Advertisement

Palaeobiodiversity and Palaeoenvironments

, Volume 99, Issue 3, pp 447–475 | Cite as

On some Mississippian (Carboniferous) brachiopods from neptunian dykes of the Harz Mountains (central Germany)

  • Bernard MottequinEmail author
  • Dieter Weyer
Original Paper

Abstract

Different generations of Mississippian neptunian dykes developed in the drowned Iberg–Winterberg Devonian seamount (Harz Mountains, Germany) yielded poorly diverse and generally small-sized brachiopod faunas dominated by spire-bearers (athyridides, spiriferides) and including several homeomorphic spiriferides. Four limestone levels are distinguished: Erdbach-II Limestone (Scaliognathus anchoralis Zone and basal Pseudognathodus homopunctatus Zone, late Ivorian and basal early Viséan), Actinotheca Limestone (Pseudognathodus homopunctatus Zone, Arundian–Holkerian–early Asbian), Goniatite Limestone (Gnathodus bilineatus and Lochriea nodosa zones, late Asbian–early Brigantian), Ibergirhynchia Limestone (Lochriea nodosa Zone, early Brigantian). The faunas (dominant cephalopod facies) of the traditional ‘Erdbach Limestone’ in all older literature related to the Iberg–Winterberg Massif are a mixture of the two older horizons (light crinoidal limestones; late Ivorian to early Asbian), of which the age of their fossil content (especially the well-studied trilobites) needs to be revised by conodonts. New spiriferide genera are described, namely Roemerithyris gen. nov. and Felsithyris gen. nov. with Spirifer macrogaster Roemer 1852 and Felsithyris hercynica gen. et sp. nov. as type species, respectively. The latter species is the most common element of an almost monospecific assemblage of early–middle Viséan age. Regeneration traces after fish attacks, developed on a spiriferide shell, are illustrated.

Keywords

Brachiopods Tournaisian Viséan Neptunian dykes Germany 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Hartmut Knappe and Helmut Ruhmer for the donation of their material from the Winterberg quarry to the Museum of Natural History (Leibniz Institute) at Humboldt University, Berlin, as well as to Frank Trostheide for the loan of material from his collection. We also acknowledge Michael Amler and Peter Müller for the loan of material from the Erdbach Limestone of the Rhenish Massif, Manfred Menning for his advices on Figure 2, and Albert Kollar who helped us to trace a loan of ‘macrogaster’ specimens among the J. L. Carter collection of the Carnegie Museum (Pittsburgh). The SEM images of the brachiopods were taken at the Royal Belgian Institute of natural Sciences at Brussels by Julien Cillis. The manuscript benefited from the thorough reviews of Ulrich Jansen and Maria-Luisa Martínez-Chacón.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12549_2018_360_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (121 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 120 kb)

References

  1. Alvarez, F., Rong, J.-y., & Boucot, A. J. (1998). The classification of athyridid brachiopods. Journal of Paleontology, 72, 827–855.Google Scholar
  2. Amler, M. R. W., Heidelberger, D., & Müller, P. (2008a). Report of current research on the fauna from the Erdbach Limestone (Mississippian) of Central Europe. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 42, 71–80.Google Scholar
  3. Amler, M. R. W., Heidelberger, D., & Müller, P. (2008b). Die unterkarbonischen Erdbach-Kalke von Breitscheid-Erdbach. Führungsblatt zu zwei karbonzeitlichen Fossilienfundstellen im Lahn-Dill-Kreis. Paläontologische Denkmäler in Hessen, 13, 1–20.Google Scholar
  4. Angiolini, L., Long, S., & Davies, L. (2011). Revision of Sowerby’s species Spirifer bisulcatus, Spirifer pinguis and Spirifer rotundatus from the Late Tournaisian-Visean of Great Britain. Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists, 41, 71–85.Google Scholar
  5. Baliński, A. (1993). A recovery from sublethal damage to the shell of a Devonian spiriferoid brachiopod. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 38, 111–118.Google Scholar
  6. Bischoff, G. (1957). Die Conodonten-Stratigraphie des rheno-herzynischen Unterkarbons mit Berücksichtigung der Wocklumeria-Stufe und der Devon/Karbon-Grenze. Abhandlungen des Hessischen Landesamtes für Bodenforschung, 19, 1–64.Google Scholar
