Evolution of cephalopods

Last updated

The cephalopods have a long geological history, with the first nautiloids found in late Cambrian strata. [1]

Contents

The class developed during the middle Cambrian, and underwent pulses of diversification during the Ordovician period [2] to become diverse and dominant in the Paleozoic and Mesozoic seas. Small shelly fossils such as Tommotia were once interpreted as early cephalopods, but today these tiny fossils are recognized as sclerites of larger animals, [3] and the earliest accepted cephalopods date to the Middle Cambrian Period. During the Cambrian, cephalopods are most common in shallow near-shore environments, but they have been found in deeper waters too. [4] Cephalopods were thought to have "undoubtedly" arisen from within the tryblidiid monoplacophoran clade. [5] However genetic studies suggest that they are more basal, forming a sister group to the Scaphopoda but otherwise basal to all other major mollusc classes. [6] [7] The internal phylogeny of Mollusca, however, is wide open to interpretation – see mollusc phylogeny.

Traditional views of origin

The cephalopods were once thought to have evolved from a monoplacophoran-like ancestor [8] with a curved, tapering shell, [9] and to be closely related to the gastropods (snails). [10] The similarity of the early shelled cephalopod Plectronoceras to some gastropods was used to support this view. The development of a siphuncle would have allowed the shells of these early forms to become gas-filled (thus buoyant) in order to support them and keep the shells upright while the animal crawled along the floor, and separated the true cephalopods from putative ancestors such as Knightoconus , which lacked a siphuncle. [10] Negative buoyancy (i.e. the ability to float)[ clarification needed ] would have come later, followed by swimming in the Plectronocerida and eventually jet propulsion in more derived cephalopods. [11] However, because chambered shells are found in a range of molluscs – monoplacophorans and gastropods as well as cephalopods – a siphuncle is essential to ally a fossil shell conclusively to the cephalopoda. [9] : 57  Chambered gastropods can be distinguished from cephalopod shells by the absence of a siphuncle, the irregular spacing of septa, the layering of the shell and (in younger or unmetamorphosed rocks) its microstructure, and the relatively thick width of the shell. [12] The earliest such shells do not have the muscle scars which would be expected if they truly had a monoplacophoran affinity. [9] : 57 

Early shell record

Fossil orthoconic nautiloid from the Ordovician of Kentucky; an internal mold showing siphuncle and half-filled camerae, both encrusted. OrdNautiloidInternalMold.jpg
Fossil orthoconic nautiloid from the Ordovician of Kentucky; an internal mold showing siphuncle and half-filled camerae, both encrusted.

Understanding of early cephalopod origins is by necessity biased by the available fossil material, which on the whole consists of shelly fossils. Critical fossils are detailed below; since their stratigraphic age has guided the interpretation of the fossils, [13] they are listed in descending order of age.

Cambrian

With the exception of the shelly genera Ectenolites and Eoclarkoceras , none of the 30+ Cambrian cephalopod genera are known to have survived into the Ordovician. [14] Cambrian cephalopods differ from their descendants by account of their small size (a few centimetres in length); long, tapering shells; smooth shell surfaces; closely spaced septa; and lack of deposits in their body chamber; several more specific features are also only seen in certain groups of Cambrian cephalopod. [14]

Tannuella

Tannuella is the oldest fossil to have been assigned to the cephalopods, dating from the Early Cambrian (Atdababian and Botomian), ~ 522  million years ago. Its position in this group is suggested based on its shape and the presence of chambers. [15] Under this hypothesis, it would be a precursor to the hypseloconids and then genera such as Knightoconus that eventually gave rise to the cephalopods. [16]

Knightoconus

Knightoconus is a Late Cambrian monoplacophoran [17] thought to represent an ancestor to the cephalopods. It had a chambered, conical shell, but lacked a siphuncle. [10] Although earlier molluscan fossils are also septate, Knightoconus is the latest septate mollusc before the first sipunculate cephalopods – a point that has been taken to prove its relevance to the Cephalopoda. [13] The absence of this siphuncle has been taken as evidence against cephalopod ancestry – how, it is argued, could a siphuncle evolve to penetrate existing septa? The prevailing argument suggests that a strand of tissue remained attached to the previous septum as the mollusc moved forwards and deposited its next septum, producing an obstacle to the complete closure of the septum and becoming mineralised itself. [18] 10 or more septa are found in mature individuals, occupying around a third of the shell – septa form very early and have been found in specimens as small as 2 mm in length. [13] Septa are uniformly spaced, [13] which is inconsistent with a gastropod affinity. [12] Unlike monoplacophoran fossils, there is no evidence of muscle scarring in Knightoconus fossils. [13]

