them. One should take environment into account: whether other marine fossils are associated, or

"' Graptolites actually range into the Mississippian System but are exceedingly rare-almost nonexistent- beyond the Silurian. In their lower range graptolites do not make significant appearance until Tremadocian time. In Europe this time is interpreted as Late Cambrian, and in North America as Early Ordovician (see Figure 1).

I 8

profoundly lacking, and so on. Fenestellid hryozoans may also be confused with dendroids but lithology should indicate which is which (see page 18).

The reader may be aware of the peculiar inorganic sedimentary structures called manganese dendrites. These will closely mimic dendroid graptolites. Typically, however, they occur in sandstone, while the graptolites favour shale.

Graptoloid graptolites are the most useful group in correlation. Unlike the complexly and densely branched dendroids, they usually are simple unbranched stipes which are monoserial (PI. 7, Figs. 8-10), biserial (PI. 7, Figs. 5-7), or quadriserial (PI. 6, Figs. 4-5). When stipes do branch it is with regular dichotomy, and produces a rather o.pen colony.

The last type of graptoloid is diagnostic for Lower Ordovician. Tetragrap­tns shows the simplest pattern in which only one pair of dichotomy has occur­red. Goniograptns and Zygograptns show the kind of colony resulting when more than one set of dichotomy occurs. There are many generic names applied to such graptoloids, but whatever the name, if branching is simple and regular the containing rocks are Lower Ordovician. Even a fragment of a dichotomizing colony is sufficient for dating.

Middle and Upper Ordovician rocks are grouped here because their grapto­lite fauna is genetically related. By far the most characteristic and abundanL elements are biserial graptoloids like Climacograptns, Diplograptns and Ortho­graptns. These genera do occur in the Lower Ordovician and Silurian, but it is only in the Middle and U,pper Ordovician that they are so abundant as to dominate the graptolite assemblage. Hence several biserial graptoloids are not enough; they should be found in swarms before the rocks are assigned to this part of the Ordovician.

Silurian strata are dominated by monoserial graptoloids like Monograptns. Again abundance is important as biserial ones do occur, albeit rather rarely, in this system. Caution should be used in determining Monograptns as broken stipes of Ordovician genera like Tetragraptns, Goniograptns, and Dicellograp­tttS will also show a monoserial pattern.

Certain monoserial graptoloids can be used for finer Silurian delimitation. Spiral" Monograpttts spiralis" indicate strata near the Lower-Middle Silurian boundary.'x, If one finds rather simple straight Mon.ograptns in which the distal or lower ends consistently have a rather simple twist then the chances favoul' a Middle Silurian age (see PI. 7, Fig. 10) .

The above graptoloid trends- multibranched for Lower; biserial for Middle and Upper Ordovician; and monoserial for Silurian-will hold in nearly all cases if one uses abundance as a criterion. Certainly easily recognizable genera described below which do not show the above trends can also be used in correlation.

Phyllograptns is a Lower Ordovician quadriserial graptoloid, i .e., thecae or tubes arranged in four rows. With ·burial the colony is almost invariably flattened to give a leaf-like carbonaceous film. The genus is abundant and should be associated with multibranched graptoloids and Isograptns.

Is.ograptns, another Lower Ordovician genus, is usually preserved as a small fan-like structure which represents the early growth stages. Mature

*On Fig. 1 it will be seen that the very highest part of the British Lower Silurian (Llandoverian) is equivalent to the lower part of the American 'Middle Silurian (Niagaran). Graptolite specialists often refer to the British section in identifica­tion. Hence their Lower Silurian designation for a graptolite fauna may actual­ly be Middle Silurian in American terminology. The reader is advised to query when uncertainty exists.

•

•

9

colonies, which preserve rather rarely, have the V-shaped appearance shown on Fig. 3 of PI. 7.

Dicmnograptus starts biserally later splitting into two monoserial branches. Although rare in western Canada, it is important because it can be identified with certainty in the field. It appears most diagnostic for Middle Ordovician.

Dicellograptus defines Middle and Upper Ordovician. The shape is that of a "V" with a fiat base. Any variation away from such shape should be considered with caution as it could be mistaken for the Lower and Middle Ordovican Didymograptus. Dicellograpttts is reclined (stipes bend back from point of earliest growth) while Didymograptus is pendent (stipes bend in direction of earliest growth). Both genera look like mature Isograptus, but have much thinner stipes.

Although rare, Cyrt.ograptus is an excellent Silurian guide. Essentially it is a broad spiral from which branches, occasionally dichotomous, extend out at intervals. It is important to remember the spiral pattern otherwise the genus could be confused with Lower Ordovician multibranched forms like Goniograptus and Zygograptus.

Corals (Plates 9-13)

In western Canada corals are very abundant in carbonate or shaly carbonate rocks and almost always indicate strata from Middle Ordovician to Permian. They are very rare in the Mesozoic and Cenozoic. It is im,portant to remember that Cambrian and Lower Ordovician strata do not bear corals. Hence a profound absence of them may be significant.

There are two broad groups of corals: 1. Tabulate (Aseptate) corals. These are without septa and always colonial.

As basic structure they have thecal wall and tabulae. In growth pattern the corallites may be fasciculate (organ-pipe), halysitoid (chain-like) or cerioid (honey-comb). The genera Syringopora, Halysites and Favosites, respectively, show these patterns (see PIs. 9-11) .

2. Septate corals. As the name implies these corals bear septa-vertical radiat­ing plate-like partitions. Along with septa, they have a thecal wall, tabulae and often other structures like dissepiments, columella, and fossula. Septate corals are either solitary (cup or horn corals) or colonial. The latter are mosly cerioid or fasciculate; halysitoid forms are rare.

Tabulate Corals Halysitid or chain-corals indicate Upper Ordovician and Silurian strata.

Two distinct groups are recognized. The first identifies mainly Upper Ordo­vician and has the individual corallites directly appressed against adjacent ones. Thus corallite outline is sub-oval or quadrangular. Catenipora has the corallites in single rows, and Manipom in rather irregular multiple rows. It is im,portant to identify the chain-like growth pattern in Manipora, other­wise it may mistaken for a cerioid coral. Manipom feildeni (PI. 9, Fig. 7) has tiny, almost circular corallites which are usually in single rows. The reader is cautioned against mistaking it for H alysites as the chains may show a pinching and swelling effect because of the corallite shape. This species is nearly always well preserved, however, so that the corallites can tbe seen abutting directly against each other.

The second group is represented by the single genus H alysifies. Small tubules (see PI. 9, Fig. 9) intervene between oval corallites imparting a noticeable pinching and swelling effect to the rows .

To distinguish these two groups a magnifying glass should not be necessary to tell Ordovician from Silurian. If the rows shows only a weak pinch and

r

10

swell effect the containing rocks are Ordovician (PI. 9, Fig. 1). If the effect is strong then Silurian is indicated (PI. 9, Fig. 5).

Occasionally Catenipom extends into the Silurian (see Jull, 1962, Figs. 1 and 2). When it does, however, the corallites are always strongly oval im­parting a noticeable pinch and swell effect to the rows. Thus the genus may be incorrectly identified as Halysites, but still be correctly dated.

The writer wishes to stress that chain corals are an abundant element of the Ordovician fauna in western and northern Canada. For many years it was assumed that all chain corals occurred only in Silurian. For this reason much of our Ordovician (e.g. Ronning Group) was originally called Silurian, an assignment that is still being sorted out.

Cerioid tabulate corals or favositids are practically confined to the Middle Ordovician-Devonian interval and are represented by a host of genera, of which only the pore bearing Palaeofavosites and Fav,osites are useful for field delimitation.

Palaeofavosites has mural pores in the wall angles and is very characteristic of the high Upper Ordovician interval represented by the Stony Mountain Formation of southern Manitoba (see Nelson, 1959, 1963) .

Favosites is practically identical with Palaeofavosites and like that genus corallite size will vary from a fraction to over 5 mm. Favosites is indicative of Silurian and Devonian strata and has as its distinguishing feature mural pores in the walls with none or very few in the wall angles.

With both Palaeofavosites and Favosites it is necessary to develop "mural pore eyes" a difficult but rewarding talent if one wishes to distinguish Ordovi­cian from Siluro-Devonian. These pores will rarely appear as discrete open­ings. They are nearly always filled and flush with the wall. The geologist should look for regularly arranged and sized discoloured spots, perhaps using a wet surface under differing light intensities and angles. As pores are often destroyed during fossilization they may be preserved only on a small portion of the colony, or not at all. In the latter case it is advisable to find another colony and begin again. Occasionally these favositid genera fracture giving a crisp, well preserved transverse surface. The pores will then appear as wall breaks like those shown on Figs. 2 and 6 of PI. 10.

Most cerioid tabulate corals grew as massive or hemispherical colonies. Occasionally Favosites or related genera will develo,p a branching habit, like "Favosites limita1"is" (PI. 11, Figs. 1-3)" Such a growth habit is very char­acteristic of Middle or low Upper Devonian, even when the genus is not Favosites. Such genera as Coenites and T.hamnopora (PI. 11, Fig. 1) exhibit this pattern and almost always indicate Devonian.

Alveolites is an aberrant cerioid coral in that corallites are oval rather than polygonal. It is necessary to use a magnifying glass for identification because corallites are commonly only a millimetre or so wide. Alveolites indicates Silurian or Devonian.

Fasciculate tabulate corals, the syringoporids, are represented by one main genus, Syringopom the organ-pipe coral which is not a good guide because it ranges from Upper Ordovician to Permian. In some instances, however, it can be very useful for intra-systemic correlation (see Nelson, 1961b, 1962a). Syring'op,ora col'umbiana Wilson, (PI. 11, Fig. 3) very easy to identify because of the extremely small and compact corallites, is the one specific representative worthy of note. It appears characteristic of high Upper Ordovician strata.

Heliolitids are a special group commonly placed with tabulates, but which bear little relationship to the normal halysitoid, cerioid or fasciculate types.

•

11

They include many genera of which H eliolites, LyelZia, Plasrnopora and Cala­IJOecia are most common. The characteristics of this group are larger, gen­erally round corallites (macrocorallites) surrounded by much smaller ones (microcorallites) or occasionally vesicular tissue. It is not advisable to attempt generic identification in the field. Assume only that the containing strata are Upper Ordovician to Devonian, with chances favouring the Siluro­Devonian interval.

Septate Corals Any septate coral found in western Canada is almost invariably Palaeozoic,

and within the Middle Ordovician to Permian range. Mesozoic and Cenozoic representatives are so rare as to be practically museum pieces.

Solitary septate corals, popularly called cup or horn corals because of their conical shape, are very dangerous fossils with which to correlate and even after laboratory study conflicting results often occur. 'rhere is proba,bly only one trend useful in the field: the presence of a dissepimentarium (see PI. 13, Figs. 1-2) . If the coral contains one then the containing rocks are probably post-Ordovician. Absence of this structure cannot ibe relied upon to indicate only Ordovician as many Silurian and later corals bear no dissepi­mentarium.

Of the myriads of Palaeozoic cup corals in western Canada only four species or genera should be relied upon in the field: LobocoraZZiurn (Stnptel­asma) trilobaturn, Bighornia, CystiphyZZurn and H eliophyZZurn. LobocoraZZiwn trilobaturn (Whiteaves), as the trivial name suggests has a tri-lobed thecal wall as outstanding feature. The species is easy to recognize even with fragments and is widespread over northern and western North America, occurring in high Upper Ordovician strata coeval with the Stony Mountain Formation of southern Manitoba.

Bighornia is diagnosed by the flattened thecal wall, occasionally with a spoon shaped depression. It occurs in high Upper Ordovician strata but the associa­tion of Loboc.oraZZiurn trilobahlrlt, Palaeofavosites, etc., should be sought as some post-Ordovician cup corals tend to become flattened.

CystiphyZZttrn is a bizarre genus in which nearly all septa are lost and tabulae develop an irregular vesicular or cystose habit. The specimen should be ,broken to determine the cystose interior as ghost septa may appear on weathered calices. CystiphylZu1n is confined to the Silurian and Devonian systems.

H eliophyZZ'Urn is probably one of the few cup coral genera that the geologist will remember from his school days. The characteristic feature is the small carinae on the septa (see Fig. 7,Pl. 12) giving an appearance somewhat like the diagrammatic representation of sun rays. The genus is diagnostic for Middle Devonian strata.

Colonial corals are similar to solitary corals in that they are characteristic of the same Middle Ordovician to Permian interval in western Canada and contain very few genera trustworthy in field correlation. Here, however, the similarities end for many colonial corals turn out to be excellent index fossils when subjected to laboratory analysis. Thus they should be assiduously sought and collected.

Several trends are reliable: 1. Dissepimentarium. Like cup corals a dissepimentarium (PI. 13, Fig. 1)

suggests a post-Ordovician interval. Absence, however, does not necessarily indicate Ordovician only. A special kind is a lonsdaleoid dis sepim entariu1n, highly diagnostic for Permo-Carboniferous, particularly MissiSSippian

j

I 12

rocks, which usually shows up only on transverse sections (PI. 13, Fig. 4). Here the septa appear to retreat to central portions of the corallites, leav­ing peripheral areas with dissepimentarium. It is stressed that the interior of the colony be examined for these structures. Often weathered surfaces will show ghost septa extending out to the periphery like 'Fig. 4 of PI. 13.

2. Breaking Habit. If a cerioid coral breaks with columnar habit the chances favour Devonian (see PI. 13, Fig. 2). It goes without saying that this generalization is dangerous. Verification should be sought in the associated fauna.

Although laboratory analysis of colonial corals will usually yield significant results, there are only three genera which should be relied upon in the field: Py.cnostylus, Billingsastraea and Lithostrotionella.

Pycnostylus is a loosely branching fasciculate colony which might be mis­taken for a tabulate coraL Septa are very short or lacking and as a result tabulae dominate the interior. They are unlike those in other corals in that they are widely and unevenly spaced. The genus is rare, but very diagnostic for Silurian.

Billingsastraea (Phillipsastraea) is a cerioid coral without walls, and thu3 septa from adjacent corallites appear confluent. The weathering habit is such that it mimics heliolitid tabulate corals in transverse section. Hence close attention should be paid to structure. Corallite size may help in distinguish­ing the two : those of Billingsastraea are usually quite large (5-10 mm.) while heliolitids are typically tiny. Billingsastraea is confined to the Middle and Upper Devonian.

Lithostrotionella, diagnostic for Permo-Carboniferous, is cerioid with a lonsdaleoid dissepimentarium. As mentioned previously this latter structure should be sought on fresh, not weathered surfaces. Facies relationships are such that if the genus is found in Alberta and British Columbia its age is probably Mississippian. In the Yukon and Northwest Territories, including the Arctic Islands, it is more likely Permo-Pennsylvanian.

PHYLUM BRAOHIOPODA

Brachiopods by reason of their shear abundance are among the most im­portant of all Palaeozoic fossils. With them there is no smooth syrup for field identification. They are difficult. The field worker must realize this and be prepared to make mistakes. The various component groups such as spiriferids, orthids, terebratulids and the like can be used with caution in the field to delimit broad portions of the geologic column. Fortunately la,bora­tory analysis usually will yield more finite correlations and hence collections should be as complete as possible.

In the following discussion of the various brachiopod groups, representative genera will be listed. These may help in prompting the reader's memory and in directing him to palaeontology text books for supplementary information.

The r eader should remember the ease with which a brachiopod can be mis­taken for a pelecypod. In the former the beak is central with mirror image on either side. In pelecypods the beak is usually off-centre, giving an assymet­rical appearance to the shell. In profile the valves of hrachiopods are generally of differing size and/ or convexity, while those of pelecypods are equaL

The phylum Brachiopoda is divided into two broad classes: Inarticulata and Articulata. The inarticulates, so called because they lack artiCUlating teeth are very poor index fossils and extend from Cambrian to Recent. Since their shell is often chitinous they may be blackish or greyish when fossilized. Articulates, on the other hand, have teeth and thus a simple muscle systejm. Their shell is mainly calcite and they often preserve with a light colour.

..

•

•

•

-

•

•

Inarticulate Brachiopods (Plate 14)

13

The most common inarticulate is Lingula (s.l.) which ranges from Cambrian to Recent. Locally it can be useful in western Canada. For example if the geologist knows he is on Triassic strata, and finds abundant Lingttla) the chances favour a Middle Triassic assignment.

Orbiculoidea is a brachiopod that looks like a small gramophone record . In western Canada it appears restricted mainly to Permo-Carboniferous, particularly Permo-Pennsylvanian.

Articulate Brachiopods (Plates 14-26)

Articulate ,brachiopods, by far the most common and useful members of this phylum, nearly always indicate strata extending from Ordovician to Per­mian, and particularly from Middle Ordovician onward. Locally they may be common in portions of the Triassic System but represented by restricted groups.

For the various articulate groups discussed below - orthids, spiriferids, terebratulids and the like-it must be stressed that internal characters are usually very important in definition; external shape is often secondary. In the field, however, it is necessary to depend almost entirely on external shape and hence mistakes may be made. Laboratory examination of internal struc­tures may later rectify such error.

For field purposes the writer recognizes eleven articulate brachiopod groups: orthids, dalmanellids, pentamerids, strophomenids, productids, rhynchonellids, spiriferids, punctospiriferids, atrypids, rostrospiriferids, and terebratulids.

Orthids Orthid hrachiopods are fairly large with wide hinge, subquadrate outline

and rather coarse ribs. In profile the valves are gently bi-convex, or with one valve nearly plane. They are indicative of Ordovician and Silurian strata, particUlarly the former. If an orthid has about the same shape and size as the Plaesiomys o.ccidentalis, shown on Figs. 3 to 6 of PI. 14, a very late Ordovician horizon should be suspected, one roughly coeval with the Stony Mountain Formation of southern Manitoba. Such orthids are ubiquitous in this horizon over much of western Canada, and confirming evidence should be sought in associated fauna (see p. 27).

Typical genera are Dinorthis) Plaesiomys, If eberteZZa, Platystrophia and If esp er.or this .

DalmaneZZids Dalmanellid brachiopods are typically small with oval outline, fine ribs and

cardinal area. In profile they are gently biconvex or may have one valve nearly plane. They are not reliable field fossils because an immature orthid may be confused with a dalmanellid. Palaeontology text books all stress that dalmanellids are punctate, and orthids impunctate. For practical purposes, nowever, it is impossible to distinguish the two. .

Representative genera are DalnwneZZa, Rhipid.omeZZa, Schizophoria, If eteror­this, Diceronvyonia and Resserella.

Small dalmanellids, usually one-half inch or less wide, are characteristic of Ordovician and Silurian. Large specimens, those which may be three-quar­ters to one inch in width, like RhipidomeZZa, are more common in the upper Palaeozoic.

•

r

14

PentamC1'ids Pentamerid brachiopods are large, typically elongate, medium to strongly

biconvex with a surface either smooth or ribbed. Virgiana, Pentamerus, Oon­chidium and Gypidula are typical genera. The elongate shape and large size are most important in identifying well preserved individuals. One of the most characteristic pentamerid structures is a spondylium, an elongate trough­like muscle platform on the interior of the valve. Well preserved shells may indicate this structure by a long line near the beak.

Very often pentamerids are preserved as dolomitized internal moulds. When this happens the spondylium and opposed septa are weathered out as pro­nounced elongate cracks near the heaks (see PI. 15, Fig. 3). If such speci­mens are large they can be assumed to belong to the pentamerid group and indicate Silurian. It is rather anomalous, but such poorly preserved penta­merids are safer to identify in the field than well preserved ones. The overall range of the pentamerid group is Ordovician to Devonian, but they are most common and characteristic in the Silurian System.

Str-ophomenids Strophomenid brachiopods, although a group readily identifiable, are indiv­

idually extremely unreliable index fossils. All that should be assumed is that containing strata are in the Middle Ordovician to Permian interval. They have a wide hinge with cardinal area, semi-circular outline and fine ribs, occa­sionally almost striae. The most distinguishing feature is valve convexity: one valve is gently convex, and the other gently concave. The living animal must have been almost paper-thin. Familiar genera are Rafinesquina, Stro­phomena, S chtl,chertella, Leptaena and Ort7wtetes.

About the only strophomenids which can he used in the field for more r efined correlation are those belonging to genera like lIiesolobus and Oh,onetina. Their characteristic is a pronounced, narrow fold and sinus-structures lacking on typical strophomenids. Such genera are Permo-Pennsylvanian, particularly Permian in western Canada.

Productids Pro.ductid brachiopods, distant relatives of strophomcnids, are important

field fossils because they are easy to identify and indicate Permo-Carboniferous; a rather limited range for a brachiopod order. Valve convexity is the most im,portant classificatory feature: the ventral is highly convex and the dorsal fiat or concave. The outline of the shell is rather variable, although the hinge tends to be fairly wide and is always without cardinal area.

Most productids have a ribbed surface although a few, like the horridonid group, are smooth. One of the more diagnostic productid features are spines. These may cover the entire valve surface or be restricted to certain areas. Almost always the spines are not preserved; only their base remains which leaves a bump on the valve surface (see PI. 18, Fig. 5).

The reader is referred to a recent publication by Muir-Wood and Cooper (1962) which describes in detail the myriads of productids. For field pur­poses only six productid groups are recognized here: dictyoclostids, linopro­ductids, horridonids, waagenoconchids, echinoconchids and productellids.

Dictyoclostids are the most common group among the productids. Typically they have a rather wide hinge and (most important) coarse, rather irregular ribs. The latter are very distinctive in that they commonly show a rough pinching and swelling effect due to interruption by growth lines. The reader should learn to r ecognize such ribs as even small valve fragments (PI. 16, Fig. 3) are sufficient to indicate Permo-Carboniferous.