  7. Bowen, Z. P., Rhoads, D. C., & McAlester, A. L. (1974). Marine benthic communities in the Upper Devonian of New York. Lethaia, 7, 93–120.Google Scholar
  8. Branson, E. B., & Mehl, M. G. (1941). New and little known carboniferous conodont genera. Journal of Paleontology, 15, 97–106.Google Scholar
  9. Brice, D. (1982). Brachiopodes du Dévonien inférieur et moyen des formations de Blue Fiord et Bird Fiord des îles arctiques canadiennes. Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin, 326, 1–175.Google Scholar
  10. Bronn, H. (1828). Posidonia Becheri, eine neue fossile Muschel der Uebergangs-Periode. Zeitschrift für Mineralogie, 1, 262–269.Google Scholar
  11. Brunton, C. H. C. (1980). Type specimens of some Upper Palaeozoic Athyridide brachiopods. British Museum (Natural History), Bulletin (Geology), 34, 219–234.Google Scholar
  12. Brunton, C. H. C. (1984). Silicified brachiopods from the Viséan of County Fermanagh, Ireland (III). Rhynchonellids, spiriferids and terebratulids. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology, 38, 27–130.Google Scholar
  13. Buckman, S. S. (1906). Brachiopod nomenclature: Epithyris, Hypothyris, Cleiothyris Phillips, 1841. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (Series 7), 18(107), 321–327.Google Scholar
  14. Carter, J. L. (1967). Mississippian brachiopods from the Chappel Limestone of central Texas. Bulletins of American Paleontology, 53, 249–488.Google Scholar
  15. Carter, J. L. (1991). Subdivision of the Lower Carboniferous in North America by means of articulate brachiopod generic ranges. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 130, 145–155.Google Scholar
  16. Carter, J. L. (2006). Brachythyridoidea. In R. L. Kaesler (Ed.), Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, Part H (Revised), Brachiopoda, 5 (pp. 1821–1824). Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas: Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
  17. Carter, J. L., & Gourvennec, R. (2006a). Martinioidea. In R. L. Kaesler (Ed.), Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, Part H (Revised), Brachiopoda, 5 (pp. 1747–1768). Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas: Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
  18. Carter, J. L., & Gourvennec, R. (2006b). Reticularioidea. In R. L. Kaesler (Ed.), Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, Part H (Revised), Brachiopoda, 5 (pp. 1848–1870). Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas: Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
  19. Carter, J. L., Johnson, J. G., Gourvennec, R., & Hou, H.-F. (1994). A revised classification of the spiriferid brachiopods. Annals of Carnegie Museum, 63, 327–374.Google Scholar
  20. Carter, J. L., Johnson, J. G., Gourvennec, R., & Hou, H.-F. (2006). Spiriferida. In R. L. Kaesler (Ed.), Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, Part H (Revised), Brachiopoda, 5 (pp. 1689–1870). Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas: Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
  21. Claus, R. (1927). Die Elsoffer Kulm-Mulde – Ein Beitrag zur Stratigraphie und Petrographie des Unterkarbons am Ostrande des Rheinischen Schiefergebirges. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 79(2–3), 235–279.Google Scholar
  22. Crickmay, C. H. (1953). Warrenella, a new genus of Devonian brachiopods. Journal of Paleontology, 27, 596–600.Google Scholar
  23. Davidson, T. (1858–1863). A monograph of the British fossil Brachiopoda. Vol. II, Part V, Nos. 1–5. The Carboniferous Brachiopoda. London: Palaeontographical Society.Google Scholar
  24. Davydov, V. I., Korn, D., & Schmitz, M. D. (2012). The Carboniferous Period. In F. M, J. G. Ogg, M. D. Scmitz, & G. M. Ogg (Eds.), The Geologic Time Scale 2012, Volume 2 (pp. 603–651). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  25. Demanet, F. (1934). Les brachiopodes du Dinantien de la Belgique. Vol. 1, Atremata, Neotremata, Protremata (pars). Mémoires du Musée royal d’Histoire naturelle de Belgique, 61, 1–116.Google Scholar