Plectronoceras

Reconstruction of Plectronoceras Plectronoceras.png
Reconstruction of Plectronoceras

Plectronoceras is arguably the earliest known crown-group cephalopod, dating to the Upper Cambrian. [1] Its 14 known specimens hail from the basal Fengshan Formation (north-east China) of the earliest Fengshanian stage. [5] None of the fossils are complete, and none show the tip or opening of the shell. [5] Approximately half of its shell was filled with septa; 7 were recorded in a 2 cm shell. [13] Its shell contains transverse septa separated by about half a millimetre, with a siphuncle on its concave side. [5] Its morphology matches closely to that hypothesised for the last common ancestor of all cephalopods, [5] and the Plectronocerida have been said to be the ancestors of the Ellesmerocerids, the first "true cephalopods".

Yochelcionellids

The Yochelcionellids have given rise to the "snorkel hypothesis". These fossils are aseptate helcionellids with a snorkel-like tube on one surface. The snorkel has been seized upon as characteristic of a cephalopod-like water circulatory system, or perhaps as a precursor to the siphuncle. However, neither of these theories have been borne out. [13]

Ellesmerocerida

Sketch of the soft-part anatomy of early ellesmeroceridans, as reconstructed by Kroger (2007). Breviconic ellesmeroceridan.svg
Sketch of the soft-part anatomy of early ellesmeroceridans, as reconstructed by Kröger (2007).

The earliest true cephalopod order to emerge was the Ellesmerocerida, which were quite small; their shells were slightly curved, and the internal chambers were closely spaced. The siphuncle penetrated the septa with meniscus-like holes. [2] This marks an important difference from the earlier cephalopods, whose siphuncle was at the edge of the septum and against the shell wall. [13] On the basis of muscle scars preserved in such genera as Paradakeoceras and Levisoceras , these animals are reconstructed with a straight body and dorsal shell, with the head at the anterior, concave surface of the shell, and the funnel (consisting of a pair of folds in the foot at the rear), not juxtaposed with the head as in later, oncocerid-like forms. [11]

Early Ordovician diversity

The Ellesmerocerids were the only shelled cephalopods known to have survived the end-Cambrian extinction; all subsequent cephalopods are thus thought to be derived from these forms, which diversified throughout the Ordovician period.

Early cephalopods had fine shells that could not cope with the pressures of deep water. [2] In the mid Tremadoc, these were supplemented by larger shells around 20 cm in length; these larger forms included straight and coiled shells, and fall into the orders Endocerida (with wide siphuncles) and Tarphycerida (with narrow siphuncles). [2]

By the mid Ordovician these orders are joined by the Orthocerids, whose first chambers are small and spherical, and Lituitids, whose siphuncles are thin. The Oncocerids also appear during this time; they are restricted to shallow water and have short exogastric conchs. [2] The mid Ordovician saw the first cephalopods with septa strong enough to cope with the pressures associated with deeper water, and could inhabit depths greater than 100–200 m. [2] The wide-siphuncled Actinocerida and the Discocerida both emerged during the Darriwilian. [2] The direction of coiling would prove to be crucial to the future success of the lineages; endogastric [a] coiling would only permit large size to be attained with a straight shell, whereas exogastric [a] coiling – initially rather rare – permitted the spirals familiar from the fossil record to develop, with their corresponding large size and diversity. [18]

Curved shells brought a number of benefits. Firstly, minerals are not required in as large quantities, as each successive whorl builds on the one before. Also, the organism is more stable (its centre of mass coincides with its centre of buoyancy) and more manoeuvrable. [19]

Early cephalopods were likely predators, near the top of the food chain. [20] In the Early Palaeozoic, their range was far more restricted than today: They were mainly constrained to sub-littoral regions of shallow shelves of the low latitudes, and usually occur in association with thrombolites. [21] They gradually adopted a more pelagic habit as the Ordovician progressed. [21] Deep-water cephalopods, whilst rare, have been found in the Lower Ordovician – but only in high-latitude waters. [21]

Fossils mistaken for cephalopods

Reconstruction of Nectocaris, enigmatic animal that is misidentified as stem-cephalopod Nectocaris reconstruction.jpg
Reconstruction of Nectocaris, enigmatic animal that is misidentified as stem-cephalopod

A number of fossils have historically been considered to represent components of the cephalopods' history, but been reinterpreted on the basis of additional material.