"1

•

>

•

15

Linoproductid brachiopods are much like dictyoclostids in size range and outline. Their distinctive feature is numerous fine regular ribs. A Mississip­pian linoproductid looks much like a Permian one, and hence they should be relied upon only to indicate the Permo-Carboniferous interval. Only one genus is useful for accurate calibration. This is the Permian genus Muir­woodia. It is a rather atypical linoproductid in that it is transversely elongate. It is of medium size and may have a sinus. It appears in fair abundance in northern Canada where it indicates Lower Permian strata .

Horridonid brachiopods are very common over northern Canada, but occur only in local pockets to the south. They are an extremely useful field fossil in that they are easy to identify and indicative of Permo-Pennsylvanian strata. The group characteristic is a nearly smooth valve surface. There are no ribs although often rude irregular rib-like protuberances appear on anterior por­tions of the valves.

Although externally identical there are actually two diverse horridonid genera in northern Canada. The first, indicative of Pennsylvanian, is prob­ably a new genus with spine bases along the ventral (hinge) cardinal margin and none along the dorsal. The valve surface is poorly preserved but appears lamellose.

The second, occurring much more commonly, likely belongs with the genus H orridonia and is indicative of Lower and lower Upper Permian strata. It has spine bases along the dorsal cardinal margin and none along the ventral. Shell surface is typically pustulose. The reader is referred to Nelson (1962c) for a more detailed discussion of these horridonids. In the field it is partic­ularly important to maintain a search until specimens with preserved cardinal spine bases are found. They are destroyed or obscured in the vast majority of specimens.

Waagenoconchid brachiopods lack ribs and are variable in shape and size. Their diagnostic feature is that the entire valve surfaces are covered with minute spines arranged diagonally. When broken the spine bases show a very characteristic pattern like that on Figs. 1-3 of PI. 20. Waage1wconcha, the most common genus, is important because a small fragment of a valve is sufficient for determination (PI. 20, Fig. 4). The genus and the group are indicative of Permian and Pennsylvanian strata in western Canada, particular­ly the former.

Echinoconchid productids have valves with concentrically arranged bands bearing minute spines. The banding is the most apparent and diagnostic feature as bases of these spines are often hard to discern. Echinoconchid species are difficult to identify and in the field all that should be assumed is that containing strata are Permo-Carboniferous.

Productellids are a special group of productids which, except for bearing spines, might be ,placed with the strophomenids on the basis of outline and valve convexity. The group is mentioned here solely because of one abundant and striking species-Productella (Quadratia) hirstdifonnis Girty, a fairly large brachiopod with typically irregular rugose valve surfaces. Spine bases are rarely seen. Productella hirsutifonnis is probably a facies fossil but so far it appears restricted to the Upper Mississippian of northern British Colum­bia, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories (Nelson, 1961a). The association of L eiorhynchus carboniferum Girty should be verified (see page 16 and PI. 20, Fig. 7, this paper).

Rhynchondlids Rhynchonellid brachiopods are very poor index fossils because they are long

ranging and show little morphological difference from system to system. The

I

-------------------------------------------,.

16

reader may remember the difficulty he had distinguishing the Ordovician Rhynchotre?1'ia from the Silurian Camarotoechia: a problem still plaguing pres­ent-day students (and professors). With most of this group about all that should be assumed is that containing rocks are Middle Ordovician to Jurassic, with chances favouring the Palaeozoic portion.

Perversely, the rhynchonellids are among the easiest to identify of all brachiopod groups. They are of small or medium size with a subtriangular outline, narrow hinge, coarse ribs and generally a well-defined fold and sinus. In profile the valves tend to be quite biconvex. The overall aspect of a rhynchonellid brachiopod is thus somewhat like a hazelnut.

Leiorhynchid brachiopods are a special kind of rhynchonellid in which the ribs on lateral areas are absent or weakly defined. They are represented by a host of genera among which Leiorhynchus, Pugnoides, Hypothryidvna and Uncinulus are perhaps best known. The leiorhynchids are better age indi­cators than the average rhynchonellid in that they should indicate Upper Palaeozoic. The reader is referred to the rather large "Leiorhynchus" sp. on Figs. 10 to 12 of PI. 21 with two to three very coarse ribs in the fold and sinus. This brachiopod is larger and less biconvex than the normal leiorhyn­chid and appears to define Wolfcampian (Lower Permian) strata in northern Canada.

Leim-hynchtlS car-b,oniferum Girty is a rather nondescript medium-sized leiorhynchid, mentioned here only because it is commonly found as the asso­ciate of Productella hirsutiformis Girty (PI. 20, Fig. 7). In northern Can­ada the two define Upper Mississippian strata (see page 29).

Spiriferids Spiriferid brachiopods are one of the most common elements in Upper

Palaeozoic faunas. Their most diagnostic feature is in the interior where the dorsal valve bears laterally directed spiralia. These are rarely preserved but do tend to impress a transversely-elongate outline upon the shell, often with pointed or acute lateral extremities. Spiriferids have well-defined ribs, . a .palpable fold and sinus which mayor may not hear ribs, and a rather broad cardinal area with triangular delthyrium. The profile is usually mediumly biconvex.

Identification of the spiriferid group should be made only if it conforms to the above description. There are many genera with great varieties of shapes and often departing radically from this norm. The more typical genera are SpirifC1", N eospirifer, Cyrtospirif:er, Brachythyris and Platyra,chella.

Rib pattern can be useful in making more discrete correlations within the Up,per Palaeozoic if caution is used. Bundled ribs like those shown on Figs. 5 to 7 of PI. 22 are characteristic of the genus N eospirifer and highly diag­nostic for Permo-Pennsylvanian strata. This bundling can be more suhtle than shown, and commonly tangential light is needed before it is apparent. It should be stressed that normal spiriferids with unbundled ribs are often common in the Permian and Pennsylvanian, as well as the Devonian and Mississippian systems.

Spirifer.elZa is a most atypical spiriferid in that it is commonly longer than wide. Ribs are coarse and rather rudely bundled. All these manifest fea­tures make the genus easy to identify. Spiriferella is a good index fossil for the Permian System, particularly in northern Canada and Alaska.

Punctospiriferids Punctospiriferids are rather small spire-bearing brachiopods having a punc­

tate shell (see PI. 23, Fig. 7). Although not common they can be confused

•

..

, • •

..

17

with the spiriferids which many mimic in external shape (e.g. Punctospirifer, Cyrtina, Spiriferina). Still others have shapes approaching the atrypid and rhynchonellid groups (e.g. Eurnetria, H orneospira) . The overall range of this rather difficult group is Silurian to Triassic. The latter genera are best iden­tified in the laboratory. It is the former which have spiriferid shapes that may cause trouble. The reader is advised to examine closely the shell surface of any small spiriferid. If it is punctate he should be aware that the con­taining rocks may be Triassic rather than Palaeozoic.

Rostr.ospiriferids Rostrospiriferid brachiopods are diagnosed by outward directed spiralia -

very similar to those of the spiriferid group. Here, however, the similarity ends for rostrospiriferids are small- to medium-sized, smooth, biconvex shells, with rather narrow hinge. Composita, Cleiothyridina, Athyris and Whitfield­ella are the more common genera. The group is quite abundant and easy to identify. However, its long range-Middle Silurian to Jurassic-makes it of minor value in correlation, especially since individual genera are rather hard to sort out. Nevertheless rostrospiriferids are most abundant in the Permo­Carboniferous. The reader should be aware of the differences between the rostrospiriferids and the externally similar terebratulids described below.

Atrypids Atrypid brachiopods, represented by numerous genera, range from Middle

Ordovician to Lower Mississippian. The external shape of the group is rather variable; the basic feature is the rarely ,preserved atrypid spiralia-spires usually directed inward and toward the floor of the dorsal valve. The variation in external form necessitates identifying the group by genera-Atrypa, Zygo­spira, Atrypella, Lepf}ocoelia, etc.-and hence its use in field correlation is limited. The reader is strongly advised to recognize Atrypa, characterized by a sub-pentagonal to semi-circular outline, with nearly flat ventral, and convex dorsal valves. Ribs are present and may vary from fine to coarse. Plate 25, Figs. 1-10 show the various aspects of this genus. Atrypa is a ubiquitous, common and very diagnostic Devonian fossil.

In northern Canada high Silurian strata often contain very small Atrypa in the order of one-quarter inch. When such Atrypa are in abundance with­out signs of larger individuals, the geologist should be sus,picious of a Silurian rather than Devonian interval.

Terenratulids Terebratulids are externally very similar to rostrospiriferids in being bicon­

vex. with narrow hinge. The shell surface is also typically smooth, although ~ome genera do have ribs. Diagnostic features of the group are punctatc shell ~urface (PI. 24, Figs. 16 and 17) and looped brachidium. Unfortunately both are rarely preserved leaving the geologist in a quandary as to whether his specimen~ are terebratnlids or rost.rospiriferids. This is something that can be solved only in the laboratory. It is especially important for the field worker to be aware of the differences in range of the two groups. Where rostrospiriferids are exclusively Palaeozoic, terebratulids extend from U,pper Silurian to Recent. Hence the possibility exists that when such smooth bi­convex brachiopods occur without helpful associated fauna, the rocks may be Mesozoic or Cenozoic, rather than Palaeozoic .

Of the numerous terebratulid genera like Terebratulina, Cranaena, I1.ingena, Rensselandia, Stringocephalus and Dielasma, only the last three are useful in field correlation.

•

,

18

Rensselan,dia is a rather large, elongate terebratulid with fine ribs. Punctae are rarely preserved. The genus is not common but appears typical of the Middle Devonian Ramparts Formation in northwestern Canada. Rensselandia may be confused with a pentamerid-the relatively fine ribs are then most helpful in identification. These are not preserved on PI. 26.

Stringocephalus is a rather atypical terebratulid because of the large size it sometimes reaches-occasionally three or four inches. Aside from this it is like most terebratulids in being biconvex, smooth and narrow-hinged. Interiors of both valves have septa which weathering may cause to form ~pondylium­like grooves. Hence the large size and grooves often cause Stringlocephalus to be mistaken for Silurian pentamerids. There is no easy way of separating the two in the field (the diagnostic punctae are rarely preserved in Stringo­cephalus). Shell outline may help if one is fortunate enough to find good specimens; that of Stringocephalus is typically about as wide as long, where­aspentamerids are typically longer than wide.

Dielasma is a small- to medium-sized smooth terebratulid quite useful for determining Permo-Carboniferous. 'rhe shape is elongate-oval with a gently biconvex profile, commonly made weakly biconvex by compression. Punctae, for some reason, are nearly always preserved and generic identification should not be made without them.

PHYLUM BRYOZOA (POL YZOA)

(Plate 27) Bryozoans, the "moss-animals" are an abundant element of Palaeozoic rocks

but are often passed over because of their rather insignificant size. They occur in strata ranging from Middle Ordovician to Recent but not in Cambrian 01' Lower Ordovician. In Canada, probably because of facies relationships, they are nearly all found in Palaeozoic rocks . Individual bryozoans are minute and the shape of colonies they build so diverse that no generalization can be made here. The reader is referred to his palaeontology text book for a more complete coverage of the phylum. Genera like Batostoma, Prasopora, II aZlopora, Fenestrellina, Fistulipora, Archimedes, Stenopora, will indicate the great diversity of shapes in this phylum.

Bryozoans are not good index fossils, either in field or laboratory. They are very difficult to identify and only two should be trusted. The first is the genus Archil1wdes and the second are the fenestellids-a rather large group with numerous genera.

Archi11'/'edes should be familiar to most readers because of the spiral portion of the colony which resulted in the generic name. The genus is Permo-Car­boniferous. Facies relationships are such that it indicates Mississippian in southern Canada, and Permo-Pennsylvanian in northern Canada.

Fenestellid bryozoans have a trellis-like colony and are usually indicative of Permo-Carboniferous. It should be realized that such colonies can occur in Silurian and Devonian rocks, albeit rather rarely. Fenestellid bryozoans may be confused with the dendroid graptolite Dictyonema. When in doubt lithology may help as the latter usually occurs in shale, while fenestellids prefer a carbonate facies.

PHYLUM ECHINODERMATA

(Plate 27) To the phylum Echinodermata belong the familiar eleutherozoans-starfish,

brittlestars and sea urchins-and the less familiar but geologically more im­portant pelmatozoans - crinoids, blastoids, cystoids and edrioasteroids. AI-

•

•

-

..

•

"

•

19

though diverse in shape all these animals tend toward radial symmetry with five-fold plan of organization, and have a skeleton made up of discrete hut usually closely appresscd calcite plates. Each of the latter is minutely porous but made up of optically continuous calcite; in other words each is a calcite crystal. Death almost always results in these plates separating from each other and being spread as broken fragments far and wide over the sea floor. For this reason a complete or relatively complete echinoderm fossil is a rare thing indeed.

We have reason to believe that echinoderms, probably pelmatozoans were among the most abundant of all animals during the Palaeozoic Era. This is because of the large amounts of crystalline calcite that by itself forms thick deposits of "crinoidal" limestone (perhaps more accurately called pelmato­zoan limestone) or goes toward helping form other sedimentary rocks, partic­ularly the carbonates.

As useful index fossils then, echinoderms can be almost completely dis­counted because they nearly always fragment before burial. Mention should, however, be made here of the Jurassic crinoid Pentacrint~s which has a stem usually with five sides like that shown on Figs. 5 and 6 of PI. 27. When five­sided columnals are found the reader should look about for corroborating evi­dence that he is on Jurassic strata. Similar columnals are known from earlier rocks but are not so characteristic.

In northern Canada strata considered Lower Devonian occasionally yield crinoid stems with two axial canals, rather than the single one found in the vast majority of crinoids. Thus columnals like those shown on Figs. 3 and 4 of PI. 27 should be suspiciously regarded as Lower Devonian. ~:,

PHYLUM MOLLUSCA

The phylum Mollusca is a diverse and important assemblage of animals to which belong the geologically significant gastropods, pelecypods and cephalo­pods. Molluscs have been important throughout nearly the whole of the Phanerozoic Eon, and today continue to form a significant segment of the earth's animal assemblage.

Gastropods (Plate 28)

Gastropods do not appear in abundance until Ordovician and have main­tained their numbers through to the present. Thus Cambrian rocks should be expected to yield f ew or no gastropods.

They are very poor index fossils being extremely difficult to identify gener­ically and specifically. Maclurit,es is the only genus which can be trusted in the field. In western Canada it indicates Middle and low Upper Ordovician strata in the interval of the Sunblood and Red River formations, and should be associated with Receptactdites) Catenipora and the like. One side is flat and the other gently sloping. To identify MacZt~rites the specimen should be large-between three and six inches in diameter-and oriented with flat side up. If the aperture is on the left then the genus is MacZurites . If, however, the aperture is on the right an entirely .different genus is represented-possibly the Middle Devonian BucheZia.

Tentaculitids are a problematical group of animals variously referred to as coelenterates, annelids, cephalopods or gastropods. They are arbitrarily dis-

* Apparently these axial canals may approach each other and join so as to form a figure eight in cross-section. The writer is indebted to T. Potter Chamney of the Geological Survey of Canada for data on these Lower Devonian crinoids .

i

20

cussed here under the last and may actually have been swimming forms like present-day pteropods. The shell is very small-in the order of one-quarter inch in length-and acutely conical with transverse ornamentation. Tentacu­litids commonly occur in swarms on bedding planes of strata ranging in age from Ordovician to Devonian. In western Canada they nearly always indicate Silurian or Devonian.

Pelecypods (Plate 29)

Pelecypods, like gastropods, are rather unreliable fossils although there are more useful field genera. For all practical purposes pelecypods are absent from Cambrian and Lower Ordovician strata; and are generally rather rare · elements of the fauna from Middle Ordovician to Permian. With the near extinction of brachiopods at the end of the Palaeozoic, pelecypods apparently stepped into the vacated ecological niche and became common members of Mesozoic and Cenozoic faunas. Thus when one finds pelecypads to be ubiqui­tous, rather common and without associated brachiopods or corals, he should suspect strata of post-Palaeozoic age.

Pectinoid pelecypods or the "pectens," rather easy to identify with their well developed wings, coarse ribs and typically sub-central beak do not make any significant appearance until the Mississippian Period. Although they may be abundant in local pods of Permo-Carboniferous rocks-particularly in the Mississippian of the Yukon Territory--even then they do not achieve any degree of constancy until Mesozoic and Cenozoic.

The Lower Triassic PseudomO'notis and the Upper Triassic Mon.otis, rather atypical pectinoids in that beak is somewhat off centre, are good indicators for Triassic strata. Because they are so difficult to distinguish, however, the geologist should not attempt intra-systemic division on the basis of morphology. Along with the sub-central beak both genera have strong ribs which may alternate in size. Monotis appears with more frequency than Pseud01nonotis and is generally preserved like the ribbed valves shown on Fig. 6 of PI. 28. The reader should familiarize himself with these ribs as fragments can some­times be used to determine Triassic.

Three other pectinoid Triassic genera rather similar to Monotis and Pseudo­manotis, but possessing finer ribs, are O~araia, H a~obia and Daonella. These three are difficult to tell apart. Only D(f)onella is shown on the illustrations.

Buchia (Atu;ella) and Inoceramus are two mytiloid pelecypods often very difficult to distinguish. Both have elongate valves with sub-triangular outline, beaks off to one side and the surface covered by rather coarse, concentric rugae. ,Vhen both valves are preserved (which is rare) Buchia is inequivalved and Inocercwntts equivalved. For field purposes the following size criterion can be used: if the shells are consistently rather small, i.e. in the order of one to two inches in length, then they are likely Bnchia of Late Jurassic or very Early Cretaceous age. If the shells are larger, then the chances favour Inoceran/,us of mainly Cretaceous age.

The ostreoids (oysters) do not appear with any abundance until the Creta­ceous Period. A typical oyster lacks pelecypod symmetry and has one valve rather deep and the other nearly :flat. The outline of both is quite variable and rather amorphous, and the surface is covered by coarse, very irregular rugae. Oysters are not good guide fossils in that they indicate only a Creta­ceous to Recent interval. As environmental indicators, however, they are often useful in that they occur near old shore lines, or on very shallow banks.

..

-.

..

•

Cephalopods (Plates 30-35)

21

The vast majority of fossil cephalopods are represented by nautiloids, am­monoids and belemnoids.

Nautiloids Nautiloid cephalopods range from Ordovician to Recent but are most com­

mon in Ordovician and Silurian rocks. In shape they vary from orthocone (straight cone) through to a curved one (cyrtocone) and finally to a coiled cone (nautilicone)"'. The most diagnostic nautiloid feature is the transverse partitions called septa. These plates are rather simple, so that the resulting suturest are simple.

Orthocones are the most common fossil nautiloids. Individual genera and species are very difficult to identify for accurate horizon and all that should be assumed is that containing rocks are likely Ordovician or Silurian, espe­cially if the shells are fairly large. Occasionally a few small orthocones~ at most about four inches long and one half inch wide-occur higher than Silurian, especially in the Upper Devonian Fort Creek shale of northwestern Canada (see Pl. 30, Fig. 3) .

Often the siphuncle of orthocones and other nautiloids will swell strongly between septa and result in a beaded structure similar to that on Figs. 1 and 3 of PIs. 30 and 31, respectively. Such siphuncles often break completely free of the shell and have caused geologists considerable perplexity as to their OrIglll. They are common, easy to recognize and almost always confined to Upper Ordovician and Silurian.

The genus Diestoceras is a special type of squat orthocone, technically termed brevicone. In western Canada these are common in Upper Ordovician across both the interval of the Red River and Stony Mountain formations. Similar hrevicones, although generically different, also occur in Silurian strata but are relatively much rarer.

Cyrtocone nautiloids are less common than orthocones, and rather difficult to identify in the field. The writer draws the reader's attention to two com­mon Upper Ordovician guide fossils-with considerable trepidation, however, as similar forms occasionally occur in Silurian rocks. One of these is W inni­pegoceras with a fairly straight living chamber and curved phragmocone. The other is Cyrtogomphoceras, a rather squat, slightly curved cyrtocone. It is important to note the position of siphuncle in identifying the last because it is close to the nearly straight, not the curved side as in the great majority of curved cephalopods. Winnipegoceras occurs over the interval correspond­ing to both the Red River and Stony Mountain formations, whereas Cyrt,o­gomphoceras appears confined to strata coeval with the former unit.

Nautilicone nautiloids are rare and essentially collector's items. They ap­pear most frequently in Ordovician and Silurian strata but can be expected sporadically in any younger system. The present day pearly Nautilus of the south seas is a member of this group.

Billingsites isa special kind of nautiloid impossible to classify as orthocone, cyrtocone or nautilicone. The genus starts as a cyrtocone then later adds on

*The term "nautili cone" is used here in a very broad sense for any cephalopod shell that is coiled, whether involute, advolute or convolute. tSutures will appear on a cephalopod shell only after the outer wall has broken off. See Figs. 1 and 2 of PI. 33 for examples.

'I

22

an ellipsoid or egg-shaped shell called an ascocone. The cyrtocone is nearly always lost: only the ellipsoid remains with its peculiar flexed sutures. Al­though not a common fossil by any means Billingsites has to be mentioned because it is so easy to recognize and such a good indicator for Upper O~dovi -. Clan.

A11'Lnwnoids Ammonoids are one step up the cephalopod evolutionary ladder in that

septa and thus sutures are crenulated. Why it was advantageous to develop such a pattern has never been properly explained. Whatever the reason suture crenulation has given field geologists a good tool for broad age determination, and ammonoid specialists are usually able to follow this up with a very accurate dating. Thus these fossils should be sought and extensively collected.

The ammonoid group ranges from Devonian to Cretaceous. Unlike nautil­oids, which are rather variable in shape, most ammonoids are nautilicone. Those of the Palaeozoic are typically small-less than the size of a golf ball. Mesozoic ammonoids can attain much larger sizes. Based upon suture pattern the earliest and simplest members are the goniatite ammonoids. These were later followed by the more complex ceratite and finally by the most complex of all, the arn.monite ammonoids. It is recommended that the field geologist content himself only with recognizing goniatites, ceratites and ammonites. Except for the few genera described below, any attempt at field generic or specific identification may ibe misleading. Ammonoids are a vast group with many pitfalls for the unwary.

