Lithostromation perdurum


Ancestry: Coccolithophores -> Nannolith families inc sed -> Lithostromationaceae -> Lithostromation -> Lithostromation perdurum
Sister taxa: L. biconvexitas, L. operosum, L. perdurum, L. simplex, L. sp., T. martinii,

Short diagnosis: Large, triangular nannoliths with porous structure formed from small crystallites.


Taxonomy:

Citation: Lithostromation perdurum Deflandre, 1942
Rank: Species
Variants:
Synonyms:
The following two species appear to be simply preservational forms of L. perdurum 

Farinacci & Howe catalog pages: Lithostromation deflandrei Lezaud * Lithostromation perdurum * Lithostromation reticulum * Lithostromation robustum * Lithostromation triangularis *

Short diagnosis: Large, triangular nannoliths with porous structure formed from small crystallites.


Morphology remarks: " L. perdurum has a triangular body which thickens toward its center. The irregular, knobby surface is covered with numerous, circular depressions. Each depression is surrounded by a hexagonal, knobby ridge. There are no discernible crystal elements. The structure of the species is similar to Lithostromation simplex (Klumpp) and Lithostromation operosum (Deflandre), but has a triangular outline, while the others have hexagonal and circular outlines respectively." [Bybell 1975]

Ecology & Biogeography: Typically confined to epicontinental areas.

Search data:
TagsLITHS: nannolith-radiate, rosette-shaped, triangular,
CSPH: not known, V-UNITS: all, R-UNITS: none, DETAILS: 1ou,
MetricsLith size: 10->15µm; Segments: 3->3;
Sources: lith size from ODs & illustrated specimens
The morphological data given here can be used on the advanced search page. See also these notes

Geological Range:
Notes: In discussion on the nanofossil listserver Varol suggested that if a tight species concept was applied then L. perdurum does not occur below the Lower Miocene
Last occurrence (top): within NN19 zone (0.44-1.93Ma, top in Ionian stage). Data source: Mike Styzen (comment on original Nannotax website)
First occurrence (base): within NP16 zone (40.40-42.87Ma, base in Lutetian stage). Data source: unpublished database of Laurel Byell (data provided by Jean Self-Trail)

Plot of occurrence data:

References:

Baldi-Beke, M., (1960). Magyarorszagi miocen Coccolithophoridak retegtani jelentosege [Die stratigraphische Bedeutung miozaner Coccolithophoren aus Ungarn]. Foldt Kozl, 90: 213-223.

Bybell, L., (1975). Middle Eocene calcareous naannofossils at Little Stave Creek, Alabama. Tulane Studies in Geology and Paleontology, 11(4): 177-247.

Deflandre, G., (1942). Coccolithophoridés fossiles d'Oranie. Genres Scyphosphaera Lohmann et Thorosphaera Ostenfeld. Société d'Histoire Naturelle de Toulouse; Bulletin, 77: 125-137.

Gardet, M., (1955). Contribution à l'étude des coccolithes des terrains néogènes de l'Algérie. Publications du Service de la Carte Géologique de l'Algérie (Nouvelle Série), 5: 477-550.

Lezaud, L., (1968). Espèces nouvelles de nannofossiles calcaires (Coccolithopohridés) d'Aquitaine sud-ouest. Revue de Micropaleontologie, 2(1): 22-28.

Martini, E., (1961). Nannoplankton aus dem Tertiär und der obersten Kreide von SW-Frankreich. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 42: 1-32.

Varol, O., (1984). New Neogene calcareous nannofossil taxa from Malta and southern Turkey. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie Monatshefte, 6: 375-384.


nannotaxlogo400px

Lithostromation perdurum compiled by Jeremy R. Young, Paul R. Bown, Jacqueline A. Lees viewed: 19-10-2017

Taxon Search:
Advanced Search
AphiaID: not found
Go to Archive.is to create a permanent copy of this page - citation notes



Comments (1)

Sort By
Page 1 of 1
 
Gravatar
Mike Styzen (Noble Energy, US)
This taxon is used as a Pleistocene biostratigraphic marker in the Gulf of Mexico. I have heard it works other places as well. This utility is generally better in shelf areas (paleobathymetry of Outer Neritic or shallower) although it is often seen in material from below the stratigraphic top. It can be quite common in shallow water sediments. The placement of this marker is somewhat problematic. On my published GOM chart I place it just below the top of C. macintyrei. I've seen others place it just above that horizon. This may depend more on how C. macintyrei is picked than on reasons of diachronaity (is that a word?)...
Gravatar
Jean Self-Trail (USGS, US)
I've recorded L. perdurum from middle Eocene sediments (NP15) and I checked Laurel's database and she has it recorded from NP16. These samples typically represent middle to outer neritic water depths.
Gravatar
Mitch Covington (BugWare, US)
I'm pretty sure I've seen it down there as well... but the bug is so spotty down there its base is useless -- at least in the GoM.
Gravatar
Mike Styzen (Noble Energy, US)
Part of the problem may be that in older material we are looking at deep water. Up in the Plio/Pleistocene we looked at a lot of shelf wells.
Gravatar
Jeremy Young (NHM, UK)
So that places the top occurrence in the early Pleistocene, any idea how far down it goes?
Gravatar
Mike Styzen (Noble Energy, US)
As I recall, I've seen it in Paleogene material. If it prefers shallow water settings throughout it's range as it appears to at the top, it may be necessary to look at sediment from shallower facies than we are used to working with for that answer.
Gravatar
Mike Styzen (Noble Energy, US)
Bybell, L.M. 1975. Middle Eocene calcareous nannofossils at Little Stave Creek, Alabama. Tulane Stud.Geol. Paleontol., 11 (4) Plate 19 figure 6
Gravatar
Mitch Covington (BugWare, US)
I'm pretty sure that what I saw down there was L. perdurum, not L. operosum. If my concept is correct, L. operosum is comparatively round, where L. perdurum is triangular (though can have some \bulging"on the sides). It's been a long time, but I'm pretty sure I could recognize both back then. Valid question, of course! Thanks for the discussion"""
Page 1 of 1
 

Add Comment

* Required information
1000
Captcha Image
Powered by Commentics