Nectocaris

Nectocaris pteryx was previously described from poorly preserved specimen and considered as an arthropod. In 2010, Martin Smith and Jean-Bernard described specimens of Nectocaris and they considered that animal as early form of cephalopod. [22] Unlike other early cephalopods, it did not have a shell and appeared to possess jet propulsion in the manner of "derived" cephalopods, complicated the question of the order in which cephalopod features developed. [23] [24] Due to its morphology is strongly dissimilar to confirmed early cephalopods, and thus their affinities to cephalopods and even to molluscs more broadly are rejected by most authors. [25] [26] [27] [28]

NFM F-2774

This specimen from Early Cambrian was originally proposed as the earliest cephalopod shell. [29] However, later study found that specimen is actually a chimera fossil. [30]

Volborthella

When it was discovered in 1888, [13] it was thought that the early Cambrian Volborthella was a cephalopod. However discoveries of more detailed fossils showed that Volborthella’s small, conical shell was not secreted but built from grains of the mineral silicon dioxide (silica); neither was it septate. [31] This illusion was a result of the laminated texture of the organisms' tests. [32] Therefore, Volborthella’s classification is now uncertain. [33]

Shelbyoceras

Because the characters differentiating monoplacophora from cephalopods are few, several monoplacophora have been mistaken for cephalopod ancestors. One such genus is Shelbyoceras , which was reclassified based on a depressed groove that forms a band around the shell, which is similar to a feature seen in Hypseloconus . [34] The septa in this genus are either closely or irregularly spaced. [34]

Pohlsepia

Pohlsepia, known from Mazon Creek has originally been interpreted as a cirrate octopus. [35] But later study shows that affinities as octopus is controversial, and even considered to be a non-mollusk. [36]

Kirengellids

The Kirengellids are a group of shells that, whilst originally aligned to the monoplacophoran ancestry of the cephalopods, have been reinterpreted as brachiopods. [37]

Hyoliths

Hyoliths such as Allatheca have been interpreted as cephalopod ancestors, [38] but hyoliths proper are now recognized as brachiopods. [39]

Coleoidea

An ammonitic ammonoid with the body chamber missing, showing the septal surface (especially at right) with its undulating lobes and saddles. 1212amma.jpg
An ammonitic ammonoid with the body chamber missing, showing the septal surface (especially at right) with its undulating lobes and saddles.

The ancestors of coleoids (including most modern cephalopods) and the ancestors of the modern nautilus, had diverged by the Floian Age of the Early Ordovician Period, over 470 million years ago. We know this because the orthocerids were the first known representatives of the neocephalopoda, [40] were ultimately the ancestors of ammonoids and coleoids, and had appeared by the Floian. [21] It is widely held that the Bactritida, a Silurian–Triassic group of orthocones, are paraphyletic to the coleoids and ammonoids – that is, the latter groups arose from within the Bactritida. [41] : 393  An increase in the diversity of the coleoids and ammonoids is observed around the start of the Devonian period, and corresponds with a profound increase in fish diversity. This could represent the origin of the two derived groups. [41]

Unlike most modern cephalopods, most ancient varieties had protective shells. These shells at first were conical but later developed into curved nautiloid shapes seen in modern nautilus species. It is thought that competitive pressure from fish forced the shelled forms into deeper water, which provided an evolutionary pressure towards shell loss and gave rise to the modern coleoids, a change which led to greater metabolic costs associated with the loss of buoyancy, but which allowed them to recolonise shallow waters. [10] : 36  The loss of the shell may also have resulted from evolutionary pressure to increase manoeuvrability, resulting in a more fish-like habit. [42] : 289  This pressure may have increased as a result of the increased complexity of fish in the late Palaeozoic, increasing the competitive pressure. [42] : 289  Internal shells still exist in many non-shelled living cephalopod groups but most truly shelled cephalopods, such as the ammonites, became extinct at the end of the Cretaceous.

Early fossils

The Early Devonian Naefiteuthis has been interpreted as the earliest fossil coleoid, and its shell may be in a partly internalized state. [41] Belemnoids proper appear slightly later in the Early Devonian, and represent the first unambiguous coleoids. [35]

The Mazon Creek biota contains a decapod, Jeletzkya , which had ten arms, but the status of its shell is ambiguous as it has not been extracted from the concretion that preserves the only fossil. Accordingly, it has been interpreted as both an internal and an external shell; the specimen may represent a 'squid' or a belemnoid, [35] although due to preservation its affinities are not known well. [36]

The Late Mississippian Bear Gulch Limestone contains some important genera of early coleoids. Gordoniconus has large internal conch which looks similar to external shell that can be seen in bactritid, and this genus probably shows how external shell become into internal conch. [43] Syllipsimopodi is considered as belonging to Octopodiformes which contains modern octopuses and vampire squids, [36] although it is later considered to be synonymous with Gordonioconus. [44]

