Recent Comments

This page gives a list of the comments on the site, sorted by date. So you can use it to see what has been discussed recently - to join in follow the link on any comment and add another comment on that page. Use the forum page for discussion of the site and general nanno stuff

Discoaster septemradiatus by Ines Galovic (2020-12-01)
Shouldn't it be a part of D. deflandrei group, if it differs from D. deflandrei in the number of rays?

Discoaster septemradiatus by Jeremy Young (2020-12-01)
Hi Ines. The nodifer group here is for Palaeogene species and the deflandrei group for Early Neogene ones, so septemradiatus needs to be in the nodifer group. The Pleogene/Miocene divide makes sense because during the Oligocene typically D. deflandrei is the only species present. - but there are some vey similar morphologies in the two groups and indeed deflandrei itself ranges from the Eocene. Je

Discoaster moorei by Michael Styzen (2020-11-19)
None of those photos above look like what I would call Disaster moorei. the photos on the right and left are symmetrical, probably 5 rayed D. deflandrei, and the one in the center is overgrown to the point I' wouldn't use it. Look at the photo on page 475 of Perch Nielsen in Plankton Stratigraphy if you want a better idea of what it really should look like.

Calyculus by Micaela Chaumeil Rodríguez (2020-11-17)
Dear Jeremy,. The original diagnosis of Calyculus and Calyculus cribum is in Noël D., 1972 not 1973.. In the Farinacci & Howe catalog the genus and the species author appears as Noël, 1972.. The publication is the same for L. barozii (I have sent a comment about it a minute ago).. Kind regards,. Mica

Lotharingius barozii by Micaela Chaumeil Rodríguez (2020-11-17)
Dear Jeremy,. I have been checking the literature and the original diagnosis of L. barozii is in Noël D., 1972 not 1973.. In the Farinacci & Howe catalog the species appears as L. barozzi Noël, 1972. The manuscript was déposé in July 1972 but the bulletin impression finished in May 1973. Unfortunately, is almost impossible to find it using that year (1973) as reference.. I have noticed tha

forum by Tatiana Tsagaraki (2020-11-02)
Thank you, I missed those, sorry! It's fine to post the pictures yes, just for reference this sample was from 50m depth and taken between Madeira and the Gibraltar straights in May 2019

forum by Tatiana Tsagaraki (2020-11-02)
Hello, Just been through the pictures on the webpage but can't find something that gets me closer to figuring out what this is. Any ideas?. Many thanks!

forum by Jeremy Young (2020-11-02)
Tatiana . That is a fairly well known undescribed Syracosphaera species - it is on here as . Syracosphaera sp. A. . Those are lovely images, it is ok if I post them on the relevant page. I'll also put you in touch via email with someone who else who has some images and is describing the species. . Jeremy

forum by Karine Leblanc (2020-10-14)
Thanks for your response! I'll try to investigate on the foram side...Cheers

forum by Karine Leblanc (2020-10-14)
dear all, . I have an identification quizz for you all. I found this in the subtropical Pacific Ocean (near Tonga volcano ridge) in a sediment trap moored at -170 m. It looks like calcite and was found in a sample with a large amount of coccolithophores (at least 25 different species). I was wondering whether this perfect ice cream cone could be a coccolith or something that you already stumbled u

forum by Jeremy Young (2020-10-14)
Karine . That is definitely not a coccolith but it certainly is nice. I agree it looks calcareous and I suspect it might be the proloculus (first chamber) of a very small foram - it has both a terminal aperture and pores on the shell. There are some microfossil groups on facebok which might help with an identification. . Jeremy

Euchitonia elegans/furcata group by Mohsen Kariminia (2020-09-28)
Hello,. E. furcata is extant. I am seeing within surface samples of GoM. Also: please see thanks,. Mo

Euchitonia elegans/furcata group by Jeremy Young (2020-09-28)
Thanks for the correction - I have changed that now and added Nigirini & Moore 1979 as the source of the data. Obviously the site is under development but it is good if you are finding it useful.. Jeremy

Biscutum grande by Micaela Chaumeil Rodríguez (2020-08-24)
Dear Jeremy,. In References the citacion for van Heck should be:. van Heck, S. E. (1990). The ICBN: Things you need to know -1. INA Newsletter. 12(1): 19.. Best regards,. Mica

Biscutum grande by Jeremy Young (2020-08-25)
Mica - sorry for that and thank you for working out. I have corrected it now.. Jeremy

Ethmorhabdus crucifer by Micaela Chaumeil Rodríguez (2020-08-18)
Dear Jeremy,. The original description of this species is in Noël, 1972 (Nannofossiles calcaires de sédiments jurassiques finement laminés. Bull. Mus. Nat. Hist. Natur.,. 3e sér., n° 75, pp. 95-156). Citation would be: Ethmorhabdus crucifer Noël, 1972. Kind regards,. Mica

Ethmorhabdus crucifer by Jeremy Young (2020-08-25)
Thanks Mica and I have corrected that now. Strictly though the correct publication date is 1973, even though the cover date on the article is 1972.. Jeremy

Retecapsa incompta by Micaela Chaumeil Rodríguez (2020-08-14)
Dear Jeremny,. I found the original description of R. incompta in Bown & Cooper, 1989b (page 92)(New calcareous nannofssils from the Jurassic. Journal of Micropalaeontology. 8: 91-96).. I checked both publications made by Bown in 1987 and Retecapsa is not mentioned.. So the citation would be: Retecapsa incompta Bown & Cooper, 1989. Kind regards,. Mica

Retecapsa incompta by Jeremy Young (2020-08-14)
Hi Michaela . Thank you for pointing out that mistake -and I have corrected it now. Please do let me know if you spot any more mistakes or omissions.. Jeremy

Silicoflagellates by Genoveva Esteban (2020-07-26)
Stunning images. How can I use two of them in a book that I am writing? Please, could you email me so that I can give you further details? Thank you

Biscutum harrisonii by Jean Self-Trail (2020-06-30)
Jeremy, you say that Jiang & Gartner 1986 called B. harrisonii by the name B. panis. They actually made a new combination of Markalius panis

Biscutum harrisonii by Jeremy Young (2020-06-30)
Hi Jean . Thanks for pointing out that mistake. It took a bit of searching but the combination was in fact proposed in a plate caption in Edwards & Perch-Nielsen 1975. I have updated the page now but what do you think, is there just one Danian Biscutum with a small central area - and what should it be called?. Jeremy

Calcicalathina erbae by Roque Aguado (2020-06-18)
Hi Jeremy. The paper by Aguado et al., was accepted for publication 18-10-1999 and was published as part of the volume 21, first issue of 2000, in Cretaceous Research (see snapshot 1). The online documentation (see snapshots 2 and 3) says that this was published in February 2000 (although probably the paper was available online prior to this date). Cretaceous Research is a reputed journal, and I h

Ceratolithus armatus by Arindam Chakraborty (2020-06-17)
If C. armatus has two months priority than C. acutus then why in the Standard Zonation chart in mentions C. acutus. Same applies for C. cristatus as C. rugosus is the over grown form of C. cristatus (Bergen 1984). . Please let me know which must be used as per the nannotax database. . This is really a hard thing to combine in a biostrat table.

Ceratolithus armatus by Jeremy Young (2020-06-17)
Hi Arindam. The reason for this discrepancy is that the chart is taken straight form TimeScaleCreator not created by me and there is some bad taxonomy still on the chart - will add a note to the chart page. Almost everyone now agrees C. rugosus is junior synonym of C. cristatus so i woulstronly advise never house that name. C. acutus vs C. armatus is more controversial as some people argue that th

Calcicalathina erbae by Roque Aguado (2020-06-15)
Hi all,. Recently, one of my colleagues gave me an indication regarding the validity of the Calcicalathina erbae/praeoblongata specific names.. As currently indicated in the nannotax page, the name erbae takes precedence over praeoblongata (synonym), as the first of them was published earlier. The apparent publication dates of C. erbae and C. praeoblongata were respectively 1998 and 2000. However,

Calcicalathina erbae by Jeremy Young (2020-06-17)
Hi Roque - that sounds reasonable it is quite clear in the ICN that it is the actual publication date not the cover date which is used to determine priority. However, do you know for sure when the actual publication of the Cretaceous Res issue was?. Jeremy

Ericsonia robusta by Alessandro Menini (2020-06-03)
Hi Jeremy. I think that in the notes and discussion there's a mistake, since large forms (> 9 micron and not >6 micron) last occur in NP9.. Alessandro

Ericsonia robusta by Jeremy Young (2020-06-05)
thanks Alessandro, I have corrected that. Jeremy

Chiasmolithus oamaruensis by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2020-06-03)
Complete name of this species should be Chiasmolithus oamaruensis (Deflandre in Deflandre and Fert, 1954) Hay et al., 1966, to keep nannotax style.

Chiasmolithus oamaruensis by Jeremy Young (2020-06-05)
yes - indeed. I've changed that now, thanks Jeremy

Coccolithus eopelagicus by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2020-05-31)
I think the combination to Coccolithus eopelagicus in Bramlette and Sullivan (1961) is not valid. The only mention of C. eopelagicus in the paper is when they are describing the new sp. Coccolithus staurion (page 141). Some paragraphs above they state that Tremalithus is a paragenus, and unnecesary, but they don´t make a proper emendation for the genus Coccolithus anyway.