  26. Douglas, J. A. (1909). The Carboniferous Limestone of County Clare (Ireland). Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 65, 538–586.Google Scholar
  27. Eichenberg, W., & Schneider, H. (1962). Schichtenfolge und Fossilführung im Riff des Iberges und Winterberges (Devon, Karbon) bei Bad Grund im Harz. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, H. Schmidt-Festband, 25–28.Google Scholar
  28. Fleming, J. (1828). A History of British Animals, Exhibiting the Descriptive Characters and Systematical Arrangement of the Genera and Species of Quadrupeds, Birds, Reptiles, Fishes, Mollusca, and Radiata of the United Kingdom. Edinburgh, London: Bell & Bradfute and James Duncan.Google Scholar
  29. Foord, A. H., & Crick, G. C. (1897). Catalogue of the fossil Cephalopoda in the British Museum (Natural History). III. Bactritidae, part of Ammonoidea. London: British Museum (Natural History).Google Scholar
  30. Franke, W. (1973). Fazies, Bau und Entwicklungsgeschichte des Iberger Riffes (Mitteldevon und Unterkarbon III, NW-Harz, W-Deutschland). Geologisches Jahrbuch, Reihe A, 11, 1–127.Google Scholar
  31. Frech, F. (1885). Die Korallenfauna des Oberdevons in Deutschland. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 37(1), 21–130.Google Scholar
  32. Frederiks, G. N. (1924). Paleontological studies. 2. On Upper Carboniferous spiriferids from Urals. Izvestiya Geologicheskogo Komiteta, 38(3), 295–324 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  33. Fromentel, É. de (1861). Introduction à l’étude des polypiers fossiles. Paris: F. Savy.Google Scholar
  34. Fuhrmann, A. (1949). Beiträge zur Geologie des Iberg-Winterberg-Massivs bei Bad Grund (Oberharz) im Lichte der neuen Aufschlüsse. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, B, Geologie-Paläontologie, 91, 35–80.Google Scholar
  35. George, T. N. (1931). Ambocoelia Hall and certain similar British Spiriferidae. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 87, 30–61.Google Scholar
  36. Gischler, E. (1991). The reef of Iberg and Winterberg. In E. Gischler, H. H. Weller, & D. Weyer (Eds.), Excursion-Guidebook VI. International Symposium on Fossil Cnidaria including Archaeocyatha and Porifera. Excursion A 4. Devonian Reefs of the Harz Mountains, Germany (pp. 5–35). Münster: International Association for the Study of Fossil Cnidaria and Porifera.Google Scholar
  37. Gischler, E. (1992). Das devonische Atoll von Iberg und Winterberg im Harz nach Ende des Riffwachstums. Geologisches Jahrbuch, Reihe A, 129, 1–193.Google Scholar
  38. Gischler, E. (1994). A new occurrence of ‘Spirifermacrogaster F.A. Roemer 1852 (Brachiopoda) in Lower Carboniferous limestones on top of the Iberg Reef, Germany. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Monatshefte, 1994(6), 321–328.Google Scholar
  39. Gischler, E. (1996). Late Devonian-Early Carboniferous deep-water coral assemblages and sedimentation on a Devonian seamount: Iberg Reef, Harz Mts., Germany. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 123, 297–322.Google Scholar
  40. Gischler, E., & Korn, D. (1992). Goniatiten des Ober-Viseums aus Decksedimenten des Iberger Riffes, Oberharz. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 185(3), 271–288.Google Scholar
  41. Gischler, E., Sandy, M. R., & Peckmann, J. (2003). Ibergirhynchia contraria (F.A. Roemer, 1850), an Early Carboniferous seep-related rhynchonellide brachiopod from the Harz Mountains, Germany – a possible successor to Dzieduszyckia? Journal of Paleontology, 77, 293–303.Google Scholar
  42. Gischler, E., Baliński, A., Fuchs, A., & Heidelberger, D. (2004). Famennian brachiopod and gastropod occurrences on top of Devonian seamounts, Elbingerode and Iberg Reefs, Hartz Mts., Germany. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 84, 125–139.Google Scholar
  43. Godefroid, J. (1995). Invertina struvei, a new atrypide brachiopod species from the Givetian of Morocco. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 79, 267–273.Google Scholar
  44. Gröning, E. (1986). Revision der Gattung Liobole (Trilobita, Unter-Karbon). Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 80, 1–216.Google Scholar