Goniatite ammonoids extend from Devonian to Permian and are distin­guished by sutures forming simple saddles and lobes. * They are very rare in Canada although occasionally the Permo-Carboniferous of northern Can­ada will yield them.

Ceratite ammonoids range from Mississippian to Triassic and represent a further evolutionary stage in that lobes are minutely crenulated- so muC'h so that a magnifying glass is needed. Saddles remain smooth as in the gonia­tites. In Canada ceratites are practically confined to Triassic strata. Natho1"stites is Middle Triassic and one of the few ceratite genera easy to identify. It is small to medium sized, smooth and with a pronounced ventral keel. Sutures rarely show on Nath;o1"stites-external shape has to be used alone.

Ammonites represent the culmination of ammonoid evolution in that both saddles and lobes are crenulated. t Usually the crenulations are so complex and flowery that it is difficult to distinguish the saddle portion from the lobe. Ammonites are exclusively Mesozoic, extending from Triassic to Cretaceous.

It should be emphasized again that sutures will appear on cephalopods, whether they be nautiloids or ammonoids, only after the outer wall has peeled off. Many cephalopods, particularly ammonites maintain this wall and thus inhibit field dating. A tool that can be used--a dangerous one-is surface ornamentation. Most nautiloids, goniatites and ceratites have a fairly smooth exterior as do many ammonites. Some ammonites, however, have developed nodes, ridges, keels and the like. Thus an ornamented cephalopod may very well be a Mesozoic ammonite.

*Such saddles and lobes can also occur in nautiloids; by definition a goniatite must have small ventral lobes. For field purposes, however, saddles and lobes nearly always are restricted to goniatites. tSome of the ammonites regressed in the Cretaceous and developed ceratite sutures. -Fortunately these are very rare.

•

•

•

•

•

23

About the only trustworthy ammonite genera are N eogastroplites and the rather bizarre Baculites. Both are Cretaceous; the former identifies Lower and the latter the Upper part of the System. N eogastroplites is large and has the surface covered by pronounced knobs. In early life Baculites is nautili­cone but later becomes orthocone. Only the latter is usually preserved and sutures will mark it as an ammonite.

B elernnoids Where nautiloids and ammonoids evolved in such a way as to crenulate septa

and sutures, the belemnoid group went a totally different direction and made the shell internal. The advantages to this should be obvious. Instead of hav­ing to carry around a cumbersome, feelingless shell as did the nautiloids and ammonoids an internal shell is covered with external flesh with all the myriad nerve endings. Thus a definite sense of touch and a greater awareness of potential danger is gained.

Belemnoids or belemnites appeared first in the Mississippian and died in the Eocene. Except for Jurassic occurrences they are exceedingly rare in Canada and Alaska. During this period they underwent such an abrupt expansion that it is often called the" age of belemnites."

A typical belemnite shell preserves two main structures, a phragmocone and a guard (rostrum). The phragmocone indicates its ancestral heritage as early representatives of the animal may have began life essentially as orthocone nautiloids. Shortly thereafter they made this phragmocone internal and pro­ceede.d to deposit fibrous calcite in layers upon it. This calcite makes up the guard, often the only part preserved, which is cigar-shaped and generally no more than three or four inches long and about one half inch wide. In trans­verse section the fibrous calcite is arranged radially-often mimicing the septal pattern of cup corals. To experienced eyes, however, these fibres are so unique that even a small fragment is sufficient to determine Jurassic strata.

PHYLUM ARTHROPODA

Although arthropods today are one of the most important animal groups their fossil record is disappointing and consists mainly of trilobites and ostra­cods. Crabs, shrimp, lobsters, spiders, insects and the like are very rare fossils and should be collected intensively when found-not for their value in correlation, which is almost nil, but for the purpose of adding to scientific knowledge.

Trilobites (Plates 36-40)

Trilobites are confined to the Palaeozoic and range from lowest Cambrian to the highest Permian. Most are in Lower Palaeozoic and consist of cephala, thoraxes and pygidia, either joined together to form a nearly complete trilo­bite carapace or more commonly separate because these animals moulted. Upper Palaeozoic, for some reason yields mainly pygidia and thus a field method arises. It goes without saying that this is a dangerous one and should be used only in desperation.

Trilobites, because of their rather enigmatic appearance and aesthetic appeal vividly remain in a student's mind, often long after university, and thus an exaggerated sense of their importance sometimes grows. The profes­sional palaeontologist, however, is well aware that the value of trilobites, both in field and laboratory correlation, is quite limited and that really they are useful mainly for the Cambrian System.

Trilobites are represented by at least fourteen hundred genera, the great majority of which are difficult to identify accurately, unless one is a specialist.

24

There are only five genera which the non-specialist should use and hope to come anywhere near an accurate correlation. 'l'hese are OlenelltlS, Albertelw) Olenoides, Encrinurus, and Scutellum.

Olenell1.ls is an excellent guide for Lower Cambrian. The cephalon is most commonly preserved and fortunately is most diagnostic and hard to mis­identify. Important features are the large crescentic eyelobes and the glabella which is rather bulbous at the anterior end. The kind of Olenelltls shown on Fig. 1 of PI. 36 occurs in both the North Atlantic and Pacific faunal realms. Other Lower Cambrian genera such as TVanneria, Fre?1wntia and Paedeumias have pygidia and thoraxes considerably different from Olenellus, but with almost identical cephala. Thus it is possible to misidentify a cephalon but still reach the correct age!

Albertella is a rather small Middle Cambrian trilobite distinguished by three pairs of abnormally long spines. The first pair is on the cephal on, the second on the third thoracic segment, and the third on the pygidium. Moult­ing commonly causes the shell to break up, and most Albertella are represented by pygidia like that shown on Fig. 1 of PI. 37.

Olenoides (Neolenus) is a rather nondescript medium to large trilobite with short spines along the edge of the pygidium. It is a fairly common Middle Cambrian genus.

Encrinurus is distinguished chiefly by the rapidly tapering pygidium, almost pointed at the posterior end. These small pygidia are usually all that is pre­served and are rare but highly characteristic of the Silurian.

Scutellum. is another rare trilobite, again highly diagnostic for Silurian and represented mainly by pygidia. These are fairly large, semi-circular with very short axial lobes and radiating pleurae.

About the only other trilobites which can be depended upon with any degree of reliability are those belonging to the bumastid, agnostid and eodiscid groups.

The chief bumastid (asaphid) characteristic is the weakly defined or absent axial lobe. This imparts a smooth appearance to cephalon and pygidium, and regular segmentation to the thorax. Fragments of the last have occasionally been mistaken for nautiloid sutures (see PI. 39, Fig. 2). The term "humastid" is used broadly here and encompasses a host of genera among which are Bumastus, Isotelus, Illaenus, I[irkella, Trimeus and Dipleura. These are an Ordovician to Devonian assemblage, but in western and northern Canada occur mainly in Siluro-Ol~dovician, particularly the latter.

Agnostids and eodiscids are exceedingly small trilobites usually less than one-half inch in length. Some authorities think their morphology indicates an extra-trilobite classification. Agnostids have cephalon and pygidium of equal size and proportionally large. The thorax has two segments. Eodiscids are very similar to agnostids and the main difference is that they possess three thoracic segments. Most agnostids occur in the Middle and Upper, and the eodiscids in the Lower and Middle Cambrian Series.

Ostracods (Plate 40)

Ostracods are bivalved arthropods which look very much like tiny clams. They are not good field fossils but are often abundant particularly in the Silurian (PI. 40, Fig. 3). The overall range is Ordovician to Recent with most fossils occurring in the Palaeozoic.

•

•

..

•

25

Typical ostracods are between one-eighth and one-quarter of an inch in length but in northern Canada one should look for an extraordinarily large form between one-half and three-quarters of an inch. It appears confined to Middle Devonian.

PHYLUM CHORDATA

(Plate 41) The Phylum Chordata contains animals with a notocord at some stage in

their life. In the vast majority this structure is replace.d and covered by bone material giving rise to the older name of the phylum, "Vertebrata."

Marine vertebrates are so rare as to be almost non-existent as fossils in Canada and Alaska. If found, likely they will be represented by fishes, and aqueous reptiles such as turtles, ichthyosaurs, and plesiosaurs. Any locality with well preserved vertebrates should be accurately located, photographed and described so that this information can be given to vertebrate palaeontol­ogists. The geologist is not advised to attempt extensive collecting unless the locality is extremely isolated-this should be left to the specialist who has the time and methods for extracting verte.brate remains without undue frag­mentation.

For the purposes of this article the only marine vertebrate remains which are likely to be found are bone fragments and fish plates. Typically these have a light bluish hue because of the phosphatic bone material. Such remains are exceedingly rare and nearly always indicate the Devonian to Recent interval. In other words they are generally lacking in Lower Palaeozoic strata.

'MARINE PLANTS (Plate 42)

"Spirophyton" is an abundant and easily recognizable fossil in northern Canada. Although long ranging it makes such a forceful appearance in Early Permian strata of approximately Leonardian Age that it is an excellent guide for that stage. The origin of the genus, which also goes under the names Spirofurbt(,S, Spirophycos and Zoophycos is an enigma. It is thought to be some sort of seaweed marking.

The most characteristic shape is that of a cone upon which grooves spirally radiate away from the apex. The cones range from over four feet in diameter down to several inches and the shape from obtusely to acutely conical. Often "Spirophyton" markings lack the conical shape and all one will see are swirl-like markings on bedding planes like those on Fig. 2 of PI. 42. With these one should be suspicious of Permian strata but strongly advised to look for supplementary evidence.

PART II. STRATIGRAPIDC PALAEONTOLOGY

CAMBRIAN SYSTEM

Recognition of Cambrian strata should be based upon a profusion of trilo­bites, particularly agnostids and eodiscids, to the exclusion of nearly all other fauna, excepting a few Lingula s. l. and primitive articulate brachiopods. Corals, graptolites, stromatoporoids and bryozoans, common in younger por­tions of the Palaeozic, are never found in Cambrian rocks, and cephalopods, gastropods and articulate brachiopods should !be absent or extremely rare.

For field purposes the Cambrian System can be divided by trilobite fauna into two broad divisions: Lower Cambrian, and Middle through Upper Cam­brian.

•

26

Olenellid trilobites are by far the best and most diagnostic indicators for Lower Cambrian. Cephala are most common and recDgnized mainly by the large crescentic eye IDbes. Other trilobite grDups are exceedingly rare. Arch­aeDcyathid sponges are very diagnostic fOol' LDwer Cambrian but shDuld have neither the abundance nDr lateral ubiquity Df the olenellids. MDSt occur in carbDnate rDck as IDcal reefal pDds.

Whereas Lower Cambrian is dDminated almost solely by closely related Dlenellid trilDbites like Olenellus, Paedewnias and Wan1veria the Middle and Upper Cambrian are characterized by diversity of trilDbite fauna. It is stressed that diversity in shape is the key fOol' identification of this interval, and this shDuld be expected tOo range thrDugh the mDrphDIDgic spectrum dis­played by Albertella and Olenoides figured in this article, thrDugh tOo other unillustrated genera like Zacanthoides) Pagetia, Parad,oxides, Wann,eria, Bris­coia, Cedaria and Ptychaspis.

ORDOVICIAN AND SILURIAN SYSTEMS

OrdDvician and Silurian rDcks can be referred tOo as a shaly 001' a shelly facie" The fDrmer facies is dominated almost exclusively by graptolites and, as its name implies, is mainly shale-typically dark grey tOo black. The shelly facies is lithDIDgically more heterDgeneDus although carbDnates and shaly carbDnates are typical. It derives its name frDm the shelly animals like brachiopDds, pelecypDds and gastrDpDds which, alDng with cDrals, bryozDans, echinDderms, trilDhites and cephalDpDds, form the bulk of the fauna.

BOoth the shelly and the shaly facies are amenable to three-fDld divisiDn by fauna: Lower Ordovician, Middle thrDugh Upper OrdDvician, and Silurian. Because these facies are almDst mutually exclusive, however, they will be discussed separately.

Shaly Facies Regularly dichDtDmizing, multibranched graptoloids like l Tetragraptus,

Zyg,ograptus and Goniograptus identify LOower OrdDvician. CDmplete speci­mens Df the last tWD types are so rare that the reader must be prepared to work with small fragments. Generic identificatiDn is nDt necessary- recDgni­tiDn Df the regular multibranched trend is sufficient tOo date Lower OrdDvician. Phyllograpttbs and Is.ograptus are tWD readily identifiable genera not cDnfDrm­ing tOo the trend, but nevertheless very diagnDstic fOol' LDwer OrdDvician.

Middle and Upper Ordovician strata are dominated by a multiplicity Df biserial graptoloids of which Climacograptus, Orthograptus and Dip~ograptus are most CDmmDn. It is emphasized that these biserial fDrms shDuld be bOoth a CDmmDn and a dDminant element Df the graptolite fauna befDre identifica­tiDn of this interval is certain. They dD Dccur, albeit rather rarely, in bOoth LDwer OrdDvician and LDwer Silurian.

Whenever dDubt exists as to identificatiDn Df Middle and Upper OrdOovician the genera Diceloograptus and Dicrwnograptus ShDUld be sDught. These are rare, but very diagnDstic for this interval.

Silurian is indicated by a prepDnderance of monDserial graptDIDids like Monograptus having straight stipes. Spiral stipes of the Monograptus spiralis grDup identify the interval about the Lower-Middle Silurian bDundary and straight mDnDserial graptDloids with a "twist in the tail" appear mDst char­acteristic of the Middle Silurian Series (see PI. 7, Fig. 10). About the Dnly Dther graptDIDid useful in identifying Silurian is the rather rare Cyrtograptus. The reader is cautioned against mistaking it for the multibranched fDrms of the LDwer OrdDvician.

I

•

27

Shelly Facies Lower Ordovician is extremely difficult to recognize and is best done by

noting absence of certain groups: stromat,oporoi.ds, corals, and bryozoans do not appear in this interval. It goes without saying that such a negative criterion should be applied only after prolonged search. Gastropods, nautiloid cephalopods, trilobites and a few articulate brachiopods occur in the Lower Ordovician but unfortunately there are no safe generalizations which can be used to distinguish them from their younger Ordovician counterparts.

Middle and Upper Ordovician are identified by a profusion of solitary and colonial corals, bryozoans, orthid, dalmanellid, strophomenid and rhynchonel­lid brachiopods, nautiloid cephalopods, and gastropo.ds. Trilobites may he common locally but, except for the bumastid group, are not morphologically distinct.

Over western Canada this interval is amenable to division into Middle to low Upper Ordovician; and high Upper Ordovician. The former represents strata spanning the interval of the Sunblood and Red River formations; and the latter the Stony Mountain Formation (see Nelson, 1959 and 1963). Fos­sils common to both are Catenip'ora, Manipora and Diestoceras.

The Middle to low Upper Ordovician interval is identified by Receptaculites and Maclurites) and less easily by the cephalopods Winnipegoceras and Cyrto­gomphoceras. High Upper Ordovician strata are recognized most readily by orthids with size and shape similar to that on Fig. 6 of PI. 14 and by the radially asymmetrical cup corals Big7wrnia and Lobocorallium trilobaturn. The stromatoporoids Aulacera and Beatricea, and the tabulate coral Palaeo­favosites are also very .diagnostic, but are difficult to identify because of preservation. A rare but diagnostic genus is the aberrant nautiloid Billing-sites. '.

Although the Silurian System displays much the same assemblage of fossil groups as in Middle and Upper Ordovician, there is a shift in emphasis and abundance. Halysites and pentamerids brachiopods, along with the less diag­nostic Favosites and stromatoporid stromatoporoids, are dominant.

Rare but noteworthy Silurian genera are the colonial coral Pycnos,tylus and the trilobites Encrinurus and Scutellum. Ostracod swarms like that por­trayed in Fig. 3 of PI. 40 appear more commonly in the Silurian than in other systems.

DEVONIAN SYSTEM

Recognition of Devonian is best based upon the genus Atrypa shown in its various aspects on PI. 25. Important associates but nevertheless limited because they are Silurian holdovers, are Fav<osites, Alveolites, Cystiphyllu1n) tentaculitids and stromatoporid stromatoporoids.

Goniatite cephalopods first appear in the Devonian and range through to the Pennian. Except for some highly localized Mississippian occurrences, however, they are almost negligible. Leiorhynchid and spiriferid brachiopods first appear in force in the Devonian and the latter group remains a particul­arly important part of Upper Palaeozoic faunas.

Lower Devonian strata are absent over most of western Canada. They have been reported from the Northwest and Yukon Territories but their distribu­tion and exact age is still in doubt. One of the fossils considered diagnostic for this problematical Devonian is a peculiar crinoid stem with two axial canals, rather than the single one characterizing the vast majority of this group. It is illustrated on Figs. 3 and 4 of PI. 27.

I

28

Middle and Upper Devonian strata are very widespread but because of facies relationships it is very difficult to be accurate about faunal ranges. Middle Devonian has two genera which appear restricted to it. 'l'hese are Stringocephalus and Rensselandia. In addition there is a considerable fauna of Amphipora, Billingsastraea, and Favosites limitaris-like corals which also range into the lower part of the Upper Devonian.

Upper Devonian is difficult to identify upon a purely palaeontologic basis. The lower part can be expected to bear the Amphipora, Billingsastraea, Favo­sites and F. limitaris mentioned above. The upper part of this series, roughly correlative with the Palliser Formation, bears no fossils readily identifiable in the field. Recognition may be supplemented by negative evidence. The interval is devoid of corals both septate and aseptate, stromatoporoids (includ­ing Amphipora) and Atrypa.

PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS SYSTEMS

Because of their genetically related faunas the Mississippian, Pennsylvanian and Permian systems will be discussed as a unit before finer faunal divisions are outlined.

Productid brachiopods-dictyoclostids, linoproductids and echinoconchids­are by far the most diagnostic indicators for the Permo-Carboniferous and the reader must be prepared to work with valve fragments like that shown on Fig. 3 of PI. 16. These productids should be associated with a rich and varied fauna of spiriferid brachiopods and fenestellid bryozoans. Common but less diagnostic associates are the productellid, rhynchonellid, rostrospiri­ferid, leiorhynchid, strophomenid, punctospiriferid and terebratulid brachio­pods. Goniatite cephalopods and pectinoid pelecypods (pectens) may be ex­pected but are usually very rare and occur mainly in the northern territories.

Particularly noteworthy is the complete absence of the stromatoporoids. Favositid corals, common in older strata are so rare as to be practically mu­seum pieces (see Nelson, 1962b) .

Over much of western Canada Mississippian and Permian strata are wide­spread but Pennsylvanian is either thin or lacking. It is only in the Yukon and Northwest Territories that rocks of the last system appear to make signifi­cant contribution to the stratigraphic column. Even then they may belong to a small and .debatable part of the Pennsylvanian: a Middle Pennsylvanian age is favoured (Nelson, 1962h). The uncertainty in dating stems from the fact that its fauna is very closely related to that of the overlying Permian. Thus in western Canada the Permo-Carboniferous is best divided by fauna into the Mississippian and the Permo-Pennsylvanian intervals.

Palaeontologically Mississippian rocks are rather difficult to delineate because so much of the fauna is rather bland spiriferid and productid brachio­pods which can easily be interpreted as Permo-Pennsylvanian. More than anything it is the lack of the morphologically distinct fusulinids, waagenocon­chids, horridonids and N 00spirifer which characterize so much of the latter two systems, that serve to suggest rocks of Mississippian age.

The Mississippian bears an abundant spiriferid fauna which nearly always lacks rib bundling. Along with these will be a fair complement of dictyo­clostid, echinoconchid and linoproductid brachiopods typically smaller than many of their Permo-Pennsylvanian descendants. Specimens less than two inches in length are common.

Corals, both solitary and colonial, are a common element of most Mississip­pian rock where carbonate and shaly carbonate is the major lithology. The

I

•

•

29

reader is refened to Nelson (1960, 1962a) for their use in refined calibration within the system. Syringopora in particular is more abundant in this system than others of the Palaeozoic. It is particularly noteworthy that the middle part is dominated by fasciculate and cerioid tetracorals of the Lithostrotion­ella and Lithostrotion type. This stratigraphic interval is the lower part of the Mount Head Formation of Early Meramecian age and over much of the world the Mississippian displays a similar coralline dominance at this horizon.

In northern Canada, particularly in the Yukon, only the upper part of the Mississippian is fossiliferous and is dominantly shaly. With this change in facies the strata are characterized by the association of Leiorhynchus carbon­ifenmt and Productella hirsutifor1nis. Typically these two are hadly preserved like those indicated on Fig. 7 of PI. 20. Their association, ho,wever, does appear highly indicative for the system in the northern territories.

Permo-Pennsylvanian rocks are diagnosed by fusulinids, Archimedes, N eo­Spi1·ife1·, waagenoconchids and honidonids. Along with these should be a fair productid population consisting of echinoconchids, linoproductids, and dictyoclostids, many of which are large (e.g. PIs. 16 and 17). It should be stressed that normal unbundled spiriferids like those in the Mississippian may be common.

The Pennsylvanian is difficult to distinguish from Permian because, although it has the above fossils, it canies little else that can be considered diagnostic for this interval alone. There is a rather unique spiriferid fauna (see Nelson, 1961a) but the writer feels this should ibe identified by specialists alone. About the only fossil which the geologist should depend upon for a Pennsylvanian dating are the horridonid brachiopods with spine bases along the ventral cardinal margin and none along the dorsal (see p. 15 and PI. 18 of this paper) .

