Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
  Journal of Paleontology   Signup for GSW Email News
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Journal of Paleontology; September 2002; v. 76; no. 5; p. 882-891; DOI: 10.1666/0022-3360(2002)076<0882:IPFR>2.0.CO;2
© 2002 Paleontological Society
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by KNAUST, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

ICHNOGENUS PHOLEUS FIEGE, 1944, REVISITED

DIRK KNAUST1

1 A/S Norske Shell, Exploration & Production, Postboks 40, N-4098 Tananger, Norway, dirk.knaust{at}shell.no

The ichnogenus Pholeus Fiege, 1944, is a common constituent of the Lower Muschelkalk (Middle Triassic) carbonates of the Germanic Basin, where it occurs in the upper part of shallowing upward cycles. It is restricted to a marly limestone lithofacies and is commonly associated with omission and erosion surfaces. The dwelling structures (domichnia) were created in a shallow-marine to lagoonal paleoenvironment in an intertidal to shallow subtidal setting. New material from Thuringia and Lower Saxony makes a re-evaluation of Pholeus possible and confirms the validity of this ichnogenus. Certain features, such as general form, wall, lining, and branching differentiate it from similar trace fossils. In addition to the already described P. abomasoformis, three new ichnospecies are named for distinctive forms: P. bifurcatus, P. platiformis, and P. elongatus. Based on geometry, size, and wall lining, the burrow producers were most probably decapod crustaceans. Many similarities to modern burrows of Callianassa sp., Neocallichirus grandimina, and Nephrops norvegicus suggest thalassinian shrimps and lobsters as likely tracemakers of Pholeus burrows. Compound burrow systems and retrusive burrow parts with spreiten-like structures are common and point to an upward shifting of the burrows related to certain sediment input in relation to tidal currents.







JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Paleontological Society