  45. Hahn, G. (1965). Revision der Gattung Archegonus Burmeister 1843 (Trilobita). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 46, 229–262.Google Scholar
  46. Hahn, G. (1966). Morphologie, Variabilität und postlarvale Ontogenie von Archegonus (Phillibole) nitidus und Archegonus (Angustibole) winterbergensis (Trilobita; Unter-Karbon). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 47, 347–383.Google Scholar
  47. Hahn, G. (1967). Neue Trilobiten vom Winterberg/Harz (Unter-Karbon). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 48, 163–189.Google Scholar
  48. Havlíček, V. (1959). Spiriferidae v Ceském Siluru a Devonu (Brachiopoda). Ustredního Ustavu Geologického, Rozpravy, 25, 1–275.Google Scholar
  49. Havliček, V. (1982). New Pugnacidae and Plectorhynchellidae (Brachiopoda) in the Silurian and Devonian Rocks of Bohemia. Vĕstník Ústredního Ústavu Geologického, 57, 111–114.Google Scholar
  50. Herbig, H.-G., & Stoppel, D. (2006). [Faunen des deutschen Unterkarbons]. 5.11. Conodonten. In Deutsche Stratigraphische Kommission (Ed.), Stratigraphie von Deutschland VI, Unterkarbon (Mississippium) (Red.: M. R. W. Amler, & D. Stoppel). Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Geowissenschaften, 41, 202–226.Google Scholar
  51. Holzapfel, E. (1889). Die Cephalopoden-führenden Kalke des Unteren Carbon von Erdbach-Breitscheid bei Herborn. Paläontologische Abhandlungen, Neue Folge, 1, 1–74.Google Scholar
  52. Ivanova, E. A. (1949). Habitat, form of life and history of development of certain brachiopods of the Middle and Upper Carboniferous of the Moscow Basin. Akademiia Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskii Institut, Trudy, 21, 1–152.Google Scholar
  53. King, W. (1850). A monograph of the Permian Fossils of England. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 3, 1–258.Google Scholar
  54. Koenen, A. (1879). Die Kulm-Fauna von Herborn. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie. Geologie und Paläontologie, 10, 309–334.Google Scholar
  55. Koninck, L.-G. de (1887). Faune du calcaire carbonifère de la Belgique. Sixième partie. Brachiopodes. Annales du Musée royal d’Histoire naturelle de Belgique, 14, 1–154.Google Scholar
  56. Korn, D. (1988). Die Goniatiten des Kulmplattenkalkes (Cephalopoda, Ammonoidea; Unterkarbon; Rheinisches Schiefergebirge). Geologie und Paläontologie in Westfalen, 11, 1–291.Google Scholar
  57. Korn, D. (2006). Ammonoideen. In Deutsche Stratigraphische Kommission (Ed.), Stratigraphie von Deutschland VI, Unterkarbon (Mississippium) (Red.: M. R. W. Amler, & D. Stoppel). Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Geowissenschaften, 41, 147–170.Google Scholar
  58. Korn, D. (2017). Goniatites sphaericus (Sowerby, 1814), the archetype of Palaeozoic ammonoids: a case of decreasing phenotypic variation through ontogeny. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 91, 337–352.Google Scholar
  59. Korn, D., & Kaufmann, B. (2009). A high resolution relative time scale for the Viséan Stage (Carboniferous) of the Kulm Basin (Rhenish Mountains, Germany). Geological Journal, 44, 306–321.Google Scholar
  60. Krebs, W. (1962). Oberdevonische Conodonten im Unterkarbon des rheinischen Schiefergebirges und des Harzes. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 114, 57–84.Google Scholar
  61. Krebs, W. (1966). Der Bau des oberdevonischen Langenaubach-Breitscheider Riffes und seine weitere Entwicklung im Unterkarbon (Rheinisches Schiefergebirge). Abhandlungen der Senckenbergischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft, 511, 1–105.Google Scholar
  62. Krebs, W. (1968). Die Lagerungsverhältnisse des Erdbacher Kalkes (Unterkarbon II) bei Langenaubach-Breitscheid (Rheinisches Schiefergebirge). Geotektonische Forschungen, 28, 72–103.Google Scholar
  63. Lazarev, S. S. (1976). Morphology and evolution of brachiopods (of the superfamily Enteletacea). Akademiia Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskii Institut, Trudy, 154, 1–167 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  64. Legrand-Blain, M., Delvolvé, J.-J., & Hansotte, M. (1996). Carboniferous brachiopods from the Arize Massif (Ariège), French Pyrénées. Geobios, 29, 177–207.Google Scholar