The Permian, on the other hand, has in addition to the characteristic Permo-Pennsylvanian fossils several very diagnostic and easily identifiable forms. These are "Spirophyton," Muirwoodia, the lobed strophomenids like Ohonetina, "Leiorhynchus" sp., H orridonia and particularly the aberrant Spirife1·ella.

It should be noted that fusulinids are far more characteristic of Permian than Pennsylvanian strata in northern Canada.

TRIASSIC SYSTEM

Triassic strata like those of the Jurassic and Cretaceous are dominated almost entirely by ammonites and pelecypods. Corals and brachiopods - so abundant and characteristic of the Palaeozoic - occur only in rare pockets and are almost entirely absent from the younger Jurassic and Cretaceous.

Ammonoid cephalopods of the ceratite and ammonite groups are fairly common in the Triassic. The ceratites are very characteristic of Triassic in western Canada, and the Middle Triassic genus N athorstites is a particularly good index fossil.

The most characteristic pelecypods are those of the monotid group repre­sented by the genera Monotis, PseudomO'1toiis, H alobia, Olaraia and Daonella. Pseudomonotis and Olaraia are Lower Triassic, Daonella Middle and Monotis and H alobia Upper Triassic. Of these the large coarse ribbed M.orl!otis is most common, and one that is readily identified.

In Middle Triassic strata a fauna consisting of punctospiriferids (Spirifer­ina) and terebratulids (Terebratula and OoenJothY1·is) occur. Before assign­ing such an age to these brachiopods, however, the geologist should be very certain that he is within the Mesozoic.

30

JURASSIC SYSTEM

Belemnites are by far the best Jurassic indicators and the geologist must be prepared to work with fragments. It is particularly important that the fine, radiating calcite fibres be identified in these fragments before any age assignment is made.

Other cephalopods occurring in the Jurassic are almost exclusively ammon­ites, but of such diverse size and shape that no attempt at field generic iden­tification should be made.

The pelecypod Buchia (AuceUa) is the only other fossil which can be used in dating- it is diagnostic for Upper Jurassic. The reader is referred to p. 20 and again warned how easy Buchia can be confused with the dominantly Cretaceous I1wceramus.

CRETACEOUS SYSTEM

Cretaceous strata are very difficult to recognize upon purely palaeontologie grounds. As expected ammonite cephalopods and pelecypods of great diver­sity dominate the assemblage. The pelecypod Buchia and the belemnites, so characteristic of Jurassic, are rare except in lower portions of the Cretaceous System. Inoceramus and the oysters could perhaps be considered fairly char­acteristic Cretaceous fossils although it must be realized that the former range into Jurassic and the latter to the present.

Inocemmus is best recognized by its relatively large size and coarse concen­tric rugae. Unlike Buchia, with which there is nearly always confusion, it is equivalved. Oysters lack pelecypod symmetry and are usually represented by rather irregularly rugose valves of varying shape and convexity. Because a Cretaceous oyster looks much like a modern one no age assignment should be made solely on the basis of this group unless associated ammonites are found.

Only two genera should be used for intrasystemic division. One is N eo­gastroplites, a rather large ammonite with pronounced knobs. It is a rare but excellent guide for Lower Cretaceous.

BactLlites is an abundant and highly diagnostic index for Upper Cretaceous. Usually only the orthocone portion of the shell is preserved and then typically in a fragmentary manner like that shown on Fig. 4 of PL 33.

TERTIARY AND QUATERNARY SYSTEMS

Marine Cenozoic rocks are very rare except along the western fringes of British Columbia and in parts of Alaska. Strata of this age are best iden­tified by a negative criterion-they lack ammonites. Thus such an assignment should be made only after prolonged search. The most characteristic feature of Cenozoic rocks is the great diversity of pelecypods, including oysters, and to a lesser extent gastropods. These will look like Cretaceous ones and, like them, will also retain a considerable amount of aragonite-mother of pearl­in the shelL

I

•

,

•

•

SYSTEMS

(Systemic spacing approximately equi­valent to time length

Systemic subdivisions not proporfional)

QUATERNARY /

TERTIARY

u

CRETACEOUS

L

U

JURASSIC M L

U TRIASSIC M

L

u PERMIAN

L

'" "0 "-c -" '" .r

« 0::: W LL -

~

31

COELENTERATA

I~ GRAPTOLITES

-+---+-----+-----------~ u

~r_--------+_------------t_---- ~ ----------------------------~ ~----------------------------~ %

--~--------+------------+----- ~--------------------------~ ~

~ ~ 1~ o .s _-+ _____ ~-- 00. ___ 0+-_ 0. __

~LJ~ __ I __ -r _______ ~ ____ c ~=:; PENNSYLVANIAN /vi ~:2 __ ~ ____________________________ ~

MISSISSIPPIAN

L Vi E _l:i. __ U'I "0 e U "0111"0 Co,

-'-+_-----+------ '" -1--:2 --"" .. --., --;:;--:.= 08.., 0 ... ", L :J.... t... ~ :2

~------_+--__ ~--%-t- ~--fl-9. - .. - ~-~".------------l QI -E..c: ~a-v °oQ. c,,-o • Q.I E!;E ~ II) : --+------+------ c:: --1-- e - '" --~--. -- CI -"~ --------<? -c"'v;----- ~-

Vi _III &~ ~ o 0 .... g"." '" \.. C tl) !{'

-- --"~--~ g -8> " ,--;,- '" "~ =~ -[~~-~§~

I--~ Q-Q --;

~

-

u

CAMBRIAN M

L

Fig. 2.--Range chart for protozoa, porifera, -stromatoporoids and graptolites. Thin lines indicate overall range; thick lines indicate the interval in which the

fossil probably will be found in the field.

32

SYSTEMS COELENTERATA (Systemic spacing

approximately equi-valent to time-length

Tabulate Corals i subdivisions not proportional)

QUATERNARY / TERTIARY

U .. 1! !5

CRETACEOUS u 3 a;

tl L

~ .§ -U ~

JURASSIC M ------, L .. U ~ -: 1-

TRIASSIC M

L ~

g> U

PERMIAN ~

L ~ ~

U PENNSYLVANIAN M

L

U j MISSISSIPPIAN L ,-! l-- !; :i

U I ~ p -'" " '- e DEVONIAN - e

~ M '" .9- e ~

'" " .9-.. § Cl - ~ L :I: <3 :t 0

SILURIAN M) U

U ORDOVICIAN

M

L

U

CAMBRIAN M

L

Fig. 3.-Range chart for tabulate corals. Thin lines indicate overall range; thick lines indicate the interval in which the fossil probably will be found in

the field.

•

-

..

•

•

33

SYSTEMS COELENTERATA (Systemic spacing approximately equi-valent to time length

Septate Corals - sol ita ry and colonial Systemic subdivisions

not proportional)

QUATERNARY J TERTIARY

U

CRETACEOUS E " , -

L - ~ - c 0 c '" - '" '" c

'" '" '" .a .a '" E 0 ~ .c; 0 c.

U '0. '" E '" c '" M " :2 '" :x JURASSIC ,-

" 5l ~ ..!:. .a - ' U --

TRIASSIC M -L

U

PERMIAN

L

..!L PENNSYLVANIAN .!':1.. 0 .. L E 0 ....

" -VI U '" E a-MISSISSIPPIAN ~ -'! ,~ - ,!;; L - ~ :::: ~ a. III (J ,!;! -U ..

:J::

DEVONIAN M

L -SILURIAN M'U • / L :.

U ORDOVICIAN

M

L -0 ", '§

U 00 ~ u 0" u c

" CAMBRIAN M >-~

" -0 '" -L

Fig. 4.-Range chart for septate corals. Thin lines indicate overall range; thick lines indicate the interval in which the fossil probably will be found in the field .

34

SYSTEMS

(Systemic spacing

approximately equi­valent .to time length

SystemIc subdivisions not proportional)

QUATERNARY

TERTIARY

u

CRETACEOUS

L

BRACHIOPODA

narticulates Articulates

~ ~--------~-'·""I----~--'------"'~----'--~--I·-~:~r:~-il~~~-' .2 .Q

J: ~. U JURASSIC M

L --U ' TRIASSIC M

L

U PERMIAN

L

PENNSYLVANIAN

U MISSISSIPPIAN

L

U

DEVONIAN M

L

SI LURIAN M

ORDOVICIAN

u

CAMBRIAN M

L

-----g -~----+--1 - ~-- - ...

------TJ·-~ ----.!, ---~ -~-

o -'I--'~ ---;;;--'15 -~-::;----I

TJ

\/I

~~ TJ 0 ~

.2

.I: .. u E c 0 ~

.a .I: ~ .. 0 - , ~

.!! -<fl ::> .!! -<

Fig. 5.- Range chart for inarticulate and articulate brachiopods. Thin lines indicate overall range; thick lines indicate the interval in which the fossil

probably will be found in the field.

--

•

•

SYSTEMS

(Systemic spacing approximately equi­

valent to time length

Systemic sutldiv'isie,nsl

not proportional)

QUATERNARY

TERTIARY

35 ,

BRACHIOPODA

Articulates

~-------------+--~---~·-------------------------~----------------'I---------------~ i' 0"'0 'U

g. 8. 8. "E .2 0 u L L ~ E E n n n----------------I-------------~

u

CRETACEOUS '0

t 0 ~ J ~ '0

"fi 0 L

~ ~

I-------------+--~---~:::::~~======~~~=;~~;:I _oc ______________ --1 ~

U

JURASSIC M

,TRIASSIC

J"ERMIAN

ORDOVICIAN

CAMBRIAN

~ VI -:-+---1---+--------- ~ -~----------L '0 -:c-

- g ------ii - Q--1l . ~ ---,,----0 g. .~

- -II----------::o! -- c _'0_'" ---j~ --t; __ 0 o·

--' ~-=--

U M L

.~

U ~

L

u

M

L

u

M

L

Fig. 6.--Range chart for articulate brachiopods. Thin lines indicate overall range; thick lines indicate the interval in which the fossil probably will be found

in the field_

1

l

36

SYSTEMS

(Syste mic spacing approximately equi­valent to time length

Systemic sul'd~'isi()nsj

not proportional)

QUATERNARY

TERTIARY

u

CRETACEOUS

L

u JURASSIC M

L

u TRIASSIC

U PERMIAN

L

PENNSYLVANIAN

U MISSISSI PPIAN

L

U

DEVONIAN M

SILURIAN

U

ORDOVICIAN M

L

U

CAMBRIAN M

L

BRYOZOA

'" .. lJ - .. -§ .c

-~-<t

:2 0; -'" ~

'" c c of " 0 N 0 » ~ m

GASTROPODS

'" .., -" u

" -c ~

-~--~--3 --.:;

0 ::t

MOLLUSCA

PELECYPODS

----1-- ~ --;;:----1 Q

o· .-.!" Q <..> . ~ 0

§ E

-~

" .. it - . _Ul_~

--]--g -u--o

-~-~ -'" .., 0 Q » u .!! ~ Q .., ___ 5 c -u ~ Q

-0 .~ Q

,?:'

--1--<;­" ;:;,

-+-~-.~

.., -"0

~ --~ --~

-0-.-.c -~----I

Fig. cate

7.- Range chart for bryozoa, gastropods and pelecypods. overall range; thick lines the interval in which the fossil

found in the field.

Thin lines indi­probably will be

•

•

37

MOLLUSCA

Cephalopoda

SYSTEMS

(Systemic spacing

approximately equi­

valent to time length

Systemic sl"J'bAd'ii'v isionsl

not proportionaL) NAUTILOIDS AMMONOIDS ~ELEMNOIDS

QUATERNARY /

TERTIARY

U

CRETACEOUS

~ ___ L~ ________ ~_§i~ U c

-2--.",-M B JURASSIC

-~-L ~

I------U~-I-----------+~'-- u -TRIASSIC M

U ~ t t

PERMIAN ~~

--+---I-----------------------~--I--I-------e---------1------~

L ~

J PENNSYLVANIAN +111,,-+ ___ 1---:; _____________________ -+-___ 1---1-------"'-<----------+------_l

MISSISSIPPIAN -U1---I--R-~--------r-ll== L

~------------+---'I--~ ---- ~------+--·I·--~-----------------+--------r- :- ~-:;;

U ~ A a; g .~ r.: g-aV)

~---I--I---~'--~·-~--E--~~~-I----------------+---~ M 0 VI DEVONIAN

-9- &> '" -;--+ ___ I---I ___ :~--_~ ~ _ .c_~~-I---------------------_+------~ --" --,,-'" L ~ 0 :i3

SILURIAN "1>~-¥-~==

U ORDOVICIAN

M

L

U i! '0 u

--+--~-------------------------~------------------------_l------~ C -0

CAMBRIAN M g

L

Fig. 8.--Range chart for nautiloid, ammonoid and belemnoid cephalopods. lines indicate overall range; thick lines indicate the interval in which the

probably will be found in the field.

Thin fossil

I

38

SYSTEMS

(Syst~mic spacing

approximately equi­valent to time length

Syst~mic i" .~

not proportional)

QUATERNARY ~

TERTIARY

u

CRETACEOUS

L

u

ARTHROPODA

TRILOBITES

~ ~ 0::: o I U

W(/) Zl­-Z 0:::<1:

~~

JURASSIC ~M~----------------------------------t--I--~ __ II __ ~_I __ ...!:

TRIASSIC u _+-_1--M --r- --~-II---

1----...:~+-/-:1.=r--------------+n:- I--t-- --+--1-

PERMIAN -i-;;:-

L VI

s _I!l .<:: -c

-£ ------------------------------------+ ~----------~~_s-~u7+=_I----------------_t- -PENNSYLVANIAN M ~ _ Ie ~_ --r-I--+- ---1-----....,. i- }j g-

.9 ~

MISSISSIPPIAN U

L -- -----g ------------------~ ----------+~-I--t---,- .$---------~ -----,..~-~----------u-+·~; ~ ~

--t-c~ - :5 --------- 2 -- E - ~ - "" --------t-- -t:-. ---

-" -I: " " ~. M ~ ·s ~ VI ... _

---t-"'"' ----1l---------- (.) - ::. - ---

DEVONIAN I

---L~ 111:0 tj~ ~

~S~IL~U;R~IA~N;__::;:p:U~~ ~ --:S = ~ ~~~!~ -, L~ __ o _~:

~

1=

u ORDOVICIAN

M

L

u

CAMBRIAN M

L

- » ,.... ~

.:2 III

I ~ c: I

I VI U ~ C ..

- c -- -<: -----------------o .., ~

I j--: -- - ~ -+--I--t-----!!----t--.0 VI _

" - c ----------------::IE e - (!)

:g -; fii 5

-~------.~

~ o ____________ _

-!" ~.5l- --- -~ --+-1---1---+---: -

~-+-"""--t--VI .., o .<:: w VI

---+--..s -+-- '" --1-------1 ~

-+------+- ~ - +-------1 S

Fig. 9. -- Range chart for trilobites, ostracods, chordates and marine plants. Thin lines indicate overall range; thick lines indicate the interval in which the

fossil probably will be found in the field.

•

•

• ,

•

"

39

ANNOTATED REFERENCES

Publications listed below include text references, and others which the writer considers important both as a supplement to the present article and for study in depth. These have been chosen iboth fOor clarity of illustration and pertinence to the present text. It should be stressed that most have been written for specialists and hence the field geologist is not advised to. attempt the detailed correlations implicit in them. Such publications are referred to below as " technical," in contrast to the "semi-" or "non-technical" ones primarily directed toward the field man.

Ager, D. V., and Westermann, G. E . G., 1963, ''New Mesozoic Brachiopods from Canada," Jour. Alberta Soc. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 37, No.3, pp. 595-610, Pls. 71-73. Photo.graphs of Upper Triassic and Lower Jurassic rhynchonellid brachio­pods from western Canada. Technical.

Anonymous, 1958, "Cretaceous Faunas from Nordegg area; Jurassic Faunas from Nordegg area; Banff-Rundle Faunas from Nordegg area," Alberta Soc. Petrol. Geol., Eighth Ann. Field Conf., Guide Book, pp. 193-203, PIs. 1-4. Drawings of ammonites, pelecypods and brachiopods. Technical.

Arkell, W. J. et al., 1957, "Part L Mollusca 4 Cephalopoda Ammonoidea," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xxii, LI-L490. Photo.graphs and drawings of ammonoid cephalopods by eight authors. Technical.

Bassler, R. S., 1953, "'Part G Bryozoa," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xiii, Gl-G253 . Drawings of bryozoans. Technical .

Bayer, F. ·M. et al., 1956, "Part F Coelenterata," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xx, Fl-F498. Drawings and some photographs of stromatoporoids, corals, and other coelen­terates by ten authors. Technical.

Benson, R. R ., et al, 1961, "Part Q Arthropoda 3 Crustacea- Ostracoda," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xxiii, Ql-Q442. Photographs and drawings of ostracods and other crustaceans by seventeen authors. Technical.

Bolton, T. E., 1957, "Silurian Stratigraphy and Palaeontology of the Niagara Escarpment in Ontario," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 289, pp. 1-145, PIs. 1-10. Photographs of tab1~late and septate corals, bryozoans, crinoids, brachiopods, gastropods, pelecypods and nautiloid cephalopods. Good for favositid and heliolitid corals. Technical.

Boucot, A. J. et al., 1960, "A Late Silurian Fauna from the Sutherland River Formation, Devon Island, Canadian Arctic Archipelago," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 65, pp. 1-51, Pls. 1-10. Photographs of brachiopods, ostracods, conodonts, scolecodonts, gastropods and trilobites. Technical.

Brindle, J. E., and Lane, D. 1M., 1963, "Saskatchewan Stringocephalids," Jour. Alberta Soc. Petrol. Geol., 'Vol. 11, No.1, pp. 59-63. Photographs of Middle Devonian STRINGOCEPHALUS and related genera. Technical.

Brown, R. A. C., 1952, "Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Palaeontology in the Mount Greenock Area, Alberta," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 264, pp. 1-119, PIs. 1-5. Photographs of Lower Mississippian brachiopods. Good for spiriferids. Technical.

Bulman O. M. B., 1955, "Part V Graptolithina with Sections on Enteropreusta and' Pterobranchia," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xvii, VI-VIOl. Drawings of graptolites. Technical.

•

40

Copeland, M. J., 1957, "The Arthropod Fauna of the Upper Carboniferous Rocks of the Maritime Provinces," pp. i-iv, 1-100, PIs. 1-21. Photographs of ostracods and other arthropods. Technical.

-----, 1962, "Canadian Fo,ssils, Ostracoda, Conchostraca, Eurypterida, and Phyllocarida," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 9'1, pp. 1-57, PIs. 1-12. Photographs of .ordovician, Silurian and Devonian ostracods, and other arthropod groups. Technical.

Cranswick, J. S. and Fritz, 1M. 'A., 1958, "Coral 'Fauna of the Upper Abitibi River Limestone," Geol. Assoc. Canada, Vol. 10, pp. 31-81, PIs. 1-6. Photographs of Middle Devonian solitary and colonial corals and tabulates. Good for FAVOSITES (including EMMONSIA) . Technical.

Crickmay, C. E., 1952, "Discrimination of Late Upper Devonian," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 26, No.4, pp. 585-609, PIs. 70-78. Photographs of leiorhynchid, spiriferid, atrypid and strophomenid brachio­pods. Technical.

-----, 1954, "-Paleontological 'Correlation of Elk Point and Equivalents," Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., Rutherford Memorial Volume, pp. 143-158, PIs. 1-3. Photographs and drawings of STRINGOCEPHALUS, s. l. Technical.

-----., 1957, "Elucidation of some Western Canada Devonian Formations," published by the author (Imperial Oil Ltd.), Calgary, pp. 1-15, Pl. 1. Photographs of ATRYPA. Technical.

-----, 1960a, "Studies of the 'Western Canada Stringocephalinae," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 34, No.5, PP. 874-890, PIs. 113-115. Photographs of Middle Devonian STRINGOCEPHALUS. Technical.

-----, 1960b, "The Older Devonian Faunas of the Northwest Terri­tories," published by the author (Imperial Oil Ltd.), Calgary, pp. 1-21, PIs. 1-11. Photographs and drawings of Middle Devonian colonial corals and brachio ­pods. Good for BILLINGSASTRAEA and ATRYPA. Technical.

--- --, 1963, "Significant New Devonian Brachiopods from Western Can­ada," published by the author (Imperial Oil Ltd.), Calgary, pp. 1-63, PIs. 1-16. Photographs and drawings of Middle and Upper Devonian brachiopods. Good for LEIORHYNCHUS and STRINGOCEPHALUS. Technical.

Cushman, J. A., 1948, "Foraminifera Their Classification and Economic Use," Harvard Univ. Press, pp. 1-605, PIs. 1-55. Photographs and drawings of foraminifera, including fusulinids. Very com­prehensive. Technical.

Dresser, J. A., and Denis, T. C., 1944, "Geology of Quebec, Volume II, Descriptive Geology," Quebec Dept. Mines, Geol. Rept. 20, pp. i-xiv, 1-544, PIs. 1-44. Very small part (Pls. 26-40) devoted to photographs of Cambrian?, Ordo­vician and Silurian fossils from various parts of Quebec. Has photographs of algae, worm burrows, unknown animal trails, sponges, corals, bryozoans, brachiopods, cephalopods, gastropods, pelecypods, cystoids, crinoids, conular­ids, graptolites and trilobites. Good for .ordovician brachiopods. Technical.

Dunbar, C. 0., 1955, "Permian Brachiopod Faunas of Central East Greenland," Medd. om Gnmland, Vol. :no, No, 3, pp. 1-169, PIs. 1-32. Photographs of numerous brachiopod groups. Particularly good for SPIRI­FERELLA, NEOSPIRIFER, WAAGENOCONCHA and the horridonid brach­iopods. Pertinent to Canada and Alaska. Technical.

Duncan, H., 1956, "Ordovician and Silurian Coral faunas of Western United States," United States Geol. Surv., Bull. 1021F, pp. 209-236, PIs. 21-27. Drawings of septate, favositid, halysitid and heliolitid corals. Technical.