Coccolithus eopelagicus by Jeremy Young (2020-06-05)
Hi Juan Pablo - I think you right here. The prime source for combinations are the Loeblich & Tappan indices and their continuation in the INA Newsletter. However, here I think they are ni error. Loeblich & Tappan 1966 indicate that the combination Coccolithus eopelagicus (Bramlette & Riedel, 1954) Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961 is valid, but they cite it as being established on page 14

Reticulofenestra stavensis by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2020-05-30)
Thanks Jeremy. It looks like that mistake was replicated in several papers, because they cite the one from Revista Española.. Cheers,. Juan

Reticulofenestra stavensis by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2020-05-30)
The last proper recombination I found for this taxon is: . 1998. Dictyococcites stavensis (Levin and Joerger) Varol, p. 218, pl. 7.2, fig. 5. . in the Black book, but I think Dictyococcitesis a synonim of Reticulofenestra

Reticulofenestra stavensis by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2020-05-30)
I checked in Varol (1989) for the recombination to Reticulofenestra and is not there... I look for the author in other taxonomic works and everybody cites Varol (1989), but there is no recombination of this species in that paper.. Could it be possible that there is no proper recombination to Reticulofenestra stavensis according to the ICBN??. Varol, O. (1989b). Eocene calcareous nannofossils from

Reticulofenestra stavensis by Jeremy Young (2020-05-30)
Hi Juan . My mistake the wrong paper was cited here - there four Varol 1989 papers and keeping track of which one is which is always a problem. The correct citation is Varol, O. (1989a). Calcareous nannofossil study of the central and western Solomon Islands. Circum-Pacific Council for Energy and Mineral Resources Earth Sciences. 239-268. There are a few other new species and combinations in that

Prinsius tenuiculus by Jeremy Young (2020-05-26)
thanks yes - ' ve added that now - although the taxonomy will be discussed more in a later paper. Jeremy

Prinsius tenuiculus by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2020-05-26)
Could you provide the reference for Alvarez et al (2019)? Thanks!

Prinsius bisulcus by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2020-05-26)
The correct name shouldn´t be: Prinsius bisulcus (Stradner in Gohrbandt, 1963) Hay and Mohler, 1967. ?

Prinsius bisulcus by Jeremy Young (2020-05-26)
very true - well both are correct: Prinsius bisulcus (Stradner in Gohrbandt, 1963) Hay and Mohler, 1967 or Prinsius bisulcus (Stradner 1963) Hay and Mohler, 1967 . but it is more useful to include the in Gohrbandt information and that is our standard practice on nannotax, so I will add that. . thanks Jeremy

Comment guidelines by Mohsen Kariminia (2020-05-11)
Hello there, Using Mikrotax for plank forams , I was not aware there is Rad Mikrotax. So happy to know it is happening now. I am so interested to help the working group and Please let me know if I can be any of help.

Hayesites sp. by Roque Aguado (2020-03-30)
Hi all!. I think the image named "CovingtonWise_pl14-6.jpg", now included in Hayesites sp. looks more as one of the detached calices of Retecapsa angustiforata. It has a larger size and slender arms than H. irregularis and H. albiensis. Also, this image shows eight arms, as the detached calices of R. angustiforata (known as R. radiata by some authors).

Hayesites sp. by Jeremy Young (2020-03-30)
agreed. Strangely in the original paper they have both its specimen and "Rucinolithus? radiatus" specimens from the same sample on the same plate and the only obvious difference is that the "Hayesites sp." specimen is more heavily calcified/overgrown. Anyway I will move the image. . as ever thank you for the input - the more anomalies we remove the better.. Jeremy

rads-forum by Maria Sandoval (2020-03-13)
Is it possible to have an idea of the species ranges by latitude zonation, for example : age ranges of D.violina in the tropical region?

Hexastylidae by Peter A. Cejchan (2020-02-29)
†family Hexastylidae Haeckel 1881 (radiolarian)

Hexastylidae by Jeremy Young (2020-02-29)
Thanks - obviously this is all at an early stage but corrections are very welcome. I have now changed the page.. Jeremy Young

Hexastylidae by Peter A. Cejchan (2020-02-29)
†family Hexastylidae Haeckel 1881 (radiolarian)

forum by Roque Aguado (2020-02-27)
Hi,. I don't know if this was a mistake. I think the fourth (otherwise of excellent quality) picture placed under Hayesites irregularis (named KCooper-Rucinolithus irregularis.jpg) in the nannotax website probably is more compatible with the description of Hayesites albiensis. The specimen appering in this picture has a marked stellate and regular outline having only six long rays.. Cheers,. R

forum by Jeremy Young (2020-02-27)
Hi Roque, . yes, you are right, in terms of the species concepts outlined here this specimen clearly ought to be in albiensis, I have transferred the image. . thanks Jeremy. NB If you are commenting on an image it is easiest if you add the comment on the bottom of the taxon page the image is on.

Cylindralithus sculptus by Roque Aguado (2020-02-05)
Hi all,. I think one of the specimens figured in nannotax as Cylindralithus sculptus (identified as Burnett1998-6-04-27.jpg, from Mississippi, USA; image 7) is misidentified, and most probably it is a top view of Perchnielsenella stradneri (note the completely filled central diaphragm and the curved elements of the periphery).. Cheers.

Cylindralithus sculptus by Jeremy Young (2020-02-10)
Roque - thanks for the comment. I am not an expert on this group, in fact I find them rather confusing. I see what you mean, but I will ask Jackie Lees to comment on this. . NB I have moved your comment to the C. sculptus page as it is easiest to have comment on the page they refer to (they also get shown on the recent comments page so they do not just get hidden). Jeremy

Cylindralithus sculptus by Jackie Lees (2020-02-10)
Hey, Roque! You're possibly correct on that one image... Both species have high-order birefringence, being thickly calcified, and both have different images depending on which end of the coccolith you're focusing on, so basically, both species are best identified on their side views.. Cheers, Jackie

Cylindralithus sculptus by Jeremy Young (2020-02-23)
I have now moved the image in question to Cylindralithus sp., since we do not have a definitive identification for it.

Cruciplacolithus intermedius by Nicolas Thibault (2020-01-31)
FO C. intermedius is given here within NP2 whereas C. tenuis is given as marker for the base of NP2. These informations may add to the confusion made years ago when the NP zonation was erected, and gives the false impression that FO C. intermedius is younger than FO C. tenuis, when it's actually the other way around. As discussed in Thibault et al. (2018, Rev. micropaléontol.), "The base

Cruciplacolithus intermedius by Jeremy Young (2020-01-31)
Nicholas. Thank you for the comment. On Nannotax we use the zonation from TimeScaleCreator and this uses base C. tenuis as base NP2 and places it within Chron C29n. So, to make it clear that the base of C. intermedius is lower than here I have now recorded it as occurring within NP1 - which is not the way you express it but puts int in the right sequence. I've also added some references to you

Actiniscus by Ines Galovic (2019-10-29)
Please see the records from Miocene to Holocene in the following article: Orr W.N. and Conley S. (1976): Siliceous dinoflagellates in the northeast Pacific rim. Micropaleontology 22/1, 92-99.

Bonetocardiella conoidea extraflexa by Robert W. Scott (2019-10-02)
Identified at seven localities in Texas and Mexico ranging from upper Albian to middle Turonian 100.9 to 90.3 Ma; source: Scott, R.W., 2014, Cretaceous chronostratigraphic database: construction and applications. Carnets de Geologie, v. 14, no. 1, p. 1-13.

Bonetocardiella conoidea extraflexa by Jeremy Young (2019-10-03)
Thanks Robert - the looks like a useful source of data. The precisionstratigraphy,com server does not seem to be responding though.. Jeremy

forum by Ian (2019-07-04)
thanks! That's really useful information. I'll sort some images out for you - might take a while as we have around a thousand frames to go through. We also have map refs and some basic water quality info for each collection site. Drop me an email and I'll send them as zipped download links. The actual project is here - . cheers. Ian

forum by Ian (2019-07-04)
Hi. We're looking at samples of freshwater collected for us by school groups, we're actually looking for viruses under TEM but we as hard pellet ( 200K RCF ) after a 6 micron filter we get everything and we're pulling out a lot of what look like coccoliths. I can't find much information on fresh water species but we have structures resembling Palusphaera and others. Are there any r

forum by Jeremy Young (2019-07-04)
Ian Thanks for posting that image. Those are not coccoliths but non-calcified scales. Actually quite a few different protists use scales to form composite exoskeletons and these are variously formed of resistant organics, silica or calcite (coccoliths). I am not an expert on these groups but I think your images are of Paraphysomonas and if you do a google search on that it should get results. i w

forum by Chengxu Zhou (2019-06-25)
Dear Dr.Young, . Thank you very much for your reply. I will try to contact Dr.Probert.. Chengxu

forum by Chengxu Zhou (2019-06-25)
Dear Dr. Young,. Thank you very much!. Chengxu

forum by Chengxu Zhou (2019-06-23)
Dear Professor Young, . I am working on several strains of the species of genus Pleurochrysis (I found the name has been changed to Chrysotila). These strains were isolated from aquaculture pool and bloomed in shrimp pools. The bloom did harm to the organisms. However, I am not quite sure what the exact name of the species is. Could I email you some of the SEM pictures and please help me to ident

forum by Jeremy Young (2019-06-23)
Dear Chengxu Zhou. Thank you for sending those images (I have unblocked the upload of them). I think they are, C. pseudoroscoffensis, but I am not an expert on this group of coccolithophores. You might like to try to contact Ian Probert of Roscoff Marine Lab in France.. Jeremy