  65. M’Coy, F. (1844). A Synopsis of the characters of the Carboniferous Limestone Fossils of Ireland. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
  66. Ma, X.-P., Becker, R. T., Li, H., & Sun, Y.-Y. (2006). Early and Middle Frasnian brachiopod faunas and turnover on the South China shelf. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, 51, 789–812.Google Scholar
  67. Martin, W. (1809). Petrificata Derbiensia; or, Figures and Descriptions of Petrifications collected in Derbyshire. Wigan: D. Lyon.Google Scholar
  68. McChesney, J. H. (1860–1865). Descriptions of New Species of Fossils from the Palaeozoic Rocks of the Western States. Chicago: Privately issued.Google Scholar
  69. Menning, M., Glodny, J., Brocke, R., Jansen, U., Schindler, E., & Weyer, D. (2017). Die Devon-Zeitskala der Stratigraphischen Tabelle von Deutschland 2016 (STD 2016). Zeitschrift der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Geowissenschaften (German Journal of Geology), 168, 465–482.Google Scholar
  70. Minato, M. (1953). On some reticulate Spiriferidae. Transactions and Proceedings of the Palaeontological Society of Japan (new series), 11, 65–73.Google Scholar
  71. Mottequin, B. (2010). Mississippian (Tournaisian) brachiopods from the Hook Head Formation, County Wexford (south-east Ireland). Special Papers in Palaeontology, 84, 243–285.Google Scholar
  72. Mottequin, B., & Simon, E. (2017a). Revision of some spiriferide and spiriferinide brachiopods from the historical type area of the Tournaisian Stage (Carboniferous, southern Belgium). Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 91, 473–496.Google Scholar
  73. Mottequin, B., & Simon, E. (2017b). New insights on Tournaisian–Visean (Carboniferous, Mississippian) athyridide, orthotetide, rhynchonellide, and strophomenide brachiopods from southern Belgium. Palaeontologia Electronica, 20.2.28A(2), 1–45.Google Scholar
  74. Mottequin, B., Sevastopulo, G., & Simon, E. (2015). Micromorph brachiopods from the late Asbian (Mississippian, Viséan) from northwest Ireland (Gleniff, County Sligo). Bulletin of Geosciences, 90, 307–330.Google Scholar
  75. Mottequin, B., Bartzsch, K., Simon, E., & Weyer, D. (in press). Brachiopod faunas from the basinal facies of southeastern Thuringia (Germany) before and after the Hangenberg Crisis (Devonian–Carboniferous boundary). Palaeontologia Electronica. Google Scholar
  76. Muir-Wood, H. (1962). On the Morphology and Classification of the Brachiopod Suborder Chonetoidea. London: British Museum (Natural History).Google Scholar
  77. Muir-Wood, H., & Cooper, G. A. (1960). Morphology, classification and life habits of the Productoidea (Brachiopoda). The Geological Society of America, Memoir, 81, 1–447.Google Scholar
  78. Müller, P., & Hahn, G. (2018). Die Trilobiten der Erdbach-Kalke von Erdbach (Hessen) und die der “Phillipsien-Bank” im Raum Warstein (Nordrhein-Westfalen), sowie eine Revision der Cystispininae (mittleres Mississippium). Abhandlungen der Senckenberg-Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, 574, 1–237.Google Scholar
  79. Nebe, B. (1911). Die Culmfauna von Hagen i. W., ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis des westfälischen Unterkarbons. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie, Beilage-Band, 31, 421–495.Google Scholar
  80. Nicolaus, H.-J. (1963). Zur Stratigraphie und Fauna der crenistria-Zone im Kulm des Rheinischen Schiefergebirges. Beihefte zum Geologischen Jarhrbuch, 53, 1–246.Google Scholar
  81. Orbigny, A. d’ (1842). Voyage dans l’Amérique Méridionale (le Brésil, la République Orientale de l’Uruguay, la République argentine, la Patagonie, la République du Chili, la République de Bolivie, la République du Pérou), exécuté pendant les années 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832, et 1833. Tome 3 (4). Paléontologie. Paris: P. Bertrand, Strasbourg: V. Levrault.Google Scholar
  82. Paeckelmann, W. (1930). Die Fauna des deutschen Unterkarbons. 1. Teil. 3. Die Brachiopoden des deutschen Unterkarbons. I. Teil. Die Orthiden, Strophomeniden und Choneten des Mittleren und Oberen Unterkarbons. Abhandlungen der Preußischen Geologischen Landesanstalt, Neue Folge, 122, 143–326.Google Scholar