-----, 1957, "Bighornia, a New Ordovician Coral Genus," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 31, No.3, pp. 607-615, 'PI. 70. Photographs of Wyoming BIGHORNIA. P ertinent to Canada. Technical.

Easton, W. H., 1960, "Invertebrate Paleontology," Harper and Brothers, Publish­ers, pp. i-xii, 1-701. Drawings of the animal phyla. Highly recommended. Technical.

•

•

41

Fagerstrom, J. A., 196-1, "The Fauna of the Middle Devonian Formosa Reef Lime­stone of Southwestern 'Ontario," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 35, No.1, pp. 1-48, PIs. 1-14. Photographs of stromatoporoid sections, corals, bryozoans brachiopods, gastropods, cephalopods and trilobites. Technical. '

Fenton, C. L., and F 'enton, 'M. A., 1958, "The Fossil Book," Doubleday and Com­pany, Inc., pp. i-xi, 1-482. Drawings and photographs of animals and plants. Very highly recommended for clarity of illustration, and lucid descriptions-. Non-technical.

Flower, R. H., 1952, "New 'Ordovician Cephalopods from Eastern North Amer­ica," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 26, No.1, pp. 24-59, PIs. 5-10. Photographs of Middle Ordovician nautiloid cephalopods. Technical.

Foel'ste, A., 1924, "Upper Ordovician Faunas of Ontario and Quebec," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. ,138, pp. 1-255, PIs. 1-46. Photographs of stromatoporoids, corals, echinoderms, bryozoans, brachiopods, pelecypods, gastropods, cephalopods, trilobites, ostracods and algae. Good jor labechid stromatoporoids and strophomenid brachiopods. Most illustra­tions are excellent. Technical.

- ----, 1928, "Contributions to the Geology of Foxe Land, Baffin Island; Part II: The Cephalopods of Putnam Highland," Michigan Univ., Mus. Pal. Contr., Vol. 3, No.3, pp. 25-70, PIs. 1-11. Photographs of Middle or low Upper Ordovician nautiloid cephalopods. Tech· nical.

-----, 1929, "The Cephalopods of the Red River Formation of Southern Manitoba," Denison Univ. Bull., Vol. 29, No.7 (Sci. Lab. Jour., Vol. 24), pp. 129-235, 'PIs. 11-39. Photographs of Middle or low Upper Ordovician nautiloid cephalopods. Good for CYRTOGOMPHOCERAS. Technical.

- ----, and Savage, T. E., 1927, "'Ordovician and Silurian Cephalopods of the Hudson Bay Area," Denison Univ. Bull., Vol. 27, No.3 (Sci. Lab. Jour., Vol. 22), pp. 1-107, PIs. 1-24 . Photographs of Silurian and Middle or low Upper Ordovician nautiloid cepha­lopods. Technical.

Frebold, H., 1951, "Contributions to the Palaeontology and Stratigraphy of the Jurassic System in Canada," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 18, pp. 1-54, PIs. 1-18. Photographs of Lower and Middle Jurassic ammonites. Technical.

- ----, 1957, "Fauna, Age and Correlation of the Jurassic Rocks of Prince Patrick ISland," Geol. 'Surv. Canada, Bull. 41, pp. 1-69, PIs. 1-18. Photographs of ammoniteS' and pelecypods. Particularly good for IN.OCERA­MUS. Technical.

- ----, 1957, "The Jurassic Fernie Group in the Canadian Rocky Mountains and Foothills," Geo!. Surv. Canada, [Mem. 287, pp. i-xi, 1-197, PIs. 1-44. Photographs of ammonites and a few pelecypods and gastropods. Technical.

- --- - , 1959, "Marine Jurassic Rocks in Nelson and Salmo Areas-Southern British Columbia," Geo!. Surv. Canada, Bull. 49, pp. 1-31, PIs. 1-5. Photographs of Lower and Middle Jurassic ammonites and pelecypods. Technical.

- - ---., 1961, "The Jurassic Faunas of the Canadian Arctic Middle and Upper Jurassic 'Ammonites," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 74, pp. 1-43, PIs. 1-21. Photographs of ammonites. Technical.

-----,. 1963, "Ammonite Faunas of the Upper Middle Jurassic Beds of the Fernie Group in Western Canada," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 93, pp. 1-33, PIs. ,1-14. Photographs of ammonites. Technical.

______ 1964a "'Illustrations of Canadian Fossils Jurassic of Western and , , Arctic Canada," Geol. Surv. Canada, 'Pap. 63-4, pp. 1-107, PIs. 1-51. Photographs of ammonites and pelecypods. Good for BUCHIA and INO­CERAMUS. Technical.

•

42

-----, 1964b, "Lower Jurassic and Bajocian Ammonoid Faunas of North­western British Columbia and Southern Yukon," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 116, pp. 1-31, 'PIs. a.-S. Photographs of Lower and Middle Jurassic ammonites. Technical.

-----, 1964c, "The Jurassic 'Faunas of the Canadian Arctic Cadoceratinae," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 1019, pp. 1-27, P Is. 1-20. Photographs of Jurassic ammonites. Technical.

-----, and Little, R. W., 1962, "Palaeontology, Stratigraphy, and Struc­ture of the Jurassic Rocks in Salmo Map-area, British Columbia," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 81, pp. 1-31, PIs. ;:1-5. Photographs of Lower and Middle Jurassic ammonites. Technical.

-----, Mountjoy, E., and Reed, R, 1959, "The Oxfordian Beds of the Jurassic Fernie Group, Alberta and British Columbia," Geol. Surv. Canada, BUll. 53, pp. 1-47, PIs. 1~12. Photographs of Upper Jurassic ammonites. Technical.

Fritz, M. A., 1964, "?Scutellum regale sp. nov. Fritz from the Silurian of the Hudson Bay Area," Geol. Assoc. Canada, Vol. '15, Pt. 2, pp. 91-97, PI. 1. Photographs of the trilobite genuS' SCUTELLUM. Technical.

-----, Lemon, R. R. R ., and Norris, A. W., 1957, "Stratigraphy and Palaeontology of the Williams Island Formation," Geol. Assoc. Canada, Vol. 9, pp. 21-47, PIs. 1-4. Photographs of high Middle or low Upper Devonian corals from the south­ern Hudson Bay Lowland. Technical.

-----, and Waines, R. R., 1956, "Stromatoporoids from the Upper Abitibi River Limestone," Geol. Assoc. Canada, Vol. 8, Pt. 1, pp'. 87-126, PIs. 1-3. Photographs of Middle Devonian stromatoporoids from the southern Hud8'On Bay Lowland. Technical.

Galloway, J. J., '1960, "Devonian Stromatoporoids from the Lower MacKenzie Valley of Canada," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 34, No.4, pp. 620-636. PIs. 71-77. Photographs of Middle and Upper Devonian stromatoporid thin-sections. Technical.

Green R., 1963, "Lower 'Mississippian Ostracodes from the Banff Formation, Aiberta," Research Council Alberta, Bull. 11, pp. 1-237, PIs. 1-17. Photographs of ostracods. Technical.

Greggs R. G., 1959, "Archaeocyatha from the Colville and Salmo Areas of Wash­ington and British Columbia," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 63-75, PIs. 11-14. Photographs of Lower Cambrian archaeocyathids (pleosponges). Technical.

Harker, P., and Raasch, G. 0., 1955, "Megafaunal Zones in the Alberta Mississip'­pian and Permian," Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., Allan !Memorial Volume, pp. 216-231, PI. 1. PhotographS' of Mississippian corals and brachiopods. Technical.

Harker, P., and Thorsteinsson, R., 1960, "Permian Rocks and Faunas of Grinnell Peninsula, Arctic Archipelago," Geol. 'Surv. Canada, Mem. 309, pp. 1-89, PIs. 1-25. Photographs of fusulinids, corals, brachiopods and cephalopods. Good for fusulinids, SPIRIFERELLA, NEOSPIRIFER, WAAGENOCONCHA and gon. iatite cephalopods. Technical.

Harrington, H. J. et al., 1959, "Part 0 Arthropoda 1 Arthropoda General Features Protarthropoda Euarthropoda General Features Trilobitomorpha," Univ. Kan­sas Press, Treat. Invert. :Baleont., pp. i-xix, 01-0560. Drawings and some photographs of trilobites by eighteen authors. Technical.

Hass H . W. et al., 1962 "'Part W Miscellanea Conodonts Conoidal Shells of Un­c'ertain Affinities Worms Trace Fossils and Problematica," Univ. Kansas rpress, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xxv, Wl-W259. Photographs and drawingS' of tentaculitids and other animal groups by seven authors. Technical.

•

..

..

43

Hume, G. S., 1925, "The Palaeozoic Outlier of Lake Timiskaming, Ontario and Quebec," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 145, pp. 1-97, PIs. 1-16. Photographs of Ordovician and Silurian receptaculitids, corals" brachiopods, gastropods and cephalopods. Particularly good for RECEPTACULITES, halysitid, favositid, heliolitid and syringoporid coral& and cephalopod siphuncles. Note: The Ordovician specimen referred to HALYSITES CATENULARIA QUEBECENSIS on Plate 5, is now called CATENIPORA. Technical.

Hutchinson, R. 10., '1952, "The Stratigraphy and Trilobite Faunas of the Cambrian Sedimentary Rocks of Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia," Geol. Surv. Canada. Mem. 263, pp. 1-124, PIs. 1-7. Photographs of trilobites, mainly fragmentary pygidia and cephala. Tech­nical.

-----, 1962, "Cambrian Stratigraphy and Trilobite Faunas of Southeastern Newfoundland," Geol. 'Surv. Canada, Bull. 88, pp. i-ix, 1-156, Pls. 1-25. Photographs of trilobites. Good for eodiscids, agnostids, and PARADOXIDES (not described in the present article). Technical.

Imlay, R. W., 1959, "Succession and 'Speciation of the 'Pelecypod Aucella," United States Geol. Surv., !Prof. Pap. 314 G, pp. i-iii, 155-169, PIs. 16-19. Photographs of Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous' AUCELLA (BUCHIA) from Alaska, United States and Russia. Technical.

-----, '1964, "Middle Bajocian Ammonites from the Cook Inlet Region, Alaska," United States Geol. 'Surv., Prof. Pap. 418'B, pp. B1-B61. Photographs of Middle Jurassic ammonites. Technical.

Jeletzky, J. A., 1964, "Illustrations of Canadian Fossils, Early Lower Cretaceous (Berriasian and Valanginian) of the Canadian Western Cordillera, British Columbia," Geol Surv. Canada, Pap. 64-6, pp. 1~18, PIs. 1-8. Illustrations of pelecypods and ammonites. Particularly good for BUCHIA. Technical .

-----, 1954, "Illustrations of Canadian Fossils Lower Cretaceous Marine Index Fossils of the Sedimentary Basins of Western and Arctic Canada," Geol. Surv. Canada, Pap. 64-11, pp. 1-100, PIs. '1-36. Illustrations of pelecypods, ammonites and belemnites. Particularly good for BUCHIA, NEOGASTROPLITES and belemnites. Technical.

Jones, D. L., 1963, "Upper Cretaceous (Campanian and Maestrichtian) Ammonites from Southern Alaska," United States Geol. Surv., Prof. Pap. 432, pp. 1-53, PIs. 1-41. Photographs of ammonites'. Good for BACULITES. Technical.

Jull, R. K., 1962, "Silurian Halysitidae of the Ronning Group, Western Canada," Jour. Alberta Soc. 'Petrol. Geol., Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 326-330. Drawings of HALYSITES and CATENIPORA. Non-technical.

Kawase, Y., and Okulitch, V. J., (1957, "Archaeocyatha from the Lower Cambrian of the Yukon Territory," 'Jour. 'Paleont., Vol. 31, No.5, pp. 913-930, 'PIs. 109-113. Photographs of archaeocyathids (pleosponges). Technical.

Kirk, E., and Amsden, T. W., 1952, "Upper Silurian Brachiopods from Southeastern Alaska," United States Geol. Surv., Prof. Pap. 233C, pp. 53-66. Photograph& of pentamerids. Technical.

Knight, J. B., et al, 1960, "'Part I Mollusca 1 !Mollusca-General Features S<capho­poda Amphineura !Monopla'COphora Gastropoda-General Features Archaeogas­tropoda and Some (iMainly Paleozoic) Caenogastropoda and Opisthobranchia," Univ. Kansas 'Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xxiii, Il-I351. Photographs and drawings of gastropod&. Technical.

Loeblich A. R., Jr., and Tappan, H., 1964, "Part C Protista 2 Sarcodina Chiefly The~amoebians and Foraminiferida," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., Vol. '1, pp. i-xxxi, 0l-C510, Vol. 2, pp. C5'11-C900. Very comprehensive. Photographs and drawings of foraminifera. Highly technical.

Logan, A., 1964, "An Indo-Pacific Spiriferinid from the Triassic of Northeastern British Columbia," ·Jour. IAlberta Soc. Petrol. Geo!., Vol. 12, No.3, pp. 692-718, PIs. 1-2. Photographs of punctospiriferid brachiopods. Technical.

44

McCammon, H., 1960, "Fauna of the Manitoba Group in Manitoba," Manitoba Dept. Mines Nat. Res., Mines Branch Pub. 59-6, pp. 1-109, PIs. 1-13. Photographs of Devonian stromatoporoids, corals, brachiopods, pelecypods, gastropods, nautiloid cephalopods and tentaculitids. Technical.

MaGill, P., 1963, "Upper and Middle Devonian Ostracodes from the Beaverhill Lake Formation, Alberta, Canada," Bull. Canadian Petrol. Geol., Vol. 11, No.1, pp. 1-26, PIs. 1-4. Photographs of ostracods. Technical.

McGugan, A, 1963a, "A Permian Brachiopod and Fusulinid Fauna from the Elk Valley, British Columbia, Canada," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 37, No.3, pp. 621-627, PIs. 76-78. Photograph& of fusulinids, and dicyoclostid and spiriferid brachiopods. Technical.

-----, 1963b, "Problematical 'Zoophyco8' from the Permian of Western Can­ada," Ann. Mag. Nat. Rist., Ser. '13, Vol. 6, pp. 107-112, PIs. 1-2. Photographs of "SPIROPHYTON" (=ZOOPHYCOS et aU. Technical.

McLaren, D. J ., 1954, "Upper Devonian Rhynchonellid Zones in the Canadian Hocky Mountains," Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., Rutherford Memorial Volume, pp. 159-181, PI. 1. Photographs of leiorhynchid brachiopods. Technical.

-----, 1958, "Common !Devonian Fossils from the Alberta Rocky Moun­tains," Alberta Soc. Petrol. Geol., Eighth Ann. Field Conf., Guide Book, pp. 193-203 (includes PIs. 5-9). Photographs of Upper Devonian brachiopods and corals. Technical.

-----, 1962, "Middle and Early Upper Devonian Rhynchonellid Brachiopod;.; from Western Canada," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 86, pp. 1-122, PIs. 1-18. Photographs of rhynchonelZid brachiopods. Good for leiorhynchids. Technical.

-----, Norris, A W., McGregor, !D. C., 19'62, "Illustrations of Canadian Fossils Devonian of Western Canada," Geol. Surv. Canada, Pap. 62-4, pp. 1-34, PIs. 1~16. Photographs of Devonian corals, brachiopods and plants. Good for BIL­LINGSASTRAEA (PHILLIPSASTRAEA), ALVEOLITES, ATRYPA (including SPINATRYPA) , RENSSELANDIA, STRINGOCEPHALUS and various spiri­ferid, leiorhynchid and rhynchonellid brachiopods. Technical.

-----, and 'Norris, A. W., 1964, "Fauna of the Devonian Horn Plateau Formation, District of IMacKenzie," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. rt14, pp. 1-74, PIs. 1-17. Photographs of Middle Devonian s'eptate and tabulate corals, and brachiopods. Good for CYSTIPHYLLUM-like corals and ATRYPA. Technical.

McLearn, F. 'fl., 1924, "Palaeontology of the Silurian Rocks of Arisaig, Nova Scotia," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 137, pp. 1-239, PIs. 1-30. Photographs of Middle Silurian corals, brachiopods, pelecypods, gastropods, cephalopods, trilobites and mi&eelZaneous fossil groups. Technical.

-----, 1926, "New Species from the Coloradoan of Lower Smoky and Lower Peace ,Rivers, Alberta," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 42, pp. 117-132, PIs. 20-23. Photographs of Upper Cretaceous pelecypods, ammonites and gastropods. Good for INOCERAMUS. Technical.

-----, 1960, "Ammonoid Faunas of the Upper Triassic Pardonet !Formation, Peace River Foothills, BriUsh Columbia," Geo!. Surv. Canada, Mem. 311, pp. 1 "118, PIs. '1-21. Photographs of ceratites and ammonites. Technical.

Miller, A. K., Youngquist, W. and Collinson, C., 1954, "Ordovician Cephalopod Fauna of Baffin Island," Geol. Soc. Amer., Mem. 62, pp. 1-234, PIs. 1-63. Photographs of Middle or low Upper Ordovician nautiloid cephalopods, and a few brachiopods, coral&, trilobites and gastropods. Technical.

Moore, R. C., Lalicker, C. G., and Fischer, A G., 1952, "Invertebrate Fossils," Mc­Graw-Hill Book Company, Inc., pp. 1-766. Drawings of nearly all representatives of animal phyla. Highly recommended.

•

•

-

45

Muir-Wood, H., and Cooper, G. A., 1960. "Morphology, Classification and Life Habits of the Productoidea (Brachiopoda)," Geol. Soc. Amer., Mem. 81, pp. I-Xl, 1-447, PIs. 1-135. Photographs and some drawings of productid brachiopods. Although not directed toward Canada or Alaska, the book is extremely useful because of its illustrations. Technical.

Nelson, S. J., 1959, "Guide Fossils of the Red River and Stony Mountain Equiv­alents (Ordovician)," Jour. Alberta 'Soc. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 7, No.3, pp. 51-61, PIs. 1-4. Drawings of labechid stromatoporoids, corals, brachiopods, cephalopods ana gastropods. Covers much the same Middle or low Upper, and high Upper Ordovician assemblage as in the present article. Non-technical.

-----, 1960, "Mississippian Lithostrotionid Zones of the Southern Canadian Rockies," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 34, No.1, pp. 107-126, PIs. 21-25. Photographs of LITHOSTROTIONELLA and LITHOSTROTION sections. Technical.

-----, 1961a, "Permo-Carboniferous of the Northern Yukon Territory," Jour. Alberta Soc. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 9, No.1, pp.1-9, PIs. 1-4. Drawings of guide brachiopods. Non-technical.

-----" 1961b, "Mississippian Faunas of Western Canada," Geol. Assoc. Can­ada, 'Spec. Paper 2, pp. 1-39, PIs. 1-29. Photographs of Mississippian brachiopods and corals, and a few Permo­Pennsylvanian brachiopods and bryozoa. Good for LITHOSTROTIONELLA, SYRINGOPORA, and spiriferid, rhynchonellid, echinoconchid, linoproductid, dictyoclostid brachiopods and SPIROPHYTON. Technical but with a small section (pp. 33-36) devoted to a serni-technical discussion on horizon identifica­tion within the Permo-Carboniferous.

-----, 1962a, "Analysis of Mississippian Syringopora from the Southern Canadian Rocky Mountains," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 36, No.3, pp. 442-460, PIs. 71-75. Photographs and drawings of SYRINGOPORA. Technical.

-----, 1962b, "Permo-Carboniferous Tabulate Corals from Western Can­ada," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 36, No.5, pp. 953-964, PIs. 137-138. Photographs and drawings of favositid and syringoporid corals. Technical.

-----, '1962c, "Horridonid Brachiopods as Horizon Indicators, Permo­Pennsylvanian of the Yukon Territory," Jour. Alberta Soc. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 10, No.4, pp. 192-197. Drawings and descriptions of horridonid brachiopods. Non-technical.

-----, 1963, "Ordovician Paleontology of Northern Hudson Bay Lowland," Geol. Soc. Amer., 'Mem.90, pp. 1-152, PIs. 1-37'. Photographs of Middle or low Upper, and high Upper Ordovician labechid stromatoporoids, corals, dendroid graptolites, gastropods and nautiloid cephal­opods. Good for LOBOCORALLIUM, BIGHORNIA, CATENIPORA, MANI­PORA, MACLURITES, BILLINGSITES, CYRTOGOMPHOCERAS and WIN­NIPEGOCERAS. Technical.

Norford, B. S., 1962a, "The Silurian Fauna of the Sandpile Group of Northern British Columbia," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 78, pp. 1-51, PIs. 1-16. Photographs of brachiopods, crinoids, tabulate and septate corals. Good for favositid and halysitid corals. Technical.

_____ , 1962b, "Illustrations of Canadian Fossils Cambrian, Ordovician and Silurian of the Western Cordillera," Geol. Surv. Canada, Pap. 62-14, pp. 1-24, PIs. 1-10. Photographs of archaeocyathids, corals, graptolites, brachiopods" gastropods, cephalopods and trilobites from both the Eastern and Western Cordillera. Particularly good for archaeocyathods, olenellid trilobites, ALBERTELLA, OLENOIDES, BIGHORNIA, CATENIPORA, HALYSITES, orthid and penta­merid brachiopods. Technical.

Northrop, S. A., 0..939, "Paleontol~gy and Stratigraphy of the Silurian Rocks of the Port Daniel-Black Cape RegIon, Gaspe," Geol. Soc. Arner., Spec. Pap. 21, pp. i-ix, 1-302, PIs. 1-28. Photographs of graptolites, corals, crinoids, brachiopods, worms, pelecypods, gastropods, trilobites and pteropods. Technical.