Organ origins

The tentacles of the ancestral cephalopod developed from the mollusc's foot; [45] the ancestral state is thought to have had five pairs of tentacles which surrounded the mouth. [45] Smell-detecting organs evolved very early in the cephalopod lineage. [45]

The earliest cephalopods, [b] like Nautilus and some coeloids, appeared to be able to propel themselves forwards by directing their jet backwards. [42] : 289  Because they had an external shell, they would not have been able to generate their jets by contracting their mantle, so must have used alternate methods, such as by contracting their funnels or moving the head in and out of the chamber. [42] : 289 

Exceptional preservation

The preservation of cephalopod soft parts is not entirely unusual; soft-bodied fossils, especially of coeloids (squid), are relatively widespread in the Jurassic, [46] but phosphatized remains are unknown before this period. [47] On the other hand, soft parts – including a possible ink sac – are known from the Paleozoic Hunsrück Slate and Francis Creek shale. [48] Putative cephalopod egg fossils have also been documented. [49]

Footnotes

  1. 1 2 Endogastric means the shell is curved so as the ventral or lower side is longitudinally concave (belly in); exogastric means the shell is curved so as the ventral side is longitudinally convex (belly out). Exogastric coiling allows the funnel to be pointed backwards, beneath the shell. [18]
  2. ↑ Ordovician orthocone nautiloids are the first for which trace fossil evidence is available.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ammonoidea</span> Extinct subclass of cephalopod molluscs

Ammonoids are extinct spiral shelled cephalopods comprising the subclass Ammonoidea. They are more closely related to living coleoids than they are to shelled nautiloids. The earliest ammonoids appeared during the Devonian, with the last species vanishing during or soon after the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event. They are often called ammonites, which is most frequently used for members of the order Ammonitida, the only remaining group of ammonoids from the Jurassic up until their extinction.

<i>Nectocaris</i> Extinct animal genus

Nectocaris is a genus of squid-like animal of controversial affinities known from the Cambrian period. The initial fossils were described from the Burgess Shale of Canada. Other similar remains possibly referrable to the genus are known from the Emu Bay Shale of Australia and Chengjiang Biota of China.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Monoplacophora</span> Superclass of molluscs

Monoplacophora, meaning "bearing one plate", is a polyphyletic superclass of molluscs with a cap-like shell, inhabiting deep sea environments. Extant representatives were not recognized as such until 1952; previously they were known only from the fossil record, and were thought to have become extinct 375 million years ago.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Coleoidea</span> Subclass of cephalopods

Coleoidea or Dibranchiata is one of the two subclasses of cephalopods containing all the various taxa popularly thought of as "soft-bodied" or "shell-less". Unlike its extant sister group Nautiloidea, whose members have a rigid outer shell for protection, the coleoids have at most an internal shell called cuttlebone or gladius that is used for buoyancy or as muscle anchorage. Some species, notably incirrate octopuses, have lost their internal shell altogether, while in some it has been replaced by a chitinous support structure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nautiloid</span> Extant subclass of cephalopods

Nautiloids are a group of marine cephalopods (Mollusca) which originated in the Late Cambrian and are represented today by the living Nautilus and Allonautilus. Fossil nautiloids are diverse and species rich, with over 2,500 recorded species. They flourished during the early Paleozoic era, when they constituted the main predatory animals. Early in their evolution, nautiloids developed an extraordinary diversity of shell shapes, including coiled morphologies and giant straight-shelled forms (orthocones). No orthoconic and only a handful of coiled species, the nautiluses, survive to the present day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Phragmocone</span>

The phragmocone is the chambered portion of the shell of a cephalopod. It is divided by septa into camerae.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Orthocerida</span> Extinct order of molluscs

Orthocerida, also known as the Michelinocerida, is an order of extinct orthoceratoid cephalopods that lived from the Early Ordovician possibly to the Late Triassic. A fossil found in the Caucasus suggests they may even have survived until the Early Cretaceous, and the Eocene fossil Antarcticeras is sometimes considered a descendant of the orthocerids although this is disputed. They were most common however from the Ordovician to the Devonian.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Neocephalopoda</span> Clade of molluscs

Neocephalopods are a group of cephalopod mollusks that include the coleoids and all extinct species that are more closely related to extant coleoids than to the nautilus. In cladistic terms, it is the total group of Coleoidea. In contrast, the palcephalopoda are defined as the sister group to the neocephalopoda.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evolution of molluscs</span> The origin and diversification of molluscs through geologic time

The evolution of the molluscs is the way in which the Mollusca, one of the largest groups of invertebrate animals, evolved. This phylum includes gastropods, bivalves, scaphopods, cephalopods, and several other groups. The fossil record of mollusks is relatively complete, and they are well represented in most fossil-bearing marine strata. Very early organisms which have dubiously been compared to molluscs include Kimberella and Odontogriphus.