Ellipsolithus by Jeremy Young (2019-06-13)
Hi Rui. The generic range is actually an automatic compilation from the specie ranges - and we have E. distichus with a slightly older (but less accurately calibrated) FO than E. macellus, so it is not a typo. .... but if you have a good source for the FO of E. distichus I'll certainly update it.. cheers Jeremy

Ellipsolithus by Rui da Gama (2019-05-17)
In the site herein,. - the range of E. macellus is "First occurrence (base): at base of NP4 zone (0% up, 63.3Ma, in Danian stage). Data source: zonal marker (Perch-Nielsen 1985)". - the range of the genus Ellipsolithus is "First occurrence (base): in upper part of Danian Stage (63% up,63.2Ma, in Danian stage). Data source: Total of range of species in this database". maybe just

Reticulofenestra minuta by Ines Galovic (2019-05-07)
Fig. 01 and 02 of BownNewsam 2017 is much closer to R. producta regarding to (nearly) closed central area as distinguishing feature in original description and I would be placed there. . All best :)

Emiliania huxleyi by Mireille Ghoussoub (2019-05-03)
I am graduate student at the University of Toronto. Myself and my supervisor, Prof. Geoffrey Ozin, are seeking to reproduce an image from the in a book that we are publishing on the topic of CO2 chemistry and climate change.. The manuscript will be published with the University of Toronto Press, Canada's leading academic publisher. We wish to request your permission to reproduce t

Emiliania huxleyi by Jeremy Young (2019-05-06)
HI Mireille. Thanks for asking and yes that should be fine - I will email you directly.. Jeremy

Assipetra terebrodentarius by Fabio Lamm (2019-04-04)
I´m looking for the reference Applegate et al. (2007) cited in:. Assipetra terebrodentarius terebrodentarius Applegate et al. (2007) - small, <8µm. I just found the paper from 1987: Covington, J.M. & Wise, S.W., (1987). Calcareous nannofossil biostratigraphy of a Lower Cretaceous deep-sea fan complex: Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 93 Site 603, lower continental rise off Cape Hatteras. Ini

Assipetra terebrodentarius by Jeremy Young (2019-04-04)
Fabio. Sorry about that there was a typo there and the reference should have been to Applegate et al. in Covington & Wise 1987, There is no Applegate metal 2007 publication -or at least not one which is relevant.. Jeremy

Syracosphaera anthos by jdv (2019-02-21)
Coccosphere size is listed as 10-15 µm but should be 7-13µm (as listed under 'Metrics'/ Cros & Fortuño 2003).

Syracosphaera anthos by Jeremy Young (2019-02-21)
Good point - I have corrected that now, after also checking the imaged specimens.

Gartnerago stenostaurion by Erik Anthonissen (2019-01-28)
Typo: top is in Albian Stage

Gartnerago stenostaurion by Jeremy Young (2019-01-28)
Hi Eric, thanks for pointing that out, but actually it is not a typo but a pain in the arse. The top of zone NC10a/UC0 is just inside the Cenomanian (see Burnett 1998 fig. 6.2 / p.140). The database holds the information that the top of the species occurs within zone NC10a and this is further explained via the auto-generated text "(100.45-103.13Ma, top in Cenomanian stage)". . Jeremy

forum by fatemeh (2019-01-11)
Dear Prof. J.Young. Is it possible to place about "ascidian spicules" or other calcareous nannofossil-liked forms in this site(especially for Jurassic system)?. Regards.

forum by Jeremy Young (2019-01-14)
Hi there is some information on ascidian spicules in the "Other Groups" area - see this page http:// - Jeremy

Neochiastozygus imbriei by Rui da Gama (2018-12-16)
Broad and narrow elliptical forms are herein included as N. imbriei. Also, there seems to be significant variations in size... Could we consider subdividing this group further?

Neochiastozygus imbriei by Jeremy Young (2019-01-14)
Hi Rui - sorry for a slow reply, that is a bit outside my expertise. Personally I have enough problems with the existing taxonomy not to want to encourage splitting further, and the coccospheres from Paul Bown show a lot of coccolith variation which again makes me cautious. Neochiastozygus is an interesting group though, and it would be nice if someone could find some good material and do a detail

Gephyrocapsa caribbeanica by Hanjie (2018-11-20)
Could you tell me whether Gephyrocapsa carribeanica extant or extinct in modern ocean? In this page, I can see the last occurrence of G.caribbeanica was in MIS7. However, the information found from "Farinacci" in the menu bar is like this—Type level: Latest Pliocene-Recent. Which is right?

Gephyrocapsa caribbeanica by Jeremy Young (2018-11-20)
G. caribbeanica is extinct. The information in the type catalog is that given in the original publication (in this case written in 1967) and will often have been improved upon (as in this case). The information in the main database (this page) is the best currently available. See the "about Nannotax" pages for more explanation.. Jeremy

Lithostromation perdurum by Vladimir Musatov (2018-10-12)
In my material (the western coast of the Aral Sea, Uzbekistan) the first appearance of this species is observed immediately after the extinction (Top common) S. gigas.

Lithostromation perdurum by Vladimir Musatov (2018-10-12)
excuse me - C. gigas

Lithostromation perdurum by Jeremy Young (2019-01-14)
Interesting to know that - and it agrees very closely with the range recorded by Bybell/Self-Trail. I have added this data to the page. Jeremy

forum by Shaka (2018-08-16)
Hi,. I'd like to use one of the images of coccolithophores (File name: JRYSEM-207-21a.JPG) for my PhD thesis. Based on the provided info in the "citation&copy right" section of this website, I must ask for permission for the works with publication potential. . Could you grant me such a permission? and if your answer is affirmative, please send me the right reference detail for ci

forum by Jeremy Young (2019-01-14)
I have answered this directly, but for the record this use is fine. In vernal you should include attribution along the lines of image from nannotax website ( image JRYSEM-207-21a.JPG), if the image is being used to illustrate a taxonomic concept (as opposed to just as generic picture of a coccolith) then you should also check the filename and the image metadata (the text

Neococcolithes radiatus by Dave Bord (2018-08-15)
Jeremy, please correct the TOP occurrence.

Neococcolithes radiatus by Jeremy Young (2018-08-16)
oops yes NP177 was a rather unlikely extinction level. Thanks for pointing that out.. Jeremy

Actiniscus pentasterias by Ines Galovic (2018-07-31)
Please see

Actiniscus pentasterias by Jeremy Young (2018-08-08)
thanks - I will add a reference to that paper.

Actiniscus pentasterias by Ines Galovic (2018-07-31)
Please see:

Coccolithus pelagicus subsp. braarudii by Jeremy Young (2018-07-22)
Goncalo. Thanks for the comment and yes I agree with you, if there are large specimens of Coccolithus off Svalbard in the plankton (as opposed to in sediments) then the most likely explanation is that they are unusually large C. pelelgicus spp. pelagicus rather than C. pelagicus ssp. braarudii. The 10µm separation work very well a lot of the time but there certainly are exceptions and complicatio

Reticulofenestra sp. by Ines Galovic (2018-07-19)
Matsuoka Okada 1989 pl11-04.; 15 and 19 JPG is typical R. hesslandii. Please see fig. 13 in Pujos, 1987 and Perch-Nielsen, 1985 pic 8 in fig. 60.

forum by Jeremy Young (2018-06-30)
June 2018 - upgrade of Neogene content. Jim Bergen, Eric de Kaenel and colleagues published a set of five major papers on Neogene and Oligocene nannofossils at the end of 2017 in the JNR. These were based on a 15 year research project to develop the BP Neogene Stratigraphic Framework, integrating results from the Gulf of Mexico and Ceara Rise ODP site 154. This included revision of numerous speci

Blackites gladius by Rui (2018-01-04)
I am confused with the following description on the short diagnosis - "The coccoliths are broad, and the spine is usually around half the width with a prominent basal collar".

Blackites gladius by Jeremy Young (2018-01-04)
-agreed that it is not clear, i will reword it.. all the best Jeremy

Silicifying dinoflagellates by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2017-12-11)
I will look for the original photos whenever I return to Argentina.. According to Rai et al. 2008. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences, 37: 430-434; they occur from Late Eocene to Recent, beeing more common in the Late Neogene to Recent. There is also another nice paper: Dumitrica, 1973. CENOZOIC ENDOSKELETAL DINOFLAGELLATES IN SOUTHWESTERN PACIFIC. SEDIMENTS CORED DURING LEG 21 OF THE DSDP. In Init

Silicifying dinoflagellates by Jeremy Young (2017-12-11)
Ah yes I had not looked at the Dumitrica paper before butI see now that it is a very useful review - i will aim to put the info into Nannotax sometime, for now I will add a reference to it.. thanks. Jeremy

Rotelapillus by fatemeh (2017-12-11)
hi. there is no the species R.laffitteiin the list.

Rotelapillus by Jeremy Young (2017-12-11)
This is a famous taxonomic problem - the correct name for the species is Rotelapillus crenulatus - as explained on that page.

Silicifying dinoflagellates by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2017-12-10)
Regarding the fossil record, I found them in Miocene samples from DSDP site 329. I know these images are bad, I´m taking them from a PPT Presentation, but I have the original ones somewhere. And also the slides.