I 46

Okulitch, V. J., '1943, "North American Pleospongia," Geol. Soc. Amer., Spec. Pap. 48, pp. 1-1'12, !PIs. 1-18. Photographs of archaeocyathids in various degrees of preservation. Technical.

-----, 1955, "Archaeocyatha from the McDame Area of Northern British Columbia," 'Roy. Soc. Canada, Trans., Ser. 3, Sec. 4, Vol. 49, pp. 47-64, PIs. 1-3. Photographs of Lower Cambrian archaeocyathids (pleosponges). Technical.

-----, and de Laubenfels, M. W., 1955, "Part E Archaeocyatha and Pori­fera," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xviii, E1-E122. Drawings and some photographs of archaeocyathids (Okulitch) and sponges (de Laubenfels). Technical.

Patton, W. J. H., 1958, "Mississippian Succession in the South Nahanni River Area, Northwest Territories," Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., Allan Memorial Volume, pp. 309-326, PIs. 1-5. Photographs of Mississippian spiriferid brachiopods and land plants. Tech­nical.

Pedder, A. E. H., 1964, "Correlation of the Canadian 'Middle Devonian Hume and Nahanni Formations by Tetracorals," Paleont., Vol. 7, Pt. 3, pp. 430-451, PIs. 62-73. Photographs of colonial coral sections. Good for BILLINGSASTRAEA PHILLIPSASTRAEA and RADIASTRAEA.

Ross, J. P., 1961, "Larger Cryptostome Bryozoa of the Ordovician and Silurian, Anticosti Island, Canada-Part II," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 35, No.2, pp. 331-344, PIs. 41-45. Photographs of bryozoa. Technical.

Ruedemann, R., 1947, "Graptolites of North America," Geol. Soc. Amer., Mem. 19, pp. 1-652, PIs. 1-92. Photographs and drawings of graptolites. Very comprehensive. Technical.

Schindewolf, O. 0., 1959, "Adolescent Cephalopods from the Exshaw Formation of Alberta," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 33, No.6, pp. 971-976, PIs. 120-121. Photographs of Upper Devonian or Lower Mississippian goniatite cephalo­pods. Technical.

Shimer, H. W., and Shrock, R. R., 1944, "Index Fossils of North America," John Wiley and Sons, Inc., pp. i-ix, 1-837, PIs. 1-303. Photographs and some drawings of nearly all representatives of the animal kingdom. Includes a section on aqueous plants. A very comprehensive text; highly recommended. Technical.

Shrock, R. R., and Twenhofel, W. H., '1953, "Principles of Invertebrate Paleontol­ogy," McGraw~Hill Book Company, pp. 1-816. Photographs and drawings of the animal phyla. Highly recommended. Technical.

Sinclair, G. W., 1955, "Some Ordovician Halysitoid Corals," Roy. Soc. Canada, Trans., Ser. 3, Sec. 4, Vol. 49, pp. 95-103, Pl.l. Photographs and drawings of Middle and low Upper Ordovician MANIPORA and CATENIPORA (=QUEPORA). Technical.

Smith, S., 1945, "Upper Devonian Corals of the Mackenzie River Region Canada," . Geol. Soc. Amer., Spec. Pap. 59, pp. i-viii, 1-126, PIs. 1-35. '

Photographs of co lonial and solitary septate corals and tabulates. Good for BILLINGSASTRAEA (PHILLIPSASTRAEA) , ALVEOLITES, and FAV­OSITES LIMITARIS-type corals (i.e. THAMN.oPORA).

Stearn C. W. !956, "Stratigraphy and Palaeontology of the Interlake Group and Stbnewall' Formation of Southern 'Manitoba," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 281, pp. 1-162, PIs. '1-16. Photographs of Silurian stromatoporoids, corals, brachiopods, cephalopods, ostracods and trilobites. Good for stromatoporids, and favositid corals. Tech­nical.

___ __ , 1961, "Devonian Stromatoporoids from the Canadian Rocky Moun­tains," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 35, No.5, pp. 932-948, PIs. 105-107. Photographs and some drawings of Upper Devonian s,tromatoporid thin sec­tions. Technical.

•

•

•

•

47

- - - --, 1962, "Stromatoporoid Fauna of the Waterways Formation (Devo­nian) of Northeastern Alberta," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 92, pp. 1-23, PIs. 1-8. Photographs of stromatoporid sections. Technical.

-----, 1963, "Some Stromatoporoids from the Beaverhill Lake Formation (Devonian) of the Swan Hills Area, Alberta," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 37, No.3, pp. 651-668, PIs. 85-88. Photographs and some drawings of Upper Devonian stromatoporid sections and AMPHIPORA. Technical.

Sutherland, P. K., 1958, "Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Rugose Coral Faunas of Northeastern British Columbia," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 295, pp. i-vi, 1-177, PI. 173. Photographs of Mississippian solitary and colonial corals including LITHO­STROTIONELLA. Technical.

Sweet, W. C., and Miller, A. K., 1957, "Ordovician Cephalopods from Cornwallis and Little Cornwallis Islands, District of Franklin, Northwest Territories," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 38, pp. 1-86, PIs. 1-8. Photographs of nautiloid cephalopods, mainly orthocone and nautilocone. Technical.

Teichert, C., 1937, "Ordovician and Silurian Faunas from Arctic Canada," Fifth Thule Exped., 1921-1924 Rept., Vol. 1, iNo. 5, pp. 1-157, PIs. 1-24. Photographs of RECEPTACULITES, stromatoporids, corals, brachiopods, gastropods, nautiloid cephalopods, trilobites, ostracods and algae. Good for RECEPTACULITES, favositid and heliolitid corals, strophomenid brachiopods, MACLURITES (also includes MACLURINA) and SCUTELLUM. Technical.

-----, et al., 1964, "Part K Mollusca 3 Cephalopoda-General Features Endoceratoidea-Actinoceratoidea-Nautiloidea-Bactritoidea," Univ. Kansas Press, Treat. Invert. Paleont., pp. i-xxviii, ~1-K518. Photographs and drawings of nautiloids by nine authors. Technical.

Tozer, E. T., 1961, "Triassic Stratigraphy and Faunas, Queen Charlotte Islands, Arctic Archipelago," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 31'6, pp. 1-116, PIs. 1-30. Photographs of ceratite and ammonite cephalopods and pelecypods. Partic­ularly good for pectinoid pelecypods. Technical.

-----, 1962, "Illustrations of Canadian Fossils- Triassic of Western and Arctic Canada," Geol. Surv. Canada, Pap. 62-19, pp. 1-26, PIs. 1-12. Photographs of ceratites, ammonites, pelecypods, and brachiopods. Tech­nical. Good for pectinoid pelecypods and ceratite cephalopods. Technical.

-----, 1963a, "Liardites and Maclearnoceras, New Triassic Ammonoids from the Nathorstites Zone of British COlumbia," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 96, pp. 31-38, PI. 6. Photographs of Middle Triassic ceratite cephalopods, Technical.

-----, 1963b, ''Lower Triassic ~mmonoids from Tuchodi Lakes and Half­way River Areas, Northeastern British Columbia," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 96, pp. 1-30, PIs. 1-5. Photographs of ceratite cephalopods. Technical.

Troedsson, G. T., 1926, "On the Middle and Upper Ordovician Faunas of North­ern Greenland, T, Cephalopods," !Medd. om Gmnland, Vol. 71, pp. 1-157, PIs. 1-65. Photographs of Middle or low Upper, and high Upper Ordovician nautiloid cephalopods. Although not specifically directed toward Canada or Alaska this article is very pertinent to the Red River and Stony Mountain cephalopod faunas of North America. Technical.

-----, 1928, "On the Middle and Upper Ordovician Faunas of Northern Greenland, II, Medd. om Gmnland, Vol. 72, pp. 1-197, PIs. 1-56. Photographs of receptaculitids, sponges, corals, crinoids, cystoids, bryozoans, brachiopods, ostracods, trilobites and gastropods. Good for RECEPTACU­LITES and heliolitid and halysitid corals (note that HALYSITES = CATENI­PORA of present text). Although concerned with Greenland the illustrated fauna is very closely related to the high Middle or low Upper, and the high Upper Ordovician faunas of Oanada and Alaska. Technical.

48

Twenhofel, W. H., 1928, "Geology of Anticosti Island," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 154, pp. 1-48, PIs. 1-60. Photographs of .ordovician and Silurian graptolites, corals, crinoids, bryo· zoans, brachiopods, gastropods, cephalopods, pelecypods and trilobites. Good for orthid, rhynchonellid and strop hom enid brachiopods, and BILLINGSITES.

-----, 1938, "Geology and Paleontology of the 'Mingan Islands, Quebec," Geol. 'Soc. Amer., Spec. Pap. 11, pp. i-vii, 1-132, PIs. 1-24. Photographs of Lower and Middle Ordovician algae, sponges, graptolites, corals, bryozoans, brachiopods, gastropods, pelecypods, cephalopods, and trilo­bites. T echnical.

Ulrich, E. 0., and Cooper, G. A., ;:19'38, "Ozarkian and Canadian Brachiopoda," Geol. Soc. Amer., Spec. Pap. 13, pp. i-viii, 1-323, PIs. 1-57. Photographs of Lower Ordovician and Upper Cambrian brachiopods, some of which are from Canada. Technical.

-----, Foerste, A. F., and 'Miller, A. K., 1943, "Ozarkian and Canadian Cephalopods. Part II Brevicones," Geol. Soc. Amer., Spec. Pap. 49, pp. i-X, 1-240, PIs. 1-70. Photographs of Lower Ordovician orthocone nautiloids, some of which are from eastern Canada. T echnical.

--- --, Foerste, A. F., 'Miller, A. 'K., and Unkles bay, A. G., 1944, "Ozarkian and Canadian Cephalopods. Part III, Longicones and Summary," Geo!. Soc. Amer., Spec. Pap. 58, pp. i-x, 1-226, PIs. 1-68. Photographs of Lower Ordovician orthocone and cyrtocone nautiloids, some of which are from Canada. Technical.

Usher, J. L., 1952, "Ammonite Faunas of the Upper Cretaceous Rocks of Vancou­ver Island, British Columbia," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 21, pp. 1-182, PIs. 1-30. Photogr aphs of ammonites. Technical.

Walcott, Charles D ., 1908, "Cambrian Geology and Paleontology NO.2 Cambrian Trilobites," Smithsonian Misc. CoIl., Vol. 53, PPM 13-52, PIs. 1-6. Photographs of trilobites, some of which are from Canada. Good for OLEN­OIDES (NEOLENUS). Technical.

-----, 1910, "Cambrian Geology and Paleontology, No. 6-0lenellus and Other Genera of the IMesonacidae," Smithsonian Misc. CoIl., Vol. 53, No.6, pp. 231-422 (plus index), PIs. 23-44. . Photographs of olenellid (mesonacid) trilobites, some of which are from Canada.

Walcott, Charles D ., 1914, "Cambrian Geology and Paleontology II. No. 13 Dikelocephalus and other Genera of the Dikelocephalinae," Smithsonian Misc. CoIl., Vol. 57, 'No. 13, pp. 345-4'12, PIs. 60-70. Photographs of Upper Cambrian trilobites, some of which are from Canada. Technical.

-----, 1916, "Cambrian Geology and Paleontology III No.5 Cambrian Trilobites," Smithsonian IMisc. CoIl., Vol. 64. No.5, PPM 303-456, PIs. 45-67. E xcellent photographs of Lower, Middle and Upper Cambrian trilobites, some of which are from Canada. Technical.

------, '1917, "Cambrian Geology and Paleontology IV No.2 The Alber­t ella Fauna in British Columbia and 'Montana," Smithsonian Misc. CoIL, Vol. 67, No.2, pp. 9-59, 'PIs. 1-7. Photographs of Middle Cambrian sponges, inarticulate brachiopods, ?gastro­pods and trilobites. Good for ALBERTELLA. Technical.

-----, 1917, "Cambrian Geology and Paleontology IV No. 3 Fauna of the Mount Whyte Formation," Smithsonian 'Misc. CoIL, Vol. 67, No.3, pp. 61-114, Pls. 8-13. Photographs of cystoids, archaeocyathids, inarticulate brachiopods and trilo­bites. Good for olenellid (mesonacid) trilobites. Technical.

--- --, 1925, "Cambrian Geology and Paleontology V No.3 Cambrian and Ozarkian Trilobites," Smithsonian Misc. CoIl., Vol. 75, No. 3, PPM 61-146, PIs. 15-24. Photographs of trilobites, some of which are from Canada. Technical.

•

•

49

Warren, P. S., 1927, "Banff Area, Alberta," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 153, pp. 1-94, P1s. 1-7. Photographs of Upper Devonian and Mississippian corals, echinoderms, and gastropods. Technical.

-----, 1947, "Cretaceous Fossil Horizons in the MacKenzie River Valley," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 21, No.2, pp. 118-123, PIs. 29-30. Photographs of pelecypods and ammonites. Technical.

-----, and Stelck, C. R., il956, "Devonian 'Faunas of Western Canada," Geol. Assoc. Canada, Spec. Paper 1, pp. 1-15, PIs. 1-29. Photographs of Middle and Upper Devonian corals, brachiopods, gastropods, tentaculitids, cephalopods and trilobites. Good for brachiopods. Technical.

Westermann, G. E. G., 1962, "Succession and Variation of Monotis and the Asso­ciated Fauna in the Norian Pine River Bridge Section, British Columbia (Triassic, Pelecypoda)," Jour. Paleont., Vol. 36, No.4, pp. 745-792, PIs. 112-118. Photographs of Upper Triassic MONOTIS and some miscellaneous pelecy­pods. Technical.

Williams, M. Y., 1919, "The Silurian Geology and Faunas of Ontario Peninsula, and Manitoulin and Adjacent Islands," Geol. Surv. Canada, Mem. 111, pp. 1-195, Pis. 1-34. Photographs of Silurian marine plants, corals, brachiopods, gastropods, pele­cypods, dendroid graptolites, cystoids, crinoids, trilobites and eurypterids. Particularly good for favositid, halysitid, syringoporid and heliolitid corals. Technical.

Wilson, A. E., 1946, "Brachiopoda of the Ottawa Formation of the Ottawa-St. Lawrence Lowland," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. No.8, pp. 1-149, PIs. 1-11. Photographs of Middle Ordovician brachiopods. Good for orthids and stro­phomenids. Technical.

------, 1947, "Trilobita of the Ottawa Formation of the Ottawa-St. Law­rence Lowland," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. No.9, pp. 1-86, PIs. 1-10. Photographs of Middle Ordovician trilobites. Good for bumastid trilobites. Technical.

-----, 1948, "Miscellaneous Classes of Fossils, Ottawa Formation, Ottawa­St. Lawrence Valley," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 11, pp. i-v, 1-116, Pis. 1-28. Photographs and drawings of algae, sponges, corals, stromatoporoidS', grap­tolites, vermes and conodonts, plus unclassified forms. Good for receptacul­itids. Technical.

-----, 1951, "Gastropoda and Conularida of the Ottawa Formation of the Ottawa-St. Lawrence Lowland," Geol. Surv. Canada, Bull. 17, pp. 1-149, PIs. 1-19. Photographs of Middle Ordovician gastropods, and conularidS' (not discussed in present article). Technical.

Zittel, K. A., von, 1931, "Text-Book of Paleontology," MaCMillan and Co., Ltd., pp. i-xi,I-839 (edited by C. R. Eastman). Drawings of fossil representatives of the animal kingdom. Extremely com­prehensive and revered textbook. Technical.

51

PLATES 1 to 42

Unless otherwise stated all illustrations are natural size.

r 52

PLATE 1

PROTOZOA-Fusulinids

FIGURES PAnE

1.- FUSULINID STRUcruRE. Permo-Pennsylvanian. Longitudinal and transverse structure of a fusulinid, X3 ______________________________ 5

2-4.-FUSULINliD STRUCTURE. Permo-Pennsylvanian. Showing trans­veI1se (Figs. 2, 3) and longitudinal sections, X5. [Fig. 2 is based upon Parafusulina belcheri Thorsteinsson; and Figs. 3 and 4 upon Schwa-gerina hyperborea (Salter)] ________________________________________ 5

5.-WEATHERBD FUSULINIDS IN ROCK. Permo-Pennsylvanian. Com­pare with Devonian Amphipora (PI. 4, Figs. 1-3): the two may be confused because of the rather similar external appearance, although the interiors are quite different. [based upon a Permian specimen] __ 5

6.-FUSULINIDS IN FRESH ROCK. Permo-Pennsylvanian. Such struc­tures are very hard to find unless a great deal of care and patience is used. [based upon Schwagerina hyperborea (Salter)] ____________ 5

-

53

5

•

4

PLATE 1.

54

PLATE 2

PORIFERA- Archaeocyathids, Receptaculites and Sponge Spicules.

FIGURES PAGE

1.- ARCHAEOCYATHID. Lower Cambrian. 'Diagrammatic sketch showing the inner and outer wall and the vertical parieties, all perforated by pores __________________________________________________________ _

2.- ARCHAEOCYATHIDS. Lower Cambrian. Transverse (lower part of specimen) and longitudinal sections (upper part) of poorly preserved individuaIs. Such preservation is most typical. [based upon Australian material] ________________ , _________________________________________ _

3.-SPONGE SPICULES. Cambrian-Recent. Such spicules should not be

5

5

depended upon in correlation. [based upon a Permian? specimen] __ 5

4.-RECEPTACULITES. Upper Ordovician (mainly). Diagrammatic sketch showing the lower and upper layers of plates joined by hollow pillars approximately, X3 _________________________________________ 5

-

-

•

55

• • • " " •

) • • • d'i i • • • • • • •

• • • • •

• ; • • • • '. ' . • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • •

• • • •

•

3

PLATE 2.

56

PLATE 3

PORIFERA-Receptaculites

FIGURES

I.-RECEPTACULITES-preserving only cross sections of pillars. Middle to Upper Ordovician. 'Note the intersecting spiral pattern which can be used to distinguish this genus from Syringopora (PI. 11, Fig. 7). [based upon an Upper Ordovician specimen] _______________________ _

2.-RECEPTACULITES - preserving a vague impression of the shell. This is the most typical preservation. [based upon an Upper Ordo-. . .] VlClan speC1ffien __________________________________________________ _

3.-RECEPTA CULITES-a fairly well preserved fragment showing plate arrangement and a few pillars. [based upon numerous specimens) __

PAGE

-5

•

5

5

•

57

•

PLATE 3 .

•

58

PLATE 4

COELENTERATA-Stromatoporoids (including Amphipora)

FIGURES PAGE

1.-AMPHIPORA. Middle to lower Upper Devonian. View of rather poorly preserved specimens in rock. Compare and contrast with the fusulinids on Fig. 5 of PI. 1. [based upon a Middle Devonian specimen] 7

2,3.-AMPHIPORA. Middle to lower Upper Devonian. Transverse and longitudinal sections of a well preserved individual ,showing the rather porous structure, X6. [based upon Amphipora ramosa (Phillips)] __ 7

4.-LABECHID STROMATOPOROID. Upper Ordovician. Longitudinal view of a rather poorly preserved specimen showing axial canal and diagnostic fluting. [based upon a poorly preserved specimen of Aulacera undulata (Billings)] ______________________________________ 6

5. LABECHID STROMATOPOROID. Upper Ordovician. Longitudinal view showing the axial canal and characteristic nodulose surface. [based upon Beatricea nodulosa Billings] __________________________ 6

59

•

3

4

5

PLATE 4.

60

PLATE 5

COELENTERATA-Stromatoporoids

FIGURES PAGE

l .-STROMATOPORID STROMATOPOROID. Siluro-Devonian. Fairly well preserved colony in rock. [based upon a Silurian specimen] ____ 6

2.-STROMATOPORID STROMATOPOROID. Siluro-Devonian. Poorly preserved colonies showing the rather shapeless appearance of most stromatoporids. [based upon a Silurian specimen] ________________ 6

3-6.-STROMA TOPORID STROMATOPOROIDS. Siluro-Devonian. Sketches showing the variation in stromatoporid structure. [figs. 3, 4 and 6 are based upon Clathrodictyon, X12, X7, X6; and fig. 5 on Actino-stroma, Xl %] _____________________________________________________ 6

-

61

4

PLATE 5.

62

PLATE 6

COELENTERATA-Graptoloid Graptolites

FIGURES PAGE

1-3.-MULTIBRANCHED GRAPTOLITES. Lower Ordovician. Note the fairly regular dichotomy. [fig. 1 is based upon Goniograptu8 thureaui (iMcCoy); fig. 2 upon Zygograptu8 abnormis (Hall); and fig. 3 upon Tetragraptu8 quadribrachiati8 (Hall)] ______________________________ 8

4-5.-PHYLLOGRAPTUS. Lower Ordovician. Usually only a carbona­ceous outline is all that is preserved. [fig. 4 is based upon P. angu8ti-/OliU8 Hall; and fig. 5 upon P. anna Hall] _________________________ _

6.-ISOGRAPTUS. Lower Ordovician. Immature specimens like this shown are most commonly preserved: c/. Fig. 3, PI. 7. [based upon

8

I. gibberu lus (Nicholson)] ________________________________________ 8

•

•

63

5

6

1

•

3

•

2

PLATE 6.