Cameroceras is an extinct genus of endocerid cephalopod which lived in equatorial oceans during the entire Ordovician period. Like other endocerids, it was an orthocone, meaning that its shell was fairly straight and pointed. It was particularly abundant and widespread in the Late Ordovician, inhabiting the shallow tropical seas in and around Laurentia, Baltica and Siberia.

The Ellesmerocerida is an order of primitive cephalopods belonging to the subclass Nautiloidea with a widespread distribution that lived during the Late Cambrian and Ordovician.

<i>Knightoconus</i> Extinct genus of molluscs

Knightoconus antarcticus is an extinct species of fossil monoplacophoran from the Cambrian Minaret Formation of Antarctica. It is thought to represent an ancestor to the cephalopods. It had a chambered conical shell, but lacked a siphuncle.

Stenothecidae is an extinct family of fossil univalved Cambrian molluscs which may be either gastropods or monoplacophorans.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Orthoceratoidea</span> Extinct subclass of cephalopods

Orthoceratoidea is a major subclass of nautiloid cephalopods. Members of this subclass usually have orthoconic (straight) to slightly cyrtoconic (curved) shells, and central to subcentral siphuncles which may bear internal deposits. Orthoceratoids are also characterized by dorsomyarian muscle scars, extensive cameral deposits, and calciosiphonate connecting rings with a porous and calcitic inner layer.

The Kirengellids are a group of problematic Cambrian fossil shells of marine organisms. The shells bear a number of paired muscle scars on the inner surface of the valve.

<i>Salterella</i> Extinct genus of shelled animals

Salterella is an enigmatic Cambrian genus with a small, conical, calcareous shell that appears to be septate, but is rather filled with stratified laminar deposits. The shell contains grains of sediment, which are obtained selectively by a manner also observed in foramanifera. The genus was established by Elkanah Billings in 1861, and was named after the English palaeontologist John William Salter.

Plectronoceratoidea is a superorder or subclass containing primitive nautiloids from the Late Cambrian and Early Ordovician. This group is best considered a paraphyletic grade of early cephalopods, as it contains the ancestors of subsequent post-Cambrian cephalopod orders.

Paleoceras is a genus of fossil cephalopods from the Upper Cambrian.

Protactinocerida is a proposed order of Late Cambrian nautiloid cephalopods. Their fossils have only been found in the Late Cambrian of North China, a diversity pattern similar to other early cephalopod orders.

Yanhecerida is a small order of Late Cambrian nautiloid cephalopods. They were similar to the more diverse Plectronocerida and Ellesmerocerida, with short shells, closely spaced septa, and diaphragms (partitions) within the siphuncle. Their most distinctive trait is the conical shape of the diaphragms, similar to the endocones which characterize the later nautiloid order Endocerida. While some authors have argued that Yanhecerida should be lumped into Ellesmerocerida, a phylogenetic analysis has maintained that Yanhecerida is a valid clade of early cephalopods closely related to a paraphyletic Ellesmerocerida.