Silicifying dinoflagellates by Jeremy Young (2017-12-11)
nice - that is clearly Actiniscus, if you get better images I will put them on the page properly. It may well have a documented fossil record, I have not looked at the literature on these forms in any depth.. Jeremy

Zeugrhabdotus diplogrammus by Zainab (2017-11-26)
How to differentiate between small forms of this species and Z. bicrescenticus ?. In picture no. 14 (PospWiseLeg113-Maas-Pl9-Fig3a-b), it looks like T. orionatus? or does Z. diplogrammus has this feature when rotated under the LM?. Thanks

Zeugrhabdotus diplogrammus by Jeremy Young (2017-12-03)
Zainab. Good question - I needed to check details before answering but you are right the image from Pospichal & Wise (1990) is not Z. diplogrammus so I am removing it. Z. bicrescenticus and Z. diplogrammus are very similar - with diplogrammus being larger and with a more open central area - but I am not sure if a clear separation has been defined.. Jeremy

Rhabdosphaera poculii by Ines Galovic (2017-11-17)
Dear Jeremy, Obertorton for the Paratethys stage definition was stood for upper Badenian in that time. Today it is NN6 zone. In the Paratethys the species (characterise) appears during MMCO and it's very rare during the MMCT in Croatian Basin, after which disappear.. Best wishes :)

Markalius by fatemeh (2017-11-11)
hi, . There isn't the species "Markalius circumradiatus" here.

Markalius by Jeremy Young (2017-12-01)
Hi, sorry for slow reply. The species is included in Haqius, so you can find it there. More generally you can use "search" to look for species and it in cases like these where the combination has changed it should send you in the right direction.

forum by Siti Umiyatun Choiriah (2017-11-08)
Dear Prof. J.Young. I will conduct a study on the Paleoclimate Quaternary (Pleistocene-Holocene) Glacial-Interglacial at North East Java Basin, Indonesia.. But I am still confused. Is Climate Change at Quarternary can be recorded on the development and variation Nannoplankton Species?. What Nannoplankton species can be used for the cold Climate founders especially that developed in the Quaternary

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-11-14)
Siti. This site is not really the place for this type of question - the coccoliths listserver would be a better choice. However, this is not a straightforward question. Nannofossils evolved fast in the Quaternary and as a result they are not as easy to use for paleoceanography as we might hope. There are exceptions, for instance Florisphaera profunda is an excellent paleoproductivity indicator, bu

Broinsonia sp. by Maurice Kevin Cooper (2017-11-01)
Jeremy is not the image with 21on it that Blair & Watkins 2009 assign to Reinhardtites clavicaviformis Varol 1991. I think the genus may be a problem I got a few images of this species

Broinsonia sp. by Jeremy Young (2017-11-08)
Hi Kevin . Interesting comment - I have not put the Blair & Watkins paper in to te system - although Rich Howe has got it into the Catalog. I'll have to ask Jackie her opinion on the species.. Jeremy

forum by fatemeh (2017-11-01)
Hi dear prof. Young. I'd like to know if it's possible to add another option for sorting genera and spices by image based on their lateral view too? . Regards.

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-11-01)
Fatemeh -we can't really do that but you can select for basic shape placolith vs murolith vs planolith, for forms with a spine, for high or low rims etc. The system is a bit compplex but if you experiemnt you should be able to do most types of search you want. . Jeremy

forum by kamran (2017-10-26)
what's a difference between the Paleocene Eocene Thermal maximum and Eocene thermal maximum? can we deal both phenomenons as same single process?

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-10-27)
Kamran - the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) is a short interval of elevated paleotemperatures at the Paleocene -Eocene boundary - you can find out much more about it easily with a google search. The term Eocene Thermal Maximum is not conventionally used but the term (Early) Eocene Thermal optimum is used for the extended period of maximum temperatures in the Early Eocene.

Discoaster stradneri by Simon Cole (2017-10-23)
Hi Jeremy. I'm not sure what's going on with this species (or two species) - it currently says the current identification/main database is Discoaster pentaradiatus Tan, 1927 which must be incorrect??. Cheers,. Simon

Discoaster stradneri by Jeremy Young (2017-10-23)
Yes - a mess indeed. Thanks for pointing that out, I think I have sorted it out now. There are three(!) species involved - D. stradneri Noel 1960 (a variant of D. binodosus); D. stradneri Martini 1961 (a homonym so invalid but interpreted as a synonym of D. elegans) and D. stradneri Borsetti & Cati 1970 (a homonym so invalid but interpreted as a synonym of D. pentaradiatus)

Coccolithus miopelagicus by Ines Galovic (2017-10-11)
well, for the precise definition it should be also taken into account its dimensions regarding temperature that C. eopelagicus is typical for PETM and Eocene optimum, while C. miopelagicus for MMCO when was 2 degrees lower temperature. Then reworked species is much easier to detect.

Sticholonche zanclea by Ric Jordan (2017-10-08)
Sticholonche zanclea

Sticholonche zanclea by Jeremy Young (2017-10-08)
thanks Ric! These have been irritating/intriguing me off and on for years. Given the name I now know there are currently interpreted as a a very unusual radiolarian. I think I get more queries about odd non-coccos than coccos these days, so if we can get some more of these sorted out it would be very useful. Right now I am going to reidentify this - so the page will reappear as Stiloconche zanclea

Parmales by Ric Jordan (2017-10-08)
The group does have a fossil record. At least Quaternary - see my publications for relevant references.

Parmales by Jeremy Young (2017-10-08)
Fair point - I have just added the record of Stradner & Allram 1982, but are there any older records?

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-10-07)
Tags, Metrics and Advanced Search - for INA16 in Athens we have launched a major upgrade to the site. All cenozoic taxa have been reviewed and data added in terms of a set of 'tags' for morphological characters and 'metrics' (coccolith and coccosphere size, liths per sphere, elements per lith). This data has been applied systematically and can be used to from the Advanced Search pa

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-10-07)
Revised recent comments page I have just now revised the recent comments page so that it shows replies below the original comments. This should make it easier to see how comments are addressed (and in some cases has resulted in us finding comments we had not answered)

forum by Ovie Collins (2017-09-03)
Great! I found this site. Grateful to the Organizers.. I sometimes have difficulty identifying these Nannofossils forms on Light microscope, because some of them looks alike.. Please I also wish to know the BEST method for preparing Nannofossils Slide for enhanced recovery.. Lastly at what temperature should these slides be dried using the Electrical Hotplate.. Regards. Ovie Collins

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-09-05)
Methods - there is a useful overview of methods in Bown (1998) Calcareous nannofossil biostratigraphy. For drying slides it is best to use a fairly low temperature (around 60°C), as you do not want to boil the water. . Best way to enhance recovery? that depends on the sample but the best technique to start with is almost always to do a direct smear (i.e. mix a little sediment in a drop of water o

Crepidolithus crucifer by Maurice Kevin Cooper (2017-07-31)
Hi Jeremy . Should not the range of this species stop in the Early Pliensbachian and not says tops in the Holocene

Crepidolithus crucifer by Jeremy Young (2017-07-31)
thanks Kevin- it is corrected now

Lithraphidites acutus by Maurice Kevin Cooper (2017-07-31)
Hi Jeremy. How can the species L. acutus have a short stratigraphic range then both the sub species L. acutus acutus and L. acutus eccentricum. What is the correct range for this species and subspecies?

Lithraphidites acutus by Jeremy Young (2017-07-31)
You are right - the species range should be the sum of the sub-species ranges. What has happened here is that when I added in the sub=species I used the ranges from Watkins & Bowdler 1984 without noticing that there was more precise range information on the species from Burnett 1998. I will change the sub-species ranges, thanks for pointing this out.

Hayella by Rui da Gama (2017-07-13)
Please note: From left, 2nd and 3rd image of Hayella simplex are same as 2nd and 4th image of Hayella spp. Better to remove to avoid confusion.

Hayella by Jeremy Young (2017-07-13)
Quite right - I have now changed those, but I need to check with Paul to see if all the images of Hayella sp. from Bown 2005 are actually now assignable to Hayella simplex. Thanks for pointing that out. Jeremy.

Tribrachiatus digitalis by Marcie Purkey Phillips (2017-06-28)
It looks like this species has been moved to the genus Rhomboaster (Bybell & Self-Trail 1997, Late Paleocene and Early Eocene Calcareous Nannofossils from three boreholes in an onshore-offshore transect from New Jersey to the Atlantic Continental Rise. Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, Vol 150X.)

Tribrachiatus digitalis by Jeremy Young (2017-07-19)
Marcie . Thanks for the comment, and apologies for the slow reply. The taxonomy of this group has been surprisingly controversial (see brief notes on the Rhomboasteraceae page) and various different combinations have been proposed. The broad consensus emerging from this is that Tribrachiatus and Rhomboaster can usefully be separated, even if they are directly linked by evolution, this reflected in

Helicosphaera lophota by Rui da Gama (2017-06-12)
On the short diagnosis you have indicated "...near-longitudinal disjunct bar with distinct median suture". I would rephrase this as I have very good images of H. lophota without the distinct median suture. Please note, in some samples depending on preservation this feature appears faded or absent. My point becomes clear if you examine the images of H. lophota you are displaying herein...

Helicosphaera lophota by Jeremy Young (2017-10-07)
interesting point (and sorry that comment got a slow reply), the median suture is clearly visible in proximal electrons micrographs and typically appears as a dark line in the light microscope. So it is usually a useful feature but I guess it can get obscured with some types of preservation. Equally relevant from reviewing the other species in this group it seems all the species with a disjunct ba

Discoaster mediosus by Rui da Gama (2017-06-11)
"Short diagnosis: 8-10 near-parallel-sided rays" - several images provided herein show more than 10 rays

Discoaster mediosus by Jeremy Young (2017-06-11)
good point - clearly the name is applied to forms with 11 or 12 rays, I will change the short diagnosis to >8 rays. . Thanks for pointing his out. Jeremy

forum by Kurosh (2017-05-16)
hi my dear friend. please introduce me a reference or definition for sister,daughter and other terms relate them?