64

PLATE 7

COELENTERATA-Graptoloid Graptolites

FIGURES PAGE

i.- DIDYMOGRAPTUS. Lower Ordovician (mainly). Compare with Figs. 2 and 3. [based upon D. bifidus (Hall)] ______________________ 9

2.-DICELLOGRAPTUS. Middle to Upper Ordovician, X4. [drawing not based upon one particular species] __________________________________ 9

3.-ISOGRAPTUS. Lower Ordovician. Mature colony. I sograptus is rarely mature: typical specimens are like that on Fig. 6 of PI. 6. [based upon I. caduceus Harris] _____________________ ________ :...______ 8

4.- DICRANOGRAPTUS. Middle Ordovician (mainly). [based upon D. spiniter (Lapworth)] _______________________________________________ 9

5-7.-BISERIAL GRAPTOLITES. Middle to Upper Ordovician. [figs. 5 and 6 are based upon Climacograptus sp.; and fig. 7 upon Orthograp-tus calcaratus (Lapworth)] ________________________________________ 8

8,9.-MONOGRAPTUS. Silurian. [fig. 8 is not based upon one partic-ular species; fig . 9 is based upon M. priodon (Bronn)] ______________ 8

10.-MONOGRAPTUS WITH DISTAL TWIST. Middle Silurian, Xl%. [based upon M. yukonensis Jackson and Lenz] ______________________ 8

ll.-CYRTOGRAPTUS. Middle Silurian. [based upon C. murchisoni Carruthers] 9

i2.- "MONOGRAPTUS SPIRALIS." Lower-Middle Silurian boundary. [based upon M . spiralis spiralis (Geinitz)] __________________________ 8

•

•

•

65

3 2 4

•

5 6 8 10

7

9

•

11

PLATE 7.

66

PLATE 8

COELENTERATA-Graptoloid and Dendroid Graptolites

FIGURES PAGE

l.-MONOGRAPTUS. Silurian. [based upon an unidentified specimen] __ 8

2.-BrSER~AL GRAPTOLOIDS. Middle and Upper Ordovician. upon a specimen containing CZimacograptus and Diplograptu8']

[based

3-5.-DENDROID GRAPTOLITES. Ordovician to Silurian. [rather dia­grammatic representations of Dictyonema (fig. 3); Desmograptus (fig.

8

4) ; and Acanthograptus (fig. 5)] __________________________________ 7

•

-

•

•

67

1 /'

/. • '( r

I . \ .

~ (~" I It ' ,

,J \.'

3

•

4

PLATE 8.

68

PLATE 9

COELElNTERATA-Halysitid Corals

FIGURES

I.-OATENIPORA. Upper Ordovician. Very poorly preserved specimen lacking the pinching and swelling effect, ct. Fig. 5. [based upon a Richmondian? specimen] __________________________________________ _

2.-0ATENIPORA. Upper Ordovician. Rather diagrammatic sketch showing corallites directly appressed against each other. Tabulae are spaced much further apart than is normal ___________________ _

3.-MANIPORA. Upper Ordovician. Rather diagrammatic sketch show­ing the polygonal corallites in irregular multiple rows. Tabulae are spaced much further apart than is normal _________________________ _

4.-HALYSITES. Silurian. Rather diagrammatic sketch showing the oval corallites joined by tubules. Tabulae are usually much closer together in both the corallites and tubules, than is indicated _______ _

5.-HALYSITES. Silurian. Poorly preserved specimen showing the pinching and swelling effect indicative of Silurian. [based upon a

PAGE

9

9

Middle? Silurian specimen] ________________________________________ 9

6-9.-0ATENIPORA, MANIPORA AND HALYSITES. Diagrammatic cross sections showing corallite pattern. Fig. 6 : Oatenipora, approx. X2; Figs. 7, 8: Manipora. Fig. 7 shows the subcircular corallites of M. feildeni (Etheridge) (X3) which might be mistaken for Silurian forms (see page 9); and Fig. 8 the more normal Manipora corallites (Xl); Fig. 9: Halysites showing oval corallites joined by tubules (X2) ____ 9

1

•

•

•

-

69

2

4

PLATE 9.

70

PLATE 10

COELENTERAT A-Favositid Corals

FIGURES PAGE

1. P ALAEOF A VOSITES. Upper Ordovician. Rather diagrammatic sketch showing the mural pores in wall angles; and abnormally widely .spaced tabulae _____________________________________________________ 10

2. P ALAEOF AVOSITES. Upper Ordovician. Diagrammatic transverse cross-section through corallites. Note the rare openings in the wall indicative of wall-angle mural pores ________________________________ 10

3. ALVEOLITES. oval corallites.

Silurian to Devonian. [based on A. undo8u8

Portion of a colony showing Miller] _____________________ _

4. ALVEOLITES. Silurian to Devonian. Diagrammatic transveI1Se sec-

10

tion showing oval corallites, X8 ____________________________________ 10

5. FAVOSITES. Silurian to Devonian. Rather diagrammatic sketch showing mural pores in walls, and very widely spaced tabulae ______ 10

6,7.-FAVOSITES. Silurian to Devonian. Diagrammatic transverse and longitudinal sections. Mural pores are shown a.s breaks in walls in Fig. 6; and in occasional oblique intercepts in Fig. 7 ________________ 10

.,

•

•

,

71

•

2

4

•

7

PLATE 10 .

•

72

PLATE 11

COELENTERATA~Favositid, Heliolitid and Syringoporid Cora1s

FIGURES PAGE

1-3.-FAVOSITES LIMITARIS-TYPE CORALS. Middle Devonian. Fig. 3 shows most the typical occurrence of the coral. [fig. 1 is based upon Coenites; fig. 2 upon F. limitaris Rominger; and fig. 3 upon a poorly preserved specimen] __ _____________________________________________ 10

4.-HELIOLITID CORAL. Silurian to Devonian (mainly), X3. [based upon a Silurian specimen] _________________________________________ 10

5,6.-HELIOLITID CORALS. Silurian to Devonian (mainly), X2lh. Show­ing various transverse patterns in the group. [fig. 6 is based upon the Silurian Lyellia americana Edwards and Haime, and fig. 5 upon the Silurian Plasmopora joUis Edwards and Haime] ______________ 10

7, 8.-SYRINGOPORA. Upper Ordovician to Permian. Sketches showing transverse (Fig. 7, X2lh) and idealized, three-dimensional aspects of genus (Fig. 8, app. X2). Tabular intercepts are shown on F ig. 7, and their idealized pattern on Fig. 8. [fig. 7 is based upon S. r udyi Nelson; fig. 7 is not based upon a specimen] ______________________ 10

9.-SYRINGOPORA COLUMBIANA WILSON. Upper Ordovician. A syringoporid diagnosed by the extremely small size of the corallites, Xl. [based upon a Richmondian specimen] ________________________ 10

l

•

, /

73

•

8 PLATE 11 .

•

74

PLATE 12

COELENTERATA-Solitary Septate Corals

FIGURES PAGE

l.-LOBOCORALLIUM TRILOBATUM (WHITEAVES). Upper Ordo-vician. [based upon an Upper Ordovician specimen] 11

2.-BIGHORNIA. Upper Ordovician. [based upon numerous specimens of B. bottei ~elson] _______________________________________________ 11

3,4.-BIGHORNIA. Upper Ordovician. Fig. 3: oblique view; Fig. 4: cali­car view. ~ote the diagnostic flattened or oval appearance in both. See PI. 14, Fig. 6. [based upon a specimen of B. patella (Wilson)] __ 11

5.-BIGHORNIA A~D LOBOCORALLIUM TRILOBATUM. Upper Ordo­vician. Diagrammatic sketch showing the trilobate outline of L. trilobatum (Whiteaves) on the left and the oval outline of Bighornia on the right _______________________________________________________ _

6.-CYSTIPHYLLUM. Silurian to Devonian. Rather diagrammatic sketch showing the cystose tabulae. Note that these tabulae do not necessarily reflect the surface features, in that ghost septa may appear

11

in the calyx ________________________________________________________ 11

7.-HELIOPHYLLUM. Middle Devonian. Rather diagrammatic sketch. ~ote the characteristic reticulate appearance of the septa caused by carinae _________________________________________________________ 11

•

•

-

75

,

I

/

\

,

5

PLATE 12.

76

PLATE 13

COELENTERATA-Colonial Septate Corals

FIGURES PAGE

I

1.-DISSEPl'MENTARIUM - characteristic of many post-Ordovician corals. The dissepiments are the cyst-like structures along both walls. The interior of the corallite has inclined tabulae and a col-umella. [based upon Lithostrotion arizelum (Crickmay)] __________ 11

2.-COLUMNAR BREAKING HABIT-most characteristic of Devonian. [based upon an unidentified specimen] ____________________________ 12

,

3.-LITHOSTROTIONELLA-SHOWING LONSDALEOID DISSEP'I'MEN­TARIUM. Permo-Carboniferous (mainly Mississippian). Note how the septa have withdrawn toward interior, leaving the peripheral re­gions with dissepimental intercepts only. [based upon L. shimeri (Crickmay)] _____________________________________________________ _

4.-LITHOSTROTIONELLA. Permo-Carboniferous (mainly Mis,sissip­pian). View of a weathered colony, X2. Notice how the septa appear continuous from wall to near centre, although breaking will show lonsdaleoid structure like that of Fig. 3. [based upon L. shimeri

12

(Crickmay)] ______________________________________________________ 12

5.-BILLINGSASTRAEA. Middle Devonian. Note confluent septa and the lack of walls. [based upon B. (Phillipsastraea) nevadensis magna Stumm] __________________________________________________________ 12

6. PYCNOSTYLUS. Silurian. Showing the rather irregular fasciculate corallites and preponderant tabulae. [based upon p. guelphensis Whiteaves] __________________________________________________________ 12

l

•

•

-

77

..

..

-5

PLATE 13.

- -------------- ----

78

.PLA'l'E 14

BRAC"'HIOPODS-Inarticulates, Orthids and Dalmanellids

FIGURES .PAGE

I. - LINGULA sol.- an inar ticulate brachiopod. Cambrian to Recent. Ventral? view [based upon a Permian specimen] ___ _________ ______ 13

2.- 0RBICULOIDEA- an inarticulate brachiopod. P ermo-P ennsylvanian. [based upon a P ennsylvanian specimen] ___________ ___ ____ _____ ___ 13

3-5.-0RTHID BRACHIOPOD. Ordovician-Silurian. Dorsal, ventral and lateral views, Xl. Brachiopods of this size and shape often belong to Plaesiomys occidentalis which is very characteristic of high Upper Ordovician strata in western Canada. See Fig. 6. [based upon ideal-ized Plaesiomys occidentalis (Okulitch)] _______ ________ ____________ _

6.-0RTHID BRAClllOPOD AND BIGHORNIA. Upper Upper Ordovi­cian (Richmondian and Gamachianl. Such association is typical in strata of this a ge in western Canada. [based upon a specimen con­taining poorly preserved Plaesiomys occidentalis (Okulitch) and Big-

13

hornia patella (Wilson)] _____ ______________________________________ 13

7-9.~DALMANELLID BRACHIOPOD. Ordovician and Silurian (mainly). Dorsal, ventral and lateral views, X2. The smaller size (X2) , more oval outline and finer ribs usually distinguish dalmanellids from ort hids (see Figs. 3-4l. [based upon Direromynnia tersa Wang] __ __ 13

•

•

•

•

( .

..

9

..

l

\ \

1 •

PLATE 14.

79

I

2

80

PLATE 15

BRACHIOPODA-Pentamerids and Strophomenids

F I GURES

1,2.- PENTAMERID BRACHIOPOD. Silurian. Dorsal and lateral views. [ba.sed upon a diagrammatic representation of Conchidium] _______ _

3. PENTAMERID BRACHIOPODS. Silurian. Such internal moulds, with cracks indicating the position of spondylia and septa, are most commonly preserved. [based upon Pentamerus sp. - see Norford, 1962b, PI. 8, fig. 18] __________ _______ ______________ ______ ____ _____ _

4-6.-STROPHOMENID BRACHIOPOD. Ordovician to Permian. Ventral,

PAGE

14

14

dorsal and lateral views. [based upon Ordovician Rafinesquina sp.] 14

•

--

-

•

•

-

81

•

PLATE l5.

82

PLATE 16

BRACHIOPODS-Productids (dictyoclostids) and Strophomenids

FIGURES

1,2.-DlcrYOCLOSTID PRoDucrrD. Permo-Carboniferous. Ventral and dorsal views. Note rather interrupted, irregular ribs. See PI. 17, Fig. 3 for lateral view of the same specimen. [based upon a Permian specimen] ________________________________________________________ _

3.-DICTYOCLOSTID PRODUcrID. Permo-Carboniferous. Poorly pre­served moulds of valve surfaces suggesting the irregular rib pattern of dictyoclostids. Such preservation is very common. [based upon a Permian mould] __________________________________________________ _

4-5.-CHONETINA-A lobed Strophomenid. Permo-Pennsylvanian. Ven­tral and dorsal views, X2. [based upon C. flemingi (Norwood

PAGE

14

14

and Pratten)] ______________________________________________________ 14

--

l

•

•

m

&3

...

'ii7 5

..

PLATE 16.

84

PLATE 17

BRACHIOPODA-Productids (linoproductids and dictyoclostids)

FIGURES PAGE

1,2.- LINOPRODUCTID PRODUcrID. Permo-Carboniferous. Ventral and lateral views. These productids may also occur as small individuals, particularly in the Mississippian. [based upon a Permian specimen] 15

3.-DICTYOCLOSTID PRODUcrID. Permo-Carboniferous. Lateral view. (See PI. 16, Figs. 1. and 2 for other views of the same specimen.) [based upon a Permian specimen] ___ _______________________________ 14

-•

•

•

•

85

•

PLATE 17.

86

PLATE 18

BRACHIOPODA- Productids (horridonids and linoproductids)

FIGURES

1-5.-HORRIDONID PRODUCTID. Pennslyvanian. Ventral, dorsal, posterior and lateral views ; and close up of the lamellose -shell surface with spine bases (approximately X6>. Note the spine bases along the ventral hinge (cardinal) area and their absence from the dorsal part (see Pl. 19, Figs. 1-3), [based upon numerous specimens] _________ _

6,7.-MUIRWOODIA-A Permian Linoproductid. Ventral and lateral views.

PAGE

15

[based upon numerous specimens] ________________________________ 15

•

-

87

6

" 5

PLATE 18.

l

88

PLATE 19

BRACHIOPODA-Productids (horridonids and echinoconchids)

FIGURES PAGE

1-4.-HORRIDONID PRODUCTID. Permian. Ventral, dorsal and lat­eral views; and close up of pustulose shell surface (approximately X6)' Note the spine bases along dorsal hinge (cardinal) area (s~e PI. 18, Figs. 1-4). [based upon numerous specimens of Horridonia] ______ 15

5-7.-ECHINOCONCHID PRODUCTID. Permo-Carboniferous. Lateral, dorsal and ventral views. [based upon Echinoconchu8 alternatu8 (Norwood and Pratten)] ___________________________________________ 15

•

•

=

89

• 4

7

•

PLATE 19.

:90

PLATE 20

BRACHIOPODA-Productids (waagenoconchids, productellids) and Rhynchonellids

FIGURES PAGE

1-3.-WAAGENOCONCHID PRODUCTID. Permian (mainly) . Ventral, dorsa~ and lateral views. [based upon Waagenoconcha irginae (Stuckenberg)] ____________________________________________________ _

4.-WAAGENOCONCHID PRODUCTID. Permian (mainly). Poorly prE'­served valve fragment showing the characteristic diagonal spine bases, [based upon a Permian specimen] _____________ ____________ _

5-6.-PRODUCTELL]D PRODUCTID. Permo-Carboniferous. Ventral and dorsal views of a well preserved specimen. [based upon Productella

15

15

hirsutiformis Girty] _______________________________________________ 15

7.- PRODUCTELLA HIRSUTIFORMIS AND LEIORHYNCHUS CAR­BONIFERUM. Upper Mississippian. Such association of poorly pre­served specimens is characteristic of this series in northern Canada and Alaska. See Figs. 5-6; and PI. 21, Fig,s. 4-6. [rather idealized drawing based upon numerous poorly preserved specimens] ________ 15, 16

-

•

91

•

PLATE 20.

92

PLATE 21

BRACHIOPODA-Rhynchonellids (including leiorhynchids)

FIGURES PAGE

1-3.-LEIORHYNCHID (RHYNCHONELLID) BRACHIOPOD. Devonian to Permian. Ventral, dorsal and lateral views. [based upon a Devonian specimen] ______________________________________________ 16

4-6.-LEIORHYNCHID (RHYNCHONELLID) BRACHIOPOD. Devonian to Permian. Ventral, dorsal and lateral views. [based upon a Devo-nian specimen] __________________________________________________ _

7-9.-RHYNCHONELLID BRACHIOPOD. Ordovician to Permian. Ven­tral, dorsal and lateral views. Note that the true rhynchonellids have ribs over the whole valve surface, while the leiorhynchids have them mainly on the fold and sinus. [based upon Rhynchotrema iowense Wang] ______________ ____________________________________ _

10,1l.-"LEIORHYNCHUS" SP. Permian. Ventral and dorsal views. The rather large size and coarse ribs distinguish this species. [based

16

16

upon numerous specimens] ________________________________________ 16

12.-"LEIORHYNCHUS" SP. Permian. Dorsal view of a rather poor­ly preserved specimen: the kind most commonly found in the field. [sketch is rather idealized] _______________________________________ 16

•

•

93

4 6

..

..

7 8 9

PLATE 21.

94

PLATE 22

BRACHIOPODA-Spiriferids

FIGURES PAGE

1-3.-SPIRIFERID BRAOHIOPOD. Devonian to Permian. Ventral, dorsal and lateral views. [based upon a Devonian Bpiriter] ______________ 16

4.-SPIRIFERID BRACHIOPOD. Devonian to Permian. Ventral view. [based upon the Mississippian Bpiriter greenockensis Brown] ________ 16

5,6.-NEOSPIRIFER. Permo-Pennsylvanian. Ventral (Fig. 5) and dorsal (Fig. 6) views. Note the bundled ribs. [fig. 6 is based upon N. dun-bari King; and fig. 5 upon a Permian specimen] ___________________ _

7.-NEOSPIRIFER. Permo-Pennsylvanian. Poorly preserved mould sug­gesting the bundled rib pattern of the genus. [based upon a Per-

. .] mlan specImen ___________________________________________________ _

16

16

•

-

•

95

2

.. 4

•

6

•

PLATE 22.

96

PLATE 23

BRACHIOPODA-Spiriferids and Punctospiriferids

FIGURES P A G E

1-3.-SPIRIFERELLA-An aberrant Spiriferid. Ventral, dorsal and lateral views. [based upon s. rajah (Salter)] ____________________________ 16

4.-SPIRIFERELLA-An aberrant Spiriferid. Permian. Poorly pre­served specimens with the broad ribs suggestive of the genus. [based upon a specimen containing S. saranae (de Verneuil)] _______ _

5.-PUNCTOSPIRIFERID BRACHIOPOD. Devonian to Triassic. Dorsal view. Punctae are too .small to be seen with the naked eye. [based

16

upon Pu.nctospiriter kentuckiensis (Shumard)] _____________ _________ 16

6, 7.-PUNCTOSPIRIFERID BRACHIOPODS. Devonian to Triassic. Fig. 6 show.s a fragmentary specimen embedded in rock; and Fig. 7 the punctate nature of the shell under magnification, X12. [based upon an unidentified Permian specimen] __________________________________ 16

-

97

•

•

•

PLATE 23.

l

98

PLATE 24

BRACHIOPODA-Rostrospiriferids and Terebratulids

FIGURES

1-8.-ROSTROSPIRIFERID BRACHIOPODS. Permo-Carboniferous (main­ly). Figs. 1, 2, 3; and 4, 5, 6: ventral, dorsal and lateral views. Figs. 7, 8 ventral and dorsal views. Figs. 1-3 are based upon Composita sub­tilita (Shepard); 4-6 upon Whitfieldella nitida (Hall); and 7-8 upon Cleiothyridina nielsoni Dunbar] ___________________________________ _

9-16.-DIELASMA - A Terebratulid Brachiopod. Permo-Carboniferous. Figs. 9-11: dorsal, ventral and lateral views; Figs. 12, 13: lateral and dorsal views; 14, 15: dorsal and lateral views of a poorly preserved specimen. Fig. 16 shows the punctate shell surface under high magnification, approximately X6 [figs. 9-11 are based upon D. stoschensis Dunbar; .12, 13 upon D. elongatum Schlotheim; 14, 15 and

PAGE

17

16 upon poorly preserved Permian specimens] ____________________ 18

17.-TEREBRATULID PUNCTAE. Devonian to Triassic (mainly). The punctae shown are much more widely spaced than is normal, approx­imately X6. [based upon the Devonian Cranaena sublingulata Stain-brook] ____________________________________________________________ 17

-

•

/, . i\,gW ~-. 13

', " , : " , '.-- - ,,-". c.'': :'," : '<~.: , <.;'

"',' . . ~,~,;." :~, .,>:

PLATE 24.

I

99

8 7

10

16

17

100

FIGURES

1-3.-"ATRYPA." [based upon

PLA'l'E 25

BRACHIOPODA-Atrypids (Atrypa)

Devonian. Dorsal, lateral and posterior (top) views. Spinatrypa coriacea Crickmay] _______________________ _

4, 5.-ATRYPA. Devonian. Lateral and dorsal views. [based upon A. arctica VVarren] ___________________________________________________ _

6,7.-ATRYPA. Devonian. Ventral and lateral views. [based upon A. sp.

PAGE

17

17

~. ~cLaren] ______________________________________________________ 17

8-1O.-ATRYPA. Devonian. Ventral, dorsal and lateral views. [based upon A. independens~ VVebster] __________________________________________ 17

-

-

•

101

4

2

5

•

10

"

PLATE 25.

102

11

PLA'I'E 26

BRACHIOPODA-Terebratulids

FIGURES PAGE -• 1,2.-RENSSELANDIA. Middle Devonian. Dorsal and lateral views. Well

preserved specimens have fine ribs. [based upon R. laevis (Meek)] __ 18 •

3,4.-"STRINGOCEPHALUS." Middle Devonian. Dorsal and lateral views. Stringocephalu8 can become much larger that that shown. [drawings are composite: based upon numerous illustrations] __________________ 18

,

103

..

PLATE 26.