References

  1. 1 2 Dzik, J. (1981). "Origin of the cephalopoda" (PDF). Acta Palaeontologica Toe. 26 (2): 161–191.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Kröger, B.; Yun-bai, Y. B. (2009). "Pulsed cephalopod diversification during the Ordovician". Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. 273 (3–4): 174–201. Bibcode:2009PPP...273..174K. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2008.12.015.
  3. ↑ Begtson, Stefan (1970). "The Lower Cambrian fossil Tommotia". Lethaia. 3 (4): 363–392. Bibcode:1970Letha...3..363B. doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.1970.tb00829.x.
  4. ↑ Landing, Ed; Kröger, Björn (2009). "The Oldest Cephalopods from East Laurentia". Journal of Paleontology. 83 (1): 123–127. Bibcode:2009JPal...83..123L. doi:10.1666/08-078R.1. S2CID   128877531.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 Clarke, M.R.; Trueman, E.R., eds. (1988). "Main features of cephalopod evolution". The Mollusca. Vol. 12: Palaeontology and Neontology of Cephalopods. Orlando, Fla.: Acad. Pr. ISBN   978-0-12-751412-3.
  6. ↑ Giribet, G.; Okusu, A, A.; Lindgren, A.R., A. R.; Huff, S.W., S. W.; Schrödl, M, M.; Nishiguchi, M.K., M. K. (May 2006). "Evidence for a clade composed of molluscs with serially repeated structures: monoplacophorans are related to chitons". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 103 (20): 7723–7728. Bibcode:2006PNAS..103.7723G. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0602578103 . PMC   1472512 . PMID   16675549.
  7. ↑ Sumner-Rooney, Lauren H.; Schrödl, Michael; Lodde-Bensch, Eva; Lindberg, David R.; Heß, Martin; Brennan, Gerard P.; Sigwart, Julia D. (2015). "A neurophylogenetic approach provides new insight to the evolution of Scaphopoda: A neurophylogenetic approach in Scaphopoda". Evolution & Development. 17 (6): 337–346. doi:10.1111/ede.12164. PMID   26487042. S2CID   37343813.
  8. ↑ Lemche, H.; Wingstrand, K.G. (1959). "The anatomy of Neopilina galatheaeLemche, 1957 (Mollusca, Tryblidiacea)" (Link to free full text + plates). Galathea Rep. 3: 9–73.
  9. 1 2 3 Wingstrand, K.G. (1985). "On the anatomy and relationships of recent Monoplacophora" (Link to free full text + plates). Galathea Rep. 16: 7–94.
  10. 1 2 3 4 Boyle, Peter; Rodhouse, Paul (2005). "Origin and Evolution". Cephalopods. p. 36. doi:10.1002/9780470995310.ch3. ISBN   978-0-470-99531-0.
  11. 1 2 3 Kröger, Björn (2007). "Some lesser known features of the ancient Cephalopod order Ellesmerocerida (Nautiloidea, Cephalopoda)". Palaeontology. 50 (3): 565–572. Bibcode:2007Palgy..50..565K. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4983.2007.00644.x .
  12. 1 2 Majewske, Otto P. (1974). Recognition of invertebrate fossil fragments in rocks and thin sections. Leiden, Netherlands: E.J. Brill. p. 76 – via Google Books.
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Webers, G.F.; Yochelson, E.L. (1989). Crame, J.A. (ed.). "Origins and Evolution of the Antarctic Biota". Geological Society of London, Special Publications. Late Cambrian molluscan faunas and the origin of the Cephalopoda. 47 (1): 29. Bibcode:1989GSLSP..47...29W. doi:10.1144/GSL.SP.1989.047.01.04. S2CID   128682549.
  14. 1 2 Chen, J.Y.; Teichert, C. (1983). "Cambrian cephalopods". Geology. 11 (11): 647–650. Bibcode:1983Geo....11..647J. doi:10.1130/0091-7613(1983)11<647:CC>2.0.CO;2. ISSN   0091-7613.
  15. ↑ Kröger, B.R.; Vinther, J.; Fuchs, D. (2011). "Cephalopod origin and evolution: A congruent picture emerging from fossils, development and molecules". BioEssays. 33 (8): 602–613. doi:10.1002/bies.201100001. PMID   21681989. S2CID   2767810.
  16. ↑ Brock, G.A. (2004). "A new species of Tannuella (Helcionellida, Mollusca) from the Early Cambrian of South Australia". Association of Australasian Palaeontologists Memoirs. 30: 133–143. hdl:1959.14/41429. ISSN   0810-8889.
  17. ↑ Yochelson, Ellis L.; Flower, Rousseau H.; Webers, Gerald F. (1973). "The bearing of the new Late Cambrian monoplacophoran genus Knightoconus upon the origin of the Cephalopoda". Lethaia. 6 (3): 275. Bibcode:1973Letha...6..275Y. doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.1973.tb01199.x.