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-05-16)
Kurosh. We are using these terms as indicators of relative taxonomic position. So for example all the species inside a genus can be described as daughter taxa of that genus and they are sisters of each other. The whole database is organised hierarchically so it is quite convenient to use these sort of terms.. Jeremy

forum by Kurosh (2017-05-16)
hi prof. I`m also as my teacher. That's great,thanks.

forum by Kurosh (2017-05-16)
hi again prof. And what a bout daughter and granddaughter?

forum by Jeremy Young (2017-05-19)
Kurosh . Sorry if this is confusing - there is nothing really ver technical about this we are just using the terms to indicate relative position in the classification, as used on the site. So if we consider the family Rhabdospheraecae its daughter taxa are are all the genera within it -Acanthoica, Algirosphara etc. and its granddaughter taxa are all the species within it - Acanthoica acanthifera,

Lithoptychius pileatus by Vladimir Musatov (2017-05-14)
Hi Jeremy. Lithoptychius pileatus. Last occurrence (top): in mid part of NP6 zone.. In the zonal division scheme indicated by its disappearance in the middle zone NP5. ( The truth is out there))

Lithoptychius pileatus by Jeremy Young (2017-05-15)
Hi Vladimir. Interesting observation. The mid NP6 LAD quoted here is bsed on Varol (1998) who used the LAD of F. pileatus within his zonal scheme. However, the taxon is certiainly more common in top NP4-lower NP5. A possible explanation is provided by Agnini et al. 2007 (fig. 5) who show an LCO in mid NP5 but a trail of rare occurrences up into NP6 . I am not sure where the mid NP5 LAD in time sca

Chiphragmalithus muzylevii by Vladimir Musatov (2017-04-26)
Hi, Jeremy. Please correct the name of the species - Ch. muzylevii

Rucinolithus wisei by Maurice Kevin Cooper (2017-04-26)
Hi Jerermy, Bralower et al. 1989 does not give a Late Valanginian age for R, wisei he place the top of R. wisei at the top of E calpionellid zone which is top Early Valanginian and between M13 and M12N polarity chron which is intra Early Valanginian in age in Gradstein 2012. I think the range should match the Neptune datebase in the Valanginian to Berriasian interval.

Rucinolithus wisei by Jeremy Young (2017-04-27)
cheers Kevin- I will change the LAD to Early Valanginian. Jeremy

Dictyocha fibula by Ines Galovic (2017-03-16)
Dictyocha pentagona (Schulz) Bukry & Foster 1973-record paleocene-recent: Arabian Sea (bas. Dictyocha fibula var pentagona Schulz 1928, syn. Dictyocha fibula f. pentagona (Schulz) Frenguelli 1935, Dictyocha pentagona (Lemm.) Martini, 1971; Dictyocha pentagona (Schulz)Ciesielski) 1975. Dictyocha rhombica (Schulz) Deflandre 1941-record: Paleocene to recent: Atlantic, Japan, Arabian Sea (Bas. Dic

Dictyocha fibula by Jeremy Young (2017-10-08)
HI Ines. Sorry for long delay in replying, silicoflagellates are well outside my expertise so really all I was trying to do here was to illustrate the main species we find in modern nannoplankton samples.. Jeremy

Stephanocha by Ines Galovic (2017-03-16)
Distephanopsis schauinslandii (Lemmermann) Desikachary & Prema 1996 -record: Eocene to recent:Pacific (basionym: Distephanus schauislandii Lemmermann 1901, syn. Distephanus crux var. schauislandii (Lemm) Schulz 1928).. Distephanopsis staurodon (Ehrenberg) Desikachary & Prema 1996- record: Miocene-recent: Mexican gulf, Indian Ocea, Adriatic Sea (basionym: Dictyocha staurodon Ehrenberg 1844,

Stephanocha by Ines Galovic (2017-03-16)
Yes, Stephanocha rotunda (Stöhr) K.McCartney & R.W.Jordan 2015 -recorded from Creataceous to recent (basionym: Distephanus rotundus Stöhr 1880). Stephanocha speculum var. ornamentum (Ehrenberg) K.McCartney & R.W.Jordan in Jordan & McCartney 2015 -records from early Eocene to recent (basionym Dictyocha ornamentum Ehrenberg 1844, syn. Distephanus ornamentum (Ehrenberg) Haeckel 1887). .

Chiasmolithus titus by Vann Smith (2017-03-15)
How is Chiasmolithus titus distinguished from C. nitidus? They look very similar to me.

Chiasmolithus titus by Jeremy Young (2017-03-16)
Vann - fair point they are every similar. They are being separated based on C. titus having one crossbar that is really hook-shaped (and the other more or less straight) as opposed to C. nitidus having one crossbar that is curved (and the other more or less straight). Dunkley Jones et al. (2009) use this explicitly and it does correspond to the original descriptions. [NB I have now edited the diag

Dictyocha by Ines Galovic (2017-03-09)
Its first fossil record: Upper Cretaceous

Stephanocha by Ines Galovic (2017-03-09)
Its first occurrence: Upper Cretaceous (Desikachary & Prema, 1996).

Stephanocha by Jeremy Young (2017-03-16)
Thanks - the coverage of silicoflagellates here is minimal, just a list of the extant species. Do you know which species was recoded from the Late Cretaceous and if it would be included in modern Stephanoca?

Helicosphaera wallichii by Ines Galovic (2017-03-08)
The base is in the mid Miocene (Badenian) of Paratethys (Slovenia, Austria, Croatia, Romania...). All the articles you can find if you combined the species name with the Paratethys at the google search.. Best wishes :)

Helicosphaera pavimentum HOL by Ines Galovic (2017-03-08)
This is also characteristic Paratethyan species for mid-Miocen (Badenian) of Slovenia, Croatia and Romania (our article).

Acri-forum by Jeremy Young (2017-01-10)
This is a test comment to check that the system does work

Ascidian spicules by magdalena lukowiak (2016-11-30)
Thanks guys for such a possitive reactions to our latest paper! :) we are glad that you liked it. If you are interested in fossil ascidian spicules, I also recommend my article from 2012: _ukowiak, M. 2012. First Record of Late Eocene Ascidians (Ascidiacea, Tunicata) from Southeastern Australia: Journal of Paleontology 86 (3): 521–526If any of you want a pdf of this paper, please, do not hesitat

Helicosphaera walbersdorfensis by Ines Galovic (2016-11-22)
First occurrence is observed in Paratethian NN4b subzone of Badenian (Andreyeva-Grigorovich et al., 2001), which belongs to Mediterranean MNN4b respectinely (Fornaciari et al, 1996).

Coccolithus tenuiforatus by Juan P. Pérez Panera (2016-10-11)
Which will be the difference with Coccolithus staurion?

Coccolithus tenuiforatus by Jeremy Young (2016-10-11)
This is not a very well worked out taxon but C. staurion has a more robust cross that nearly fills the c area and is clearly visible in LM. By contrast in C. tenuiforatus the cross is delicate and not really visible in LM.

Ascidian spicules by Ines Galovic (2016-09-21)
Very nice article about ascidian spicules at Researchgate published in April 2016 in Geobios. Unfortunatelly I couldn't add a link here. :(

Ascidian spicules by Jeremy Young (2016-09-21)
thanks for the tip - I just found it and and yes it is a nice paper , i will add mention of it on the page as it has modern references etc.Lukowiak, M.; Dumitriu, S. & Ionesi, V., (2016). First fossil record of early Sarmatian didemnid ascidian spicules (Tunicata) from Moldova. Geobios, 49: 201-209.

Parhabdolithus marthae by Kevin Cooper (2016-08-18)
I think the stratigraphic range is wrong for this species you have assign it to NJ3 zoned, based on Bown & Cooper 1998. However in that publication it range is give as NJ2a subzone restricted significantly older

Parhabdolithus marthae by Jeremy Young (2016-08-30)
Thanks Kevin - you are of course quite right and I have now corrected this. Please do keep pointing out errors!

forum by Jeremy Young (2016-08-15)
I don't think so - probably the closest is the INA Facebook page

Watznaueria barnesiae by H K Sabot (2016-08-07)
Why W barnesae has less abundance in Coniacian, although it being a resistant ? whether reproductivity is low or sea regressed at that time ?

Watznaueria barnesiae by Jeremy Young (2016-08-07)
There does seem to be a reduction in the frequency of W. barnesiae in the Coniacian but you should look at this as an indication that there may be something happening rather than definite proof, it may just be noise in the data. Interestingly though there is also an increase in the frequency records in W. biporta, W. communis and W. brittannica at this time - so one possibility is that forms with

Micula staurophora by H K Sabot (2016-08-07)
Dear Nannotax, This is to appreciate your effort to make available your data in open forum. Thank you.

forum by Jeremy Young (2016-07-02)
Update to range plots - I have now changed the way range data is plotted on species pages, the histograms still show the data from the Neptune database but the nannotax range is now directly compared to it. Also the background image shows the stages using GTS colours (hover mouse over the plot to see stage names).

forum by fatemeh (2016-08-13)
hi That's great,thanks.

forum by fatemeh (2016-08-13)
Hi Is there any Channel about calcareous nannofossils in telegram or other social networks?

forum by Masykur Widhiyatmoko (2016-06-17)
Hi, I am new in learning nannoplankton from Geological Research and Development Centre, Geological Agency, Indonesia...Many thanks to all contributor of this website.Thaks,Masykur

Syracosphaera mediterranea HOL hellenica type by Maria Triantaphyllou (2016-06-12)
actually it is published in 2015

Syracosphaera mediterranea HOL hellenica type by Jeremy Young (2016-06-13)
OK I have updated the reference list. The publication date I have left as 2016 as the website gives the date for this issue as February 2016. Do you know if it was printed in 2015? Then again if there is no new taxonomy the exact date is not very important and it may be easiest to use the cover-date (which is 2015).