104

PLATE 27

BRYOZOA AND ECHINODERMATA

Archimedes, Fenestellids, and Crinoid Stems

FIGURES

l.-ARCHIMEDES. Permo-Pennsylvanian. [rather idealized represen-tation of a Permian specimen] _______________________ _____________ _

2.-FENESTELLID BRYOZOA. Permo-Carboniferous. Note the sim­ilarity to Siluro-Ordovician dendroid graptolites (PI. 8, Fig. 3) . [based

PAGE

18

upon Permian specimens] __________________________________________ 18

3,4.-TWO-HOLED CRINOID STEMS. Lower Devonian. Fig. 3 shows a well preserved stem, and Fig. 4 the expected occurrence, X2. [based upon a sketch presented by T. Potter Chamney] ____________________ 19

5, 6 .-PENT ACRINUS. Jurassic. Fig. 5 shows a well preserved stem with five sides (X2), and Fig. 6 the preservation to be expected (Xl) . [based upon a Jurassic specimen] __________________________________ 19

•

-

•

•

105

/'

4 "-,,- -" ~"'; , . . < _.,::,'

"

3 •

5

•

PLATE 27.

106

PLATE 28

MOLLUSCA- Gastropods and Pelecypods

FIGURES PAGE

1-3.- MACLURITES. Middle to Upper Ordovician. Lower, upper and aper­tural views, Xl,2. Usually Maclurites is poorly preserved and does not show the longitudinal lines of Figs. 1 and 3. [based upon numer-ous specimens] ___ __ ____ _____________________ ______________ ________ 19

4.- TENTACULITIDS. Silurian to Devonian. Various specimens in rock. X2. [based upon T. sp., nr. T. attenuatus Hal!] ___________ _________ 19

5.- PECTINOlD PELECYPOD (true Pecten). Mississippian to Re­cent. Note that pectens have symmetry very close to that of brachiopods. [based upon a Permian specimen] ______________ ___ ___ 20

6.- MONOTIS-PSEUDOMONOTIS TYPE PELECYPODS. Triassic. View of variously preserved specimens. Pelecypods of this size and shape are most frequent in the Upper Triassic. [based upon Monotis subcircularis (Gabb)] _______ ___ _____ ________ _______________________ 20

•

•

107

..

•

..

PLATE 28.

108

PLATE 29

MOLLUSCA-Pelecypods

FIGURES PAGE

l.-BUCHIA (AUCELLA) - A Mytiloid Pelecypod. Upper Jurassic (mainly) . Slab showing Buchia in various states of preservation. [based upon an Upper Jurassic slab] ________________________________ 20

2,3.-BUCHIA (AUCELLA) - A Mytiloid Pelecypod. Upper Jurassic (mainly). Fig. 2 shows one valve, and Fig. 3 the rarely seen in­equivalved nature of genus. [fig. 2 is based upon B. fi&heriana (Stoliczka)] ______________________________________________________ _

4.-INOCERAMUS - A lMytiloid [based upon I. barabina 'Morton]

Pelecypod. Cretaceous (mainly).

5,6.-DAONELLA-A iPectinoid Pelecypod. Triassic [fig. 5 is based upon

20

20

D. nitanae 'McLearn; fig. 6 upon D. eZegans McLearn] ______________ 20

7.-0YSTERS - Ostreoid Pelecypods. Cretaceous to Recent. Show­ing poorly preserved rather shapeless, irregularly rugose valve frag-ments, X%. [sketch is not based upon a specimen] ________________ 20

-

•

I

109

..

,

5

-

7

PLATE 29.

110

PLATE 30

MOLLUSCA- Nautiloid Cephalopods

FIGURES PAGE

I.- BEADED SIPHUNCLE. Ordovician-Silurian. [based upon Stokeso-ceras cylindricum Foer,ste and Savage] ______ _______________________ 21

2.- - 0RTHOCONE CEPHALOPOD. Ordovician-Silurian (rarely Devo­nian), Xlh . N ote the tubular (orthochoanitic) siphuncle. [based upon an Upper Ordovician specimen] ___________________________________ _

3.- 0RTHOCONE CEPHALOPOD. Ordovician-Silurian (rarely Devo­nian). [based upon one of the rare Devonian specimens from the Fort Creek shale] __________________________ ___ ____________________ _

4-5.- BILLINGSITES. Upper Ordovician ascocone. [based upon B . k eat-

21

21

ingi Nelson] _______________________________________________________ 21

6.- NAUTILICONE NAUTILOID. Ordovician-Silurian, X%. [based upon Cham ctocems ' laddi. Foerste] _______________________________________ 21

,

•

•

I

111

•

..

4

..

•

PLATE 30.

112

PLATE 31

MOLLUSCA-Nautiloid Cephalopods

FIGURES PAGE

1,2.- CYRTOGOMPHOCERAS- Upper Ordovician Cyrtocone. Lateral and ventral views. [based upon C. alcocki Nelson] ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ____ 21

3.-BEA'DED SIPHUNCLE. Ordovician-Silurian. [based upon a Silurian specimen] 21

4-5.- BILLINGSITES- Upper Ordovician Ascocone. Dorsal and lateral views. [based upon B. borealis (Parks)] __________________________ 21

113

..

..

PLATE 31.

- ,

114

PLATE 32

MOLLUSCA-Nautiloid Cephalopods

FIGURES PAGE

l.-DIESTOCERAS-Upper Ordovician Brevicone. [based upon an upper Ordovician specimen] ______________________________________________ 21

2.-WINNIPEGOCERAS-Upper Ordovician Cyrtocone. [based upon W. laticurvatu~ (VVhiteaves)] _________________________________________ 21

-

115

•

PLATE 32.

116

PLATE 33

MOLLUSCA-Goniatite. Ceratite and Ammonite Cephalopods

FIGURES

l.-GONIATITE AMMONOID. Devonian to Permian. Lateral view. Note the outer wall obscuring sutures on the lower part of specimen. [based upon Permian Pseudogastrioceras /ortieri Harker] ___ ______ _

2.-CERATITE AMMONOID. Mississippian to Triassic: mainly Triassic in Canada and Alaska. NQte the outer wall covering most of the sutures. Lateral view. [based upon a Triassic specimen] ______ ___ _

3.-AMMONITE AMMONOID. Triassic to Cretaceous. Lateral view. Note the extremely complicated sutures : see also Fig. 4. [based upon

PAGE

22

22

Jurassic Warrenoceras henryi (Meek and Hayden)] _____________ ___ 22

4.- BACULITES. Upper Cretaceous. Lateral view of the orthocone por-tion. [based upon an Upper Cretaceous specimen] __________________ 23

,

•

-

I

117

..

"

, Jr-

.. , ,. ,

PLATE 33.

118

PLATE 34

MOLLUSCA-Ammonite Cephalopod

FIGURE PAGE

1.-NEOGASTROPLITES. Lower Cretaceous. [based upon a specimen from Peace River area, British Columbia] _____ _____________________ 23

--

•

-.

1

I

119

PLATE 34.

120

PLATE 35

MOLLUSCA-Ceratite Cephalopods, and Belemnites

FIGURES

1, 2.-NATHORSITES. Middle Triassic ceratite ammonoid. Lateral and ventral views. No sutures are shown: these are rarely preserved on this genus. [based upon N . mcconnelli (Whiteaves)] _______________ _

3.-BELEMNITES. Jurassic. Various aspects are shown. Note the fib­rous construction of guard. Portions or traces of phragmocones are present in the two belemnites in the upper right hand corner. [draw-

PAGE

22

ing is composite : based upon various species] ______________________ 23

I

•

-•

--

121

?

2

PLATE 35.

122

PLATE 36

ARTHROPODA-Trilobites

FIGURES

1.-0LENELLID TRILOBITES. Lower Cambrian. [based upon Paed-eumias transitans Walcott]

2.-0LENELLID TRILOBITE. Lower Cambrian, X2. Such cephala are the most commonly preserved parts of these trilobites. [based upon

PAGE

24

Fremontia sp.] ____________________________________________________ 24

-

-•

• •

1

,

123

•

PLATE 36.

124

PLATE 37

ARTHROPODA-Trilobites

FIGURES PAGE

l.-ALBERTELLA. Middle Cambrian. Such pygidia are most commonly preserved in this genus. See Fig. 2. [based upon A. helena Walcott] 24

2.-ALBERTELLA. Middle Cambrian. [based upon A. helena Walcott] 24

3.-AGNOSTID TRILOBITE. Middle to Upper Cambrian; X2. Note the two thoracic segments, compared with the three of EodiscU8 (PI. 39, Fig. 3), [based upon A . monotis Matthew] ______________________________ 24

4.-AGNOSTID TRILOBITES. Middle to Upper Cambrian. [based upon A. inter8tr~u8 White] _____________________________________________ 24

1

,

125

•

PLATE 37.

126

PL,AT'E 38

ARTHROPODA-Trilobites

FIGURES PAGE

I. - OLENOIDES (NEOLENUS)' Middle Cambrian. The spinose pygid­ium is the most commonly preserved structure. [based upon O. serratus (Rominger)] _______________ ______________________________ _ 24

2.- ENCRINURUS. Silurian. [based upon E . punctatus (Wahlenberg)] 24

3.- ENCRINURUS. Silurian. Such pygidia are the most com monly pre­served feature of this genus. [based upon E. sp., cf. E. princeps Poulsen] __________________________________________________________ 24

M r T ' I

--

. -

PLATE 38.

1

127

128

PLATE 39

ARTHROPODA-Trilobites

FIGURES PAGE

l.- BUMASTID TRILOBITE. Ordovician to Silurian. [based upon Iso-telus brachycephalu8 Foerste] ______________________________________ 24

2.- BUMASTliD TRILOBITE. Ordovician to Silurian. Fragment show­ing part of thorax. Note the similarity to an orthocone cephalopod surface (see Pl. 30, Fig. 2). [based upon an Ordovician specimen] __ 24

3.-EODISCID TR1LOBITE. Lower and Middle Cambrian, X6. Com-pare with Agnostus (PI. 37, Fig. 3), [based upon E. punctatus (Salter)] 24

- , .,, = 1

•

-;

1

129

..

'.

PLATE 39 .

•

130

PLATE 40

ARTHROPODA-Trilobites and Ostracods FIGURES

I.-SCUTELLUM. Silurian. [based upon S. borealis Poulsen] _______ _

2.- SCUTELLUM. Silurian. Such pygidia are the most commonly pre-served features of this genus. [based upon S . borealis Poulsen] ___ _

3.-0STRACODS. Ordovician to Recent. Ostracod swarms like that shown are most characteristic of the Silurian. [based upon a SilUlian

PAGE

24

24

specimen] - - ---------------------_________________________________ 24

7 PECCI I

•

•

/

/-it ? ,. ... , ,

1

131

•

PLATE 40.

132

PLATE 41

CHORDATA-Fish Remains

FIGURES PAGE

I.-FISH PLATES. Devonian to Recent. These thick disc like structures typically have a light grey to bluish colour due to the phosphatic content. [based upon Mississippian specimens] ______________________ 25

2.-FISH BONES. Devonian to Recent. The rather porous bone frag­ments are very rare ; often they may have a bluish hue. [based upon specimens of various ages] ________________________________________ 25

-

•

,

.­-

I

i

133

.. . . .

1

PLATE 41.

134

PLATE 42

MARINE PLAm'S

l.- "SPIROPHYTON." Permian. Such cone shapes with spirally radiat­ing ridges are very diagnostic for Leonardian (Lower Permian) strata [based upon a Permian specimen] _________________________________ _

2.-"SPIROPHYTON." Permian. Occasionally Spirophyton may occur like these flattened ,swirl-like markings along bedding planes. Caution should be used in dating as such markings may have other origins. [sketch based upon memory of structures on Dave Lord Ridge, Yukon

25

Territory] _________________________________________________________ 25

.I

135

PLATE 42.

136

Agnostid Trilobites AlberteZla Alveolites Amphipora

Confusion with Fusulinids

Aragonite (Mother of Pearl) in 'Molluscs

Archaeocyathids (Pleosponges) Distinguished from

cup corals Archimedes

Ascocone cephalopods Atrypa

Aucella (see Buchia)

Aulacera

Baculites

Beatricea Belemnites (Belem-

noids) Fragments

24, PI. 37 24,26, PI. 37 10, 27, PI. 10

7,28, Pl. 4

7, 13

30

5,26, PI. 2

5 18, 29, PI. 27 22, PIs. 30, 31 17,27,28, PI. 25

6,27, PI. 4

23, 30, PI. 33 6,27, PI. 4

21, 23, 30, PI. 35 23,30 23 23

INDEX

Spiralia Spiriferids

Spondylium Strophomenids Terebra tulids Waagenoconchid

productids

Brevicone cephalopods Buchia (Aucella)

Confusion with Inoceramus

Cambrian System Catenipora

Cenozoic Cephalopods

Ammonites Ammonoids Ascocone

Guard (Rostrum) Phragmocone Confusion with corals 23

Beaded siphuncles Belemnites Belemnoids Brevicone Ceratites Cyrtocones Goniatites Nautilicones Nautiloids Ornamentation Orthocones Phragmocone Sutures

Bighornia

Billingsastraea (Phillipsastraea)

Billingsites

Brachiopods Articulates Atrypids nalmanellids Dictyoclostid

productids Distinction from

pelecypods Echinoconchid

productids Horridonid productids Inarticulates LeiorhY'nchids Linoproductid

productids Orthids Pentamerids Productellid

productids Productids Punctae PUnctospiriferids Rhynchonellids Rostrospiriferids

/

11, 27, PIs. 12, 14

12, 28, PI. 1'3 21,22,27, PIs. 30,31

12-18 12,13 13,17 12, Pl. 14

15,29, PIs. 16, 17

12

14,15,29, PI. 19 14,29, PIs. 18, 19 12, 13, Pl. 14 16, 27, 28, PIs. 20, 21

15, 29, PIs. 17, 18 13, PI. 14 13,14,27, PI. 15

14,15,28, PI. 20 13,14,28 13, PIs. 23, 24 1'3, 16, 28, 29, PI. 23 13, 15, 28, PI. 21 13, 17, 28, PI. 24

Chonetina

Chordata Claraia

Climacograptus

Coenites

Colonial corals Corals

Breaking habit Cerioid Chain corals Confusion with

archaeocya thids Colonial Columnar breaking

habit Cup corals Dissepimentarium Fasciculate Favositids

17 13, 16, 27, 28,

PIs. 22, 23 14 13, 14, 28, PI. 15 13, 17, 28, PI. 24

15, 29, Pl. 20 21, Pl. 32 20, 30, PI. 29

20

25 9, 10, 27, PI. 9

30

21-23 22, 29, 30, PI. 33 21, 22, PI. 33 22, PIs. 30, 31 21, PIs. 30, 31 23, 30, Pl. 35 21,22 21, PI. 32 22, 29, PIs. 33, 35 21, PIs. 31, 32 22, 27, 28, PI. 33 21, PI. 30 21 22

6,21, PI. 30 23 20,21,22 14,29, PI. 16

25 20,29

8,26, PI. 8 10, PI.U

11 9 -12

12, PI. 13 9 9

5 11

12 11 11, PI.13

9 28

•

•

•

•

Halysitids Halysitoid Heliolitids Horn corals Lonsdaleoid

dissepimentarium Mural pores Organ pipe Septate Syringoporids Tabulate

Cretaceous System Crinoid columna Is Cyrtogomphoceras Cyrtograptus Cystiphyllum

Daonella Devonian System D icellograptus D icranograptus Dictyonema Dielasma Didymograptus Diestoceras Diplograptus Dissepimentarium

Echinodennata Eleutherozoan

echinodenns Encrinurus

Favosites "Favosites limitaris"

Rominger Fenestellid bryozoans Fish bones Fish plates Foraminifera Fusulinid foraminifera

Confusion with Amphipora

Goniograptu8

Graptolites Biserial Confusion with fene­

stellid bryozoans Confusion with man­

ganese dendrites Confusion with p,lant

fossils Dendroids

9 9

10, Pl. 11 11

11, 12, PI. 13 10, PI. 10 9. 10 9, 11

10 9

30 19 21, '2:7, PI. 31

9,26, PI. 7 11, '2:7, PI. 12

20, 29, PI. 29 27

8, 9,26, PI. 7 9,26, PI. 7

PI. 8 17, 18, PI. 24

9, PI. 7 21,27, PI. 32

8,26, PI. 8 1'1, PI. 13

18

18 24, '2:7, Pl. 38

9, 10, 27, 28, PI. 10

10, 28, PI. 1:1 18, 28, PI. 27 24, PI. 41 24, PI. 41 5 5,29, PI. 1

7, 13

8,26, PI. 6

7 8, 26. PIs. 7, 8

8,18

8

7 7, PI. 8

Dichotomy Graptoloids Monoserial Multibranched Quadriserial Shaly facies

Guide (Index) fossil

Halobia Halysites Heliophyllum Honeycomb corals

(favositids) Horn corals (cup

corals) Horridonia Horridonid (productid)

brachiopods

Index (Guide) fossil Impunctate brachiopods Inoceramus

Confusion with Buchia (Aucella)

Isograptus

Jurassic System

Labechid stromatopo­roids Confusion with ortho­cone cephalopods

Leiorhynchus carboni/erum Girty sp.

Lingula Lithostrotionella Lobocorallium (Strep-

telasma) trilobatum (Whiteaves)

Lower Devonian crinoids

Maclurites Confusion with nian Buchelia

Devo-

Manganese dendrites­confusion with grap­tolites

Manipora /eildeni (Etheridge)

Mesolobus Mesozoic braehiopods Mississippian£ystem Monograptus

(( ~i1'al~"

8,26 7

137

8, 26, PIs. 7,8 8, 26, PIs. 6, 8 8, PI. 6

26 2.

20,29 9, 10,27, PI. 9

11, PI. 12

9

11 15, 19, PI. 19

15, 29, PIs. 18, 19

2 13 20, 30, PI. 29

20,30 8, 9, 26, PIs. 6, 7

30

6, PI. 4

6 Pl. 20 15, 16, 29, PIs. 20, 21 16, 29, Pl. 21 13, 25, PI. 14 12, 29, PI. 13

11, 27, PI. 12

19, '2:7, PI. 27

19, 27, PI. 28

19

7

9, '2:7, PI. 9 9, PI. 9

14 29 28

8, 26, PIs. 7, 8 8,26, PI. 7

138

With distal twist

Monotis Mother of Pearl

(Aragonite) in molluscs

Muirwoodia Mytiloid pelecypods

Nathorstites N eogastroplites Neolenus (Olenoides) N eospirifer

Olenellus Olenoides (Neolenus) Orbiculoidea Ordovician 'System Orthograptus Ostracods

Swarms Ostreoid pelecypods Oysters

-As environmental

indica tOIlS

Palaeofavosites Pecten Pectinoid pelecypods Pelecypods

Distinguished from brachiopods

Mytiloids Ostreoids Pectinoids

Pelmatozoan echinoderms

Pennsylvanian System Pentacrinus> Permian and Carbon­

iferous systems Phillipsastraea

( Billingsastraea) Phyllograptus Plaesiomys occidentalis

(Okulitch) Pleosponges

(Archaeocya thids) Productella hirS'Uti­

formis Girty Productid brachiopods

Dictyoclostids E chinoconchids Horridonids Linoproductids Productellids Waagenoconchids

Pseudomonotis Pycnostylus

8,26, Pl. 7

20, 29, PI. Z8

30 15, 29, PI. 18 20, PI. 29

22, 29, PI. 35 23, 30, Pl. 34 24, 26, IFI. 38 16, 29, PI. 22

24, 26, PI. 36 24, 26, PI. 38 13, PI. 14 26 8,26, PI. 7

23, 24, PI. 40 27, PI. 40 20, PI. 29 20, 30, PI. 29

20

10, 11, 27, PI. 10 20,28 20, 28. PIs. 28, 29 19,20,29

12 20, Pl. 29 20, PI. 29 19, Pls_ 28, 29

18 28 19, PI. 27

Z8

12, 28, PI. 13 8,26, PI. 6

13, PI. 14

5, 26, Pl. 2

15,16, 29, PI. 20 13,14, 28 14, 29, PIs. 16, 17 15, 29, PI. 19 15, 29, PIs. 18, 19 15, 29, Pl. 17 15, PI. 20 15, 29, PI. 20 20, 29, PI. 28 12, 27, Pl. 13

Quaternary System

Receptaculites Distinguished from

Syringopora Rensselandia

Confusion with pen­tamerid brachio­pods

Rostrospiriferid brachiopods Confusion with

terebratulids

Scutellum Shaly facies Shelly facies Silurian System Solitary corals (cup

corals) Spiriferella "Spirophyton" Sponges Sponge spicules Stringocephalus Stromatoporoids "Sunflower Coral" (see

Receptaculites) Syringopora

columbiana Wilson Distinguished from

Receptaculites

Tabulate corals Tentaculitids Terebratulid

brachiopods Distinguished from

rostrospiriferids Tertiary System Tetragraptus Triassic 'System Trilobites

Agnostids Bumastids Eodiscids Olenellids (iMesona-

30

5, 27, PIs. 2, 3

6 17, 28, PI. 26

18

13, 17, 28, PI. 24

17

24, 27, PI. 40 26 26, 27 26

9 16, 29, PI. Z3 25, 29, PI. 42

5 5, PI. 2

17,18,28, Pl. 26 6, 7, 28, PI. 5

5 9, 10, 29, PI. 11

10, PI. 11

6

9 19, 20, 27, PI. 28

13, 17, 28, PI. 24

17 30

8,26, PI. 6 29 23 24, PI. 37 24, PI. 39 24, PI. 39

cids) 24,26; PI. 36 Two-holed cr inoid stems 27, PI. 27 Thamnopora 10

Waagenoconcha Waagenoconchid

brachiopods

W innipegoceras

Zygograptus

15, PI. 20

14,15,29, PI. 20

21,27, PI. 32

8,26, PI. 6

•