  18. 1 2 3 Holland, C.H. (1987). "The nautiloid cephalopods: A strange success". Journal of the Geological Society. President's anniversary address 1986. 144 (1): 1–15. Bibcode:1987JGSoc.144....1H. doi:10.1144/gsjgs.144.1.0001. S2CID   128629737.
  19. ↑ Wells, M.J.; O'Dor, R.K. (July 1991). "Jet Propulsion and the Evolution of the Cephalopods". Bulletin of Marine Science. 49 (1): 419–432.
  20. ↑ Boyle, Peter; Rodhouse, Paul (2004). Cephalopods: Ecology and fisheries. Ames, Iowa: Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470995310.ch2. ISBN   978-0-632-06048-1.
  21. 1 2 3 4 Kröger, B.R.; Servais, T.; Zhang, Y.; Kosnik, M. (2009). Kosnik, Matthew (ed.). "The Origin and Initial Rise of Pelagic Cephalopods in the Ordovician". PLOS ONE. 4 (9): e7262. Bibcode:2009PLoSO...4.7262K. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007262 . PMC   2749442 . PMID   19789709.
  22. ↑ Smith, Martin R.; Caron, Jean-Bernard (2010-05-01). "Primitive soft-bodied cephalopods from the Cambrian". Nature. 465 (7297): 469–472. Bibcode:2010Natur.465..469S. doi:10.1038/nature09068. hdl: 1807/32368 . ISSN   0028-0836. PMID   20505727.
  23. ↑ Mazurek, D.; Zatoń, M. (2011). "Is Nectocaris pteryx a cephalopod?". Lethaia. 44: 2–4. Bibcode:2011Letha..44....2M. doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.2010.00253.x.
  24. ↑ Smith, M.R. (2013). "Nectocaridid ecology, diversity and affinity: Early origin of a cephalopod-like body plan". Paleobiology. 39 (2): 291–321. Bibcode:2013Pbio...39..297S. doi:10.1666/12029. S2CID   85744624.
  25. ↑ Mazurek, D.; Zatoń, M. (2011). "Is Nectocaris pteryx a cephalopod?". Lethaia. 44 (1): 2–4. Bibcode:2011Letha..44....2M. doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.2010.00253.x.
  26. ↑ Runnegar, B. (2011). "Once again: Is Nectocaris pteryx a stem-group cephalopod?". Lethaia. 44 (4): 373. Bibcode:2011Letha..44..373R. doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.2011.00296.x.
  27. ↑ Kröger, Björn; Vinther, Jakob; Fuchs, Dirk (August 2011). "Cephalopod origin and evolution: A congruent picture emerging from fossils, development and molecules". BioEssays. 33 (8): 602–613. doi:10.1002/bies.201100001. PMID   21681989. S2CID   2767810.
  28. ↑ Pohle, Alexander; Kröger, Björn; Warnock, Rachel C. M.; King, Andy H.; Evans, David H.; Aubrechtová, Martina; Cichowolski, Marcela; Fang, Xiang; Klug, Christian (December 2022). "Early cephalopod evolution clarified through Bayesian phylogenetic inference". BMC Biology. 20 (1): 88. doi: 10.1186/s12915-022-01284-5 . ISSN   1741-7007. PMC   9008929 . PMID   35421982.
  29. ↑ Hildenbrand, Anne; Austermann, Gregor; Fuchs, Dirk; Bengtson, Peter; Stinnesbeck, Wolfgang (2021). "A potential cephalopod from the early Cambrian of eastern Newfoundland, Canada". Communications Biology. 4 (1): 388. doi:10.1038/s42003-021-01885-w. PMC   7987959 . PMID   33758350.
  30. ↑ Landing, Ed; Kröger, Björn; Westrop, Stephen R.; Geyer, Gerd (2023-01-12). "Proposed Early Cambrian cephalopods are chimaeras, the oldest known cephalopods are 30 m.y. younger". Communications Biology. 6 (1): 32. doi:10.1038/s42003-022-04383-9. ISSN   2399-3642. PMC   9837193 . PMID   36635404.
  31. ↑ Lipps, J.H.; Sylvester, A.G. (1 March 1968). "The enigmatic Cambrian fossil Volborthella and its occurrence in California". Journal of Paleontology. 42 (2): 329–336. ISSN   0022-3360. JSTOR   1302218.
  32. ↑ Signor, P.W.; Ryan, D.A. (1993). "Lower Cambrian fossil Volborthella: The whole truth or just a piece of the beast?". Geology. 21 (9): 805. Bibcode:1993Geo....21..805S. doi:10.1130/0091-7613(1993)021<0805:LCFVTW>2.3.CO;2.
  33. ↑ Hagadorn, J.W.; Waggoner, B.M. (2002). "The Early Cambrian problematic fossil Volborthella: New insights from the Basin and Range". In Corsetti, F.A. (ed.). Proterozoic-Cambrian of the Great Basin and Beyond, Pacific Section (PDF). SEPM Book. Vol. 93. Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM). pp. 135–150. Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 October 2008. Retrieved 1 June 2010.
  34. 1 2 Stinchcomb, B. L. (1980). "New Information on Late Cambrian Monoplacophora Hypseloconus and Shelbyoceras (Mollusca)". Journal of Paleontology. 54 (1): 45–49. JSTOR   1304159.