Syracosphaera mediterranea HOL hellenica type by Maria Triantaphyllou (2016-06-12)
The correct reference for the new combination coccospheres is:TRIANTAPHYLLOU, M.V, KARATSOLIS, B., DIMIZA, M.D., MALINVERNO, E., CERINO, F., PSARRA, S., JORDAN, R.W., YOUNG, J.R., 20156. Coccolithophore combination coccospheres from the NE Mediterranean Sea: new evidence and taxonomic revisions. Micropaleontology, 61(6): 457-472.

Watznaueria barnesiae by Alessandro Menini (2016-04-16)
Very nice job here. I was curious about the species of Zeugrhabdotus in pic JRYlm-Wb16.JPG. Which species is it ?

Watznaueria barnesiae by Jeremy Young (2016-04-18)
Thanks for the feedback, always appreciated. The image you mention is one I took a long time ago but i think from Early Maastrichtian or Late Campanian of Tunisia. Zeugrhadotus taxonomy is problematic but Z. sigmoides would be a normal identification fro this, and Jackie Lees conformed this. [

forum by Magdy Girgis (2016-04-16)
Many thanks Jeremy for your swift response and guiding me to the information requested. I really appreciate it.Magdy

Discoaster berggrenii by Jeremy Young (2016-04-15)
Hi MagdyA copy of the diagram is here.

Cribrocentrum isabellae by Baptiste Sucheras-Marx (2016-02-26)
The FO and LO are inversed.

forum by Baptiste Sucheras-Marx (2016-02-18)
Hi,I am doing a little study sort of updating Aubry et al. 2005 on Mesozoic cocco size. To do so, I saw that we can plot coccolith from nannotax with stratigraphic range. But I wonder we can extract those data in .txt? It would save me thousands of copy/paste.ThanksBap

forum by Jeremy Young (2016-03-05)
hi BaptisteIf you let me know what you want I can almost certainly send you the data Jeremy

Arkhangelskiella confusa by Baptiste Sucheras-Marx (2016-02-18)
Hi,I think it would be great in the future development of nannotax to add for each species information on size like size range, mean, etc with a small indication if it is from a large amount of specimen or not.Thank you very and congratulations again for this brilliant website.Baptiste

Arkhangelskiella confusa by Jeremy Young (2016-02-18)
Hi BaptisteYou are quite right it would be a very useful to have good data on coccolith sizes and this is one of the things we would like to add - but the problem is to find useful compendiums of data. If you have any suggestions for data sources please feel free to make them. .. but thanks anyway for the feedback.Jeremy

Nannoconus steinmannii by Elliott Burden (2016-02-16)
I am looking for a contact that may help locate an old 1970's vintage coccolith sample perhaps housed/curated at Elf or Total in France. Basic questioning of my few contacts in the Calgary oil patch have not lead me to any French contacts.

Scyphosphaera hamptonii by Tamsin (2016-02-01)
Hi, I was wondering about the published age for this species - it's stated on here as NN2-NN4, however looking at the original publication, it suggests NN11. Any thoughts?

Acanthoica laffittei by Ines Galovic (2016-01-18)
the missing part of the last reference is: ...des invirons de Pan_evo (Yougoslavie). Bull. Sci. Yougoslavie, A16(207)

Acanthoica laffittei by Jeremy Young (2016-01-18)
thanks! I have corrected that nowJeremy

forum by Jeremy Young (2016-01-04)
Hi Fatemeh - there is more information on the user guide page

Sphenolithus by Kenneth M. Towe (2015-12-20)
This old paper should be added to the list of references...1979 K.M. Towe, Variation and systematics in calcareous nannofossils of the genus Sphenolithus. AMERICAN ZOOLOGIST, v. 19, p. 555-572.It should give pause to the discussion of various "species" in this genus.

Sphenolithus by Jeremy Young (2015-12-21)
good point - do you have a pdf copy of the paper. it would be nice to include your reconstruction of sphenolithus sphere.

forum by fatemeh (2016-01-02)
Hi thanks for your reply,I tried in that way but It didn't work or I need more guide. Regards

forum by Emilia (2015-11-20)
I would like to know if someone is working with calcareous nannofossils from Eastern Equatorial Pacific, my field work is in this area. I found very few publication on Cenozoic calcareous nannofossils for this area. I am wondering if it is worth to make a review paper for this Pacific side and construct a geographic data using ArcGIS.

forum by Jeremy Young (2015-12-04)
Hi EmiliaIt might be worth trying posting that on the coccoliths list server, that may work better for getting general comments. Synthesising an reviewing data almost always proves useful in my experience though so your idea sounds well worth thinking about. Jeremy

Trochoaster martinii by Ines Galovic (2015-10-23)
It looks like Actiniscus pentasterias (Ehrenberg) Ehrenberg.

Trochoaster martinii by Jeremy Young (2015-12-04)
Indeed Actiniscus and Trochoaster can look really similar in SEM - but of course in LM there is no problem to separate them, as Actiniscids are siliceous

forum by fatemeh (2015-10-18)
hi, thanks for good website.If you have a possibility of sorting all specious of nannofossils based on each stages(age range) for search, it will be more helpfull. Regards.

forum by Jeremy Young (2015-12-04)
Hi Fatemeh The main way you can do an age related search is to go to Tools/Prefs & Time Control. There you can set the time interval you are interested in (e.g. Oligocene or Albian or 100 to 102 Ma) and the taxa which fall within that time interval will be highlighted. If you wanted something a bit different to that then feel free to explain a bit more. All the bestJeremy

Sphenolithus pseudoradians by Simon Cole (2015-10-15)
Like my comment just now about H. compacta; again, I don't believe this species goes to the top of NP24 (and therefore not to 26.84Ma). P-N, 1985 dashes to NP24 so I don't think we should be referencing that as the source of the date for the LO of this species without a question-mark at least.Because I have found the same issue for H. compacta and S. pseudoradians in the last few minutes,

Sphenolithus pseudoradians by Jeremy Young (2015-12-04)
Hi SimonYes it is a good point - the age ranges in nannotax are not heavily researched data from the literature and they are stored in whatever units the original sources used - eg NN zones or Cretaceous stages - the conversion of these to Ma ages is just for convenience but I think people are bit liable to misinterpret them.Jeremy

Helicosphaera compacta by Simon Cole (2015-10-15)
Hi JeremyI've always put the LO of H. compacta intra-NP24, approximated to the top of the Early Oligocene (28.09 according to GTS2012). I believe this is where de Kaenel & Villa, 1996 observed it too in most of their sections from the Iberia Abyssal Plain. Would you consider amending the absolute age here to reflect this?Cheers,Simon

Helicosphaera compacta by Ines Galovic (2015-11-24)
Maybe in IAP LO of the species marks the end of E. Oligocene, but in other Oceans (ODP, IODP and in other articles) its rare appearance certainly is in the Late Oligocene i.e. NP25, like in Adriatic (Mediterranean area)-mine observation.

Craticullithus clathrus by Jason Crux (2015-10-12)
Jeremy,One of your specimens clearly appears to be a Sollasites horticus.Jason

Ceratolithus by SHIVANGI TIWARI (2015-10-12)
Has a type species been defined for Ceratolithus?

Ceratolithus by Jeremy Young (2017-10-08)
Tes - C. cristatus, and I have added that now

forum by Alessandro Menini (2015-10-04)
Hi. I'm a usual user of Nannotax. I was only wondering if it's goin to be available in the future a sort of "mobile application"of the website in order to make the most of it also on mobile devices.Thanks and good nannopaleontology to anyone ! A.

Isolithus by Ines Galovic (2015-09-29)
This species is very common for restricted, shallow and alkaline environments of Miocene to recent sediments. I'm going to take some pictures for You of modern sediments (try to do my best with it) and would emailed with upper Miocene pictures.

Isolithus by Ines Galovic (2015-09-15)
I found it in the first few centimeters of Adriatic coastal lake sediments (Ba_ina Lakes).

Isolithus by Jeremy Young (2015-09-15)
Interesting - I presume those are modern or Holocene sediments? Do you have photos?

Calcidiscus pataecus by Ines Galovic (2015-08-17)
The Zone NN6 is given by our publication (Galovi_ & Young, 2012). Bown & Dunkley Jones, 2012 couldn't give this data because thay were investigated mostly Paleogene sediments, not middle Miocene. In their article the source of this zone is missing.

Calcidiscus pataecus by Jeremy Young (2015-09-08)
Intersting point, but the range in our paper would have applied to the paratethys only. I have seen the morphotype much higher in the Miocene, so will emend the range.