  83. Paeckelmann, W. (1931). Die Fauna des deutschen Unterkarbons. 2.Teil. Die Brachiopoden des deutschen Unterkarbons. 2. Teil. Die Productinae und Productus-ähnlichen Chonetinae. Abhandlungen der Preußischen Geologischen Landesanstalt, Neue Folge, 136, 1–440.Google Scholar
  84. Parkinson, J. (1822). Introduction to the study of fossil organic remains. I. London: Sherwood, Neely, & Jones.Google Scholar
  85. Peou, S. (1980). Some Carboniferous Articulate brachiopods from Eastern South Wales. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales, 104, 1–15.Google Scholar
  86. Phillips, J. (1836). Illustrations of the geology of Yorkshire or a description of the strata and organic remains. II. The Mountain Limestone District. London: J. Murray.Google Scholar
  87. Phillips, J. (1841). Figures and Descriptions of the Palaeozoic Fossils of Cornwall, Devon, and West Somerset; observed in the course of the ordnance geological survey of that district. London: Longman, Brown, Green, & Longmans.Google Scholar
  88. Poletaev, V. I. (1975). Early Carboniferous and Bashkirian smooth spiriferids and athyrids of the Donets Basin. Kiev: Akademia Nauk Ukrainskoi SSR, Institut Geologicheskikh Nauk. Izdatelstvo Naukova Dumka [in Russian].Google Scholar
  89. Richter, R., & Richter, E. (1949). Die Trilobiten der Erdbach-Zone (Kulm) im Rheinischen Schiefergebirge und im Harz. Senckenbergiana, 30, 63–94.Google Scholar
  90. Riley, N. J. (1990). Stratigraphy of the Worston Shale Group (Dinantian), Craven Basin, north-west England. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 48, 163–187.Google Scholar
  91. Riley, N. J. (1991). A global review of mid-Dinantian ammonoid biostratigraphy. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 130, 133–143 (dated 1990).Google Scholar
  92. Riley, N. J. (1993). Dinantian (Lower Carboniferous) biostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy in the British Isles. Journal of the Geological Society, 150, 427–446.Google Scholar
  93. Riley, N. J. (1995). Foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Chadian stage stratotype (Dinantian), Chatburn, northwest England. Bulletin de la Société belge de Géologie, 103(for 1994), 13–49.Google Scholar
  94. Riley, N. J. (1996). Mid-Dinantian ammonoids from the Craven Basin, north-west England. Special Papers in Palaeontology, 53, 1–87.Google Scholar
  95. Roemer, F. A. (1850). Beiträge zur geologischen Kenntniss des nordwestlichen Harzgebirges. [I]. Palaeontographica, 3(1), 1–67.Google Scholar
  96. Roemer, F. A. (1852). Beiträge zur geologischen Kenntniss des nordwestlichen Harzgebirges. II. Palaeontographica, 3(2), 69–111.Google Scholar
  97. Roemer, F. A. (1862). Beiträge zur geologischen Kenntniss des Nordwestlichen Harzgebirges. IV. Palaeontographica, 9(I–II, 1–46), 347–348.Google Scholar
  98. Roemer, F. A. (1866). Beiträge zur geologischen Kentniss des Nordwestlichen Harzgebirges. V., 13(Palaeontographica), 201–235 354.Google Scholar
  99. Roundy, P. V., Girty, G. H., & Goldman, M. I. (1926). Mississippian Formations of San Saba County, Texas. Professional Paper, U.S. Geological Survey, 146, 1–63.Google Scholar
  100. Ruzhencev, V. E. (1962). Nadotryad Ammonoidea. In Yu. A. Orlov (Ed.), Osnovy Paleontologii. Mollyuski – Golovonogie I (pp. 243–425). Moskva: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR [in Russian].Google Scholar
  101. Schindewolf, O. H. (1951). Über ein neues Vorkommen unterkarbornischer Pericyclus-Schichten im Oberharz. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 93, 23–116.Google Scholar
  102. Schmidt, H. (1922). Das Oberdevon-Culmgebiet von Warstein i.W. und Belecke. Jahrbuch der Preussischen Geologischen Landesanstalt, 41(for 1920), 254–339.Google Scholar
  103. Schmidt, H. (1924). Zwei Cephalopodenfaunen an der Devon-Carbongrenze im Sauerland. Jahrbuch der Preussischen Geologischen Landesanstalt, 44(for 1923), 98–171.Google Scholar
  104. Schmidt, H. (1925). Die carbonischen Goniatiten Deutschlands. Jahrbuch der Preussischen Geologischen Landesanstalt, 45(for 1924), 489–609.Google Scholar
  105. Schneider, H. (1956). Bericht der Exkursion IIa. Oberdevon und Unterkarbon bei Bad