  35. 1 2 3 Kluessendorf, J.; Doyle, P. (2000). "Pohlsepia Mazonensis, an Early 'Octopus' from the Carboniferous of Illinois, USA". Palaeontology. 43 (5): 919. Bibcode:2000Palgy..43..919K. doi: 10.1111/1475-4983.00155 .
  36. 1 2 3 Whalen, Christopher D.; Landman, Neil H. (2022-03-08). "Fossil coleoid cephalopod from the Mississippian Bear Gulch Lagerstätte sheds light on early vampyropod evolution". Nature Communications. 13 (1): 1107. Bibcode:2022NatCo..13.1107W. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28333-5. ISSN   2041-1723. PMC   8904582 . PMID   35260548.
  37. ↑ Dzik, Jerzy (2010). "Brachiopod identity of the alleged monoplacophoran ancestors of cephalopods" (PDF). Malacologia. 52 (1): 97–113. doi:10.4002/040.052.0107. S2CID   85622212.
  38. ↑ Landing, E.; Kröger, B. (2012). "Cephalopod ancestry and ecology of the hyolith Allatheca degeeri s.l. in the Cambrian evolutionary radiation". Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. 353–355: 21–30. Bibcode:2012PPP...353...21L. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.06.023.
  39. ↑ Moysiuk, J.; Smith, M.R.; Caron, J.-B. (2017). "Hyoliths are Palaeozoic lophophorates" (PDF). Nature. 541 (7637): 394–397. Bibcode:2017Natur.541..394M. doi:10.1038/nature20804. PMID   28077871. S2CID   4409157.
  40. ↑ Kröger, Björn (2006). "Early growth-stages and classification of orthoceridan Cephalopods of the Darriwillian (Middle Ordovician) of Baltoscandia". Lethaia. 39 (2): 129–139. Bibcode:2006Letha..39..129K. doi:10.1080/00241160600623749. Archived from the original on 2012-10-20.
  41. 1 2 3 Young, R. E.; Vecchione, M.; Donovan, D. T. (1998). "The evolution of coleoid cephalopods and their present biodiversity and ecology". South African Journal of Marine Science. 20: 393–420. doi:10.2989/025776198784126287.
  42. 1 2 3 4 Wilbur, Karl M.; Trueman, E.R.; Clarke, M.R., eds. (1985), The Mollusca, vol. 11. Form and Function, New York: Academic Press, ISBN   0-12-728702-7
  43. ↑ Klug, Christian; Landman, Neil H.; Fuchs, Dirk; Mapes, Royal H.; Pohle, Alexander; Guériau, Pierre; Reguer, Solenn; Hoffmann, René (2019-07-31). "Anatomy and evolution of the first Coleoidea in the Carboniferous". Communications Biology. 2 (1): 280. doi:10.1038/s42003-019-0523-2. ISSN   2399-3642. PMC   6668408 . PMID   31372519.
  44. ↑ Klug, Christian; Stevens, Kevin; Hoffmann, René; Zatoń, Michał; Clements, Thomas; Košťák, Martin; Weis, Robert; De Baets, Kenneth; Lehmann, Jens; Vinther, Jakob; Fuchs, Dirk (2023-12-07). "Revisiting the identification of Syllipsimopodi bideni and timing of the decabrachian-octobrachian divergence". Nature Communications. 14 (1): 8094. Bibcode:2023NatCo..14.8094K. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-42842-x. ISSN   2041-1723. PMC   10703834 . PMID   38062003.
  45. 1 2 3 Shigeno, S.; Sasaki, T.; Moritaki, T.; Kasugai, T.; Vecchione, M.; Agata, K. (2008). "Evolution of the cephalopod head complex by assembly of multiple molluscan body parts: Evidence from Nautilus embryonic development". Journal of Morphology. 269 (1): 1–17. doi:10.1002/jmor.10564. PMID   17654542. S2CID   13109195.
  46. ↑ Kear, A.J.; Briggs, D.E.G.; Donovan, D.T. (1995). "Decay and fossilization of non-mineralized tissue in coleoid cephalopods" (PDF). Palaeontology. 38 (1): 105–132. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 September 2011. Retrieved 21 April 2009.
  47. ↑ Briggs, D.E.G.; Kear, A.J.; Martill, D.M.; Wilby, P.R. (1993). "Phosphatization of soft-tissue in experiments and fossils". Journal of the Geological Society. 150 (6): 1035–1038. Bibcode:1993JGSoc.150.1035B. doi:10.1144/gsjgs.150.6.1035. S2CID   130195674.
  48. ↑ Allison, P.A. (1987). "A new cephalopod with soft parts from the Upper Carboniferous Francis Creek Shale of Illinois, USA". Lethaia. 20 (78): 117–121. Bibcode:1987Letha..20..117A. doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.1987.tb02028.x.[ permanent dead link ]
  49. ↑ Etches, S.; Clarke, J.; Callomon, J. (2009). "Ammonite eggs and ammonitellae from the Kimmeridge Clay Formation (Upper Jurassic) of Dorset, England". Lethaia. 42 (2): 204–217. Bibcode:2009Letha..42..204E. doi:10.1111/j.1502-3931.2008.00133.x.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.