Sphenolithus avis by Mohammed Aljahdali (2015-08-01)
Thanks Jeremy for posting this at the NANNOTAX3. Under the stratigraphic distribution it should be FAD rather than LAD. Many thanks again, Mohammed

Sphenolithus avis by Jeremy Young (2015-08-03)
OK I have corrected the FAD/LAD error.

forum by Jeremy Young (2015-07-20)
A few more recent updates: Farinacci catalog pages are now all available as PDFs with selectable text Image file names can now be shown below the images (see Tools/Prefs & Time Control) A lot of extra Mesozoic images have been added

Calcidiscus macintyrei by Kevin Jackson (2015-07-20)
This page references Raffi et al., (2006), yet the top occurrence (~0.44Ma) doesn't appear to reflect the updated top occurrence of ~1.64Ma. Regarding the base occurrence Raffi (2006) states "LO of Calcidiscus macintyrei (alternative marker for CN3–CN4 boundary): highly contradictory stratigraphic positions are reported for this biohorizon in the literature and partly related to the amb

Discoaster toralus by Alonso Rincon (2015-07-07)
Hi! D. toralus, have any relationship with D. wisei?, and why you not include this fossil (D. wisei) in Nannotax? it is not an official nannofossil? In fact, dont have much information about this nannofossil.. why? Thanks.

Actiniscus by Ines Galovic (2015-08-13)
I'm sending a SEM and LM figures of fossil and recent A. pentasterias that differs from your images. I'm sorry for bad scan. Unfortunately, AlgaeBase are not complete and missing lot of species, descriptions, references and their synonyms from Paratethyan and Adriatic Sea. (invalid-image)

Stephanocha speculum by Ines Galovic (2015-05-25)
It is stephanocha instead of stephanoca, probably just mistake in typing.I'm so happy to see that silicoflagellate taxonomy is finally going to be done correctly. Nice work and best wishes to authors.

Sphenolithus spiniger by Alonso Rincon (2015-05-08)
thank you very much for your comments, I found it very helpful. Alonso.

Sphenolithus spiniger by Alonso Rincon (2015-05-07)
Hello everyone. Some authors placed the extinction of S. spiniger in the biozone NP15 (Bown, 2005), but others authors in the biozone NP17 (Fornaciari et al, 2010; Shamrock 2010; Fensome, 2008; Toffanin et al, 2013. This can be attributed to the different geographical areas of studies? Greetings!!

Sphenolithus spiniger by Jeremy Young (2015-05-08)
Hi AlonsoInteresting question - however a quick check of Bown 2005 (Tanzania paper) shows that he is quoting the occurrences observed in that area and that they had a gap in coverage from NP15 to mid NP17 so his data is not incompatible with a consistent LAD in NP17. I will adjust the nannotax entry following the reference you cite. Jeremy

Syracosphaera halldalii by Maria Triantaphyllou (2015-04-28)
Combination coccosphere with Calyptrolithina divergens var. tuberosaTRIANTAPHYLLOU, M.V., DIMIZA, M.D.*, DERMITZAKIS, M.D., 2004. Syracosphaera halldalii and Calyptrolithina divergens var. tuberosa life-cycle association and relevant taxonomic remarks. Micropaleontology 50 (1): 121-126.

Syracosphaera halldalii by Jeremy Young (2015-04-28)
very true - id like to see at least one more specimen but I will add some text on both pages and a link between them

Calcidiscus gallagheri by David Bord (2015-04-15)
I notice you put the first occurrence at NP5, but da Gama & Varol 2013 restrict this species to NP25. Is this a mistake or have you heard differently?

Calcidiscus gallagheri by Jeremy Young (2015-04-15)
thanks Dave that was typo of mine - I'll correct it!

forum by Jeremy Young (2015-03-27)
Farinacci catalog update. We have now completed a major update of the Farinacci catalog with additional entries for most taxa described since Anna Farinacci stopped compiling the catalog in 1989 and now there are both PDF and jpeg versions of most pages. The PDF version are better quality but the jpeg versions are quicker to use so we will leave them on the site. There also is more metadata for ta

forum by Jeremy Young (2015-03-17)
Adding data from the neptune databaseFor the INA15 meeting in the Philipines we have done a series of further updates, including adding a lot more Mesozoic images. The BIG change though is that we have now added occurrence data from the Neptune database. This provides useful information on the abundance of taxa through time - BUT READ THE NOTES PAGE. From the menu bar - About Nannotax/The Neptune

Coccolithus pauxillus by Ryan Weber (2015-03-12)
It appears that the original description is Bown (2005), and the species name is from Bown (2010). Would this be correct?

Calciosolenia corsellii by Ines Galovic (2015-03-11)
In our article smaller forms (fig. 15-16) are also presented with spurs which is a consequence of warm and oligotroph water. Larger specimens without spurs are more characreristic for transition (of climate, current mixing, water exchanges, flooding, more nearshore influences, seasonality...)

Calciosolenia sp. by Ines Galovic (2015-03-11)
We put species in our article of revised taxonomy to Calciosolenia brasiliensis that some of Calciosolenia sp. could be included, and even smaller forms see figures in article or our data from NHM.

Syracosphaera tanzanensis by Ines Galovic (2015-03-11)
The last SEM picture doesn't look like to represent diagnosed species. It is much smaller and has different developed central plate (not so wide central area) with spine.

Syracosphaera tanzanensis by Jeremy Young (2015-04-14)
True - and in the original publication it is labelled as S. cf. S. tanzanensis - I will move this image to Syracosphaera sp.

spinose microspheres by Ines Galovic (2015-03-06)
This is Archaeomonas cysts (Chrysophyceae), known from Miocene sediments of Paratethys (Hajos M., 1968).

non_cocco by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
I hope you'll put some Ebridians in non cocco too, with time.

Diatoms by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
Stratigraphical range for Th. nitzschoides is from Eger (Paratethys) to Recent (Adriatic).

Diatoms by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
SEM pic (5) is Thalassionema nitzschioides (Grunow, 1862) Mereschkowsky, 1902.

Actiniscus by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
I found A. stella (Ehrenberg,1840)Ehrenberg, 1854, in middle Miocene i.e. Sarmatian (Croatia) and A. pentasterias from Karpatian (Austria) to Recent (Adriatic).

Actiniscus by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
It looks like more to A. stella (Ehr.)Ehrenberg than A. pentasterias (Ehrenberg)Ehrenberg.

Actiniscus by Jeremy Young (2015-06-02)
In the modern plankton it is generally accepted that there is only one species, A. pentasterias and these are quite typical specimens.

Octactis pulchra by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
This is Octactis octonaria (Ehrenberg) Hovasse 1964. All the mentioned species including O. pulchra should be in syn. with Dictyocha octonaria Ehrenberg, 1844, Distephanus octonarius (Ehrenb.) Haeckel 1887 and Distephanus pulchra (Schiller) Ling & Takahashi 1985 as well.

Stephanocha speculum by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
In nomenclature it should be Dictyocha speculum Ehrenberg 1839. Geological range is the same as D. fibula.

Dictyocha fibula by Ines Galovic (2015-03-03)
Stratigraphic range for D. fibula is from Upper Cretaceous to Recent (Desikachary & Prema, 1996).

Reticulofenestra sp. by Ines Galovic (2015-03-02)
The second pic looks like Dictyococcites antarcticus (Farinacci catalog) i.e. D. productus (fig. 22 in Pujos, 1987).

Reticulofenestra sp. by Ines Galovic (2015-03-02)
I think it should be R. producta for smaller forms and R. perplexa for larger forms.

N. truitti group by maryam (2015-02-20)
Hi pro, Thank you very much for answer to my questions and guide me and Help me With the new Pictures. Good luck.

Stephanolithion by maryam (2015-02-11)
Good luck always and a lot thanks for your good and excellent informations.

Watznaueria ovata by Simun Ascic (2015-02-10)
Is it questionable a range of W. ovata, FO maybe in Middle/Late Jurassic? Thanks, Simun

Watznaueria britannica by maryam (2015-02-09)
many thanks for pictures and diagnosis but I have encountered a problem for centrifuge time.What time could be better for centrifuge? I did 30 seconds.

Watznaueria britannica by Jeremy Young (2015-02-09)
Hi MaryamCentrifuging is not a very precise preparation technique with nannos and times will vary between centrifuges. Actually few workers use centrifugation now. Jeremy

Nannoconus steinmannii by maryam (2015-01-31)
Thank you very much for very good information and Description of jurassic samples , nannofossils of lower cretaceous.Yours sincerely "maryam".

Nannoconus steinmannii by Jeremy Young (2015-02-09)
Thanks - it is good to hear you find the site useful

Discoaster obtusus by Mandur (2014-12-20)

Syracosphaera bannockii HOL by Maria Triantaphyllou (2014-11-16)
The combination coccospheres found (Dimiza et al., 2008, Pl.2, figs1-6) involving Z. amoena, S.bannockii HOL-solid and transitional forms to S. bannockii HOL- bridged implies that all three taxa should belong to the same species. Syracosphaera Lohmann 1902 has priority over Zygosphaera Kamptner 1937 emend. Heimdal 1982 and the species Z. amoena Kamptner 1937 has priority over S.bannockii (Borsetti

Syracosphaera bannockii HOL by Jeremy Young (2014-12-06)
Good point and I should definitely mention this on the relevant pages. I think I'd like to see HET-HOL combination cells though before changing the names

Campylosphaera differta by Jean Self-Trail (2014-10-30)
You list the geologic range of Camplyospheara differta as being from NP9 to NP10. However, one of the images (mine) is from NP11. Therefore, you need to adjust the geologic range of this species.Thanks!

Campylosphaera differta by Jeremy Young (2014-11-01)
Thanks for pointing that out - curiously though in the paper the only record is from NP10, but I guess it is a very rare species and you found it during imaging but not during the taxon count?

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-09-30)
Progress update. In preparation fro the upcoming workshop on living coccoithophores I have just now completed an overhaul of the coverage of extant nannos including adding 1000 more images and a separate module for non-coccolithophres. The non-coccos module is very much a work in progress, so comments and suggestions are welcome.

Discoaster bellus by Aaron Avery (2014-09-16)
On second thought Mike, you are right. I have been looking through the section again and noticed some very small 5 rayed forms that I could only describe as thin prepentaradiatus.

Discoaster bellus by Jeremy Young (2014-09-23)
good points - I have had samples where this was a very real problem. I have now edited the text to note this.

Discoaster bellus by Aaron Avery (2014-09-16)
I would argue that bellus is quite useful. I am working with material from the pacific where there is a clear difference between D. bellus and D. prepentaradiatus. In otherwords, the material is preserved well enough that D. prepentaradiatus and D. bellus appear together and make for useufl zonal constraint within certain assemblages. In my experience prepentaradiatus is much more robust. The argu

forum by Ines Galovic (2014-09-03)
Regarding to Time scale I have also a comment. The first occurrence of Catinaster coalitus in the Mediterranean is noted at 10,73-10,74 Ma (Hilgen et al., 2003). But, its FO of which defines the base of the NN8 zone, is rare or absent in many Mediterranean sections. Radiometric analyses from the Paratethys (Poland and Eastern Slovakian Basin) placed the period between 11,3-10,9 Ma (Vass, 1999; Kov

forum by Aaron Avery (2014-08-25)
I'm curious why the datums included in the Gradstein 2012 geologic timescale book seem to be outdated or in conflict with ranges posted on this site, which I rely on heavily as an excellent reference? I post here because, for instance, Top (downhole)O. serratus is listed at NN2 the bottom of its range noted here NN2-NN6.

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-08-26)
Hi AaronWe have not used GTS2012 for nannofossil ranges (only for age calibrations) so there may well be discrepancies. In this particular case I suspect someone has entered LAD into a database when they should have written FAD. O. serratus definitely occurs from NN2 to NN6 (it may of course have a longer range but there are plenty of records of specimens through that age range).

forum by Steve Starkie (2014-07-16)
Hi JeremyI have been working closely over the Santonian - Turonian section and I am not sure the Millions of year ages match for some taxa in the database?. So you know I have been comparing the database with what I observed, Jackie and various other papers along with Timescale Creator but was not sure what to do about really any suggestions?

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-07-16)
Hi SteveFirst thing to note here is that ages are always given as some sort of primary data - e.g. a chronostrat stage or nanno zone then the translation into Ma age.The primary data is stored in the database and the Ma age conversion is done by the program as needed, using a look-up table provided by Jim Ogg, with the age quoted being that of either the top or the bottom of the time interval, as

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-07-15)
Latest innovations - I have made a couple of improvements in the last week or so. First google translate is now enabled so you can read descriptions in almost any language you like, I hope this will especially help students who don't speak english.Second - I have finally got links from the Farinacci page to the main pages. This was a quite an interesting little coding problem and then required

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-07-01)
I am a bit surprised at how few comments there are on the site, especially since I can see from google analytics that the site is very well used. Any suggestion why this is?

forum by Marites Villarosa Garcia (2015-08-05)
I'm only just now looking through the comments section, despite having heavily used (and continuing to use) the nannotax database for my dissertation (I'm probably responsible for a chunk of that summer of 2014 traffic). I know the comments section exists, but I tend to forget about it. I also don't feel compelled to post comments unless I encounter some issue and I haven't had any

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-06-10)
Just now I completed one of the major items from my to do list for the site - enabling proper referencing. You will now find a reference list at the bottom of each page, as well as the master reference list from the utilities menu. This is only semi-automated so we will need to correct and update the reference lists but it is a significant step forward. .. and if you think a particular reference s

forum by Steve Starkie (2014-05-27)
Hi JeremyGreat job on the website it is really easy to navigate and thanks for all you obvious hard work that has gone into it. If there is any assistance I can offer to ease your burden please let me know. Cheers Steve

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-05-30)
Hi SteveThanks for the encouragement, it is always nice to know the site is appreciated. Ways to hep? more images are always appreciated or you could go through taxa which you know well and add comments on edits which would be useful

N. compressus group by Cristina Casellato (2014-05-09)
Hello, I just want to correct the name: Casellato, not best regards

N. compressus group by Jeremy Young (2014-05-09)
OK - I have corrected that now and also on a couple of other pages. To heck this you can use the google search box on the search page which allows you to check quickly for everywhere a name occurred on the site the last itme google checked it.

forum by Jarrett Cruz (2014-05-01)
I think I ran across a dead link, searching for Markalius inversus I get this error: ERROR: Could not open iNanno/Mesozoic/Heterococcoliths inc sedis/placoliths inc sedis/Markalius/Markalius inversus for reading! On another note this web site has been working wonders for me! Quite amazing!

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-05-07)
Thanks for pointing that out Jarrett, I have fixed it now but it is very useful to have errors flagged up. cheersJeremy

Pseudoemiliania lacunosa by Ines Galovic (2014-04-24)
In syn. you put in bracket (Coccolithus). Did you mean Coccolithites for Coccolithites annulus Cohen, 1964?

Pseudoemiliania lacunosa by Jeremy Young (2014-05-07)
Thank you - you are quite correct and I have corrected the page now. Jeremy

Reticulofenestra pseudoumbilicus by Ines Galovic (2014-04-24)
Thank you Jeremy on explanation, I didn't check it is it a noun or not and rely on expert's knowledge, but haven't been sure till now.

Reticulofenestra haqii by Ines Galovic (2014-04-10)
It is clear on the holotype figures of both R. haqii and R minutula species (dimension around 4 µm and almoust the same number of elements) that R. haqii has smaller opening (around 1 µm) than minutula (around 2 µm) . Your figures of birefringence and last SEM here mostly are not presented by typical figures of haqii origin. Could you please give us (Paratethian workers who are not dealing with

Reticulofenestra haqii by Jeremy Young (2014-04-13)
Reticulofenestra taxonomy is, of course, problematic and difficult to standardise. My approach in the Neogene is to use coccolith size and shape but not central area opening size. Hence for me all the illustrated forms fall in R. haqii.

Reticulofenestra pseudoumbilicus by Ines Galovic (2014-04-10)
Isn't it Gartners' Reticulofenestra from 1969 R. pseudoumbilica, that you refer to in Citation but as pseudoumbilicus or I missed something?

Reticulofenestra pseudoumbilicus by Jeremy Young (2014-04-14)
Gartner did indeed call the taxon Reticulofenestra pseudoumbilica and this spelling was widely used. However, pseudoumibilicus is a noun not an adjective and so cannot change gender. Hence the correct spelling is pseudoumbilicus.

Clausicoccus fenestratus by Jean Self-Trail (2014-03-26)
You should probably change the estimate on the first occurrence for this species from NP14 to NP12, as I find this species consistently in NP12 (Early Eocene) material.

Clausicoccus fenestratus by Jeremy Young (2014-03-26)
Thanks - do you have a reference for that? I could put something like "Self Trail via comment" as the data source but ideally we are trying to get things properly documented.

Discoaster berggrenii by Magdy (2016-04-15)
Mike...Thanks for producing sketches for the Discoaster quinqueramus/berggrenii plexus. I found it very useful. Some how I lost the original copy. Could you tell where you have posted this document, hopefully I will be able to download it.RegardsMagdy

Calcidiscus bicircus by Jeremy Young (2014-03-24)
C. bicircus certainly does resemble Biscutum but it occurs in Tanzania in sites with negligible reworking and has a consistent range there so it probably is an example of homoeomorphy not reworking.

forum by Jeremy Young (2014-03-24)
In the medium term I do still aim to convert things so that ages are quoted in more than one way. For now though we will stay with NP/NN zones because that is the system we know.

Coccolithus pelagicus subsp. braarudii by Jeremy Young (2014-03-24)
That is surprising - I would definitely expect it to be C. pelagicus ssp. pelagicus in the high Arctic, and that is what I observed there in the plankton in June 2012.

Coccolithus pelagicus subsp. braarudii by Gonçalo Prista (2018-07-19)
Dear Professor Giulliana Villa and Professor Jeremy Young, I hope you are both fine. I have been studying C. pelagicus s.l. during my PhD and had the chance to look on a few samples from Svalbard (i believe those samples were the ones used by Katia in her PhD). I noticed and mentioned to Katia that there were quite a few coccoliths over 10 micron, which would be highly interesting to look into. I

Coccolithus pelagicus subsp. braarudii by Gonçalo Prista (2018-07-19)
This interpretation is in line with culture studies that show size variation as a response to nutrient availability (Daniels et al. 2014; Sheward et al. 2014, 2016) and also Gerecht et al., 2014; Gerecht et al., 2015; Šupraha et al., 2015. Maybe the larger coccoliths found in Svalbard are just morphological plasticity of C. pelagicus, responding to the environmental variations. But this would dem

Coccolithus gigas by Jeremy Young (2014-03-23)
Very good point. I followed Perch-Nielsen (1985) and Varol (1992) here who did place gigas in this group but I am not sure that Gartner (1970) included gigas in his consuetus group. I will ask Paul Bown to take a look at this.

Coccolithus gigas by Jeremy Young (2014-03-24)
I have now transferred gigas to the bidens group. Gartner (1970) and Romein (1979) both place it in this group, on the basis of crossbar structure.

Fasciculithus varolii by dummy user (2017-01-10)
this is a test comment

Futyania petalosa by Jeremy Young (2017-01-08)
test comment using new version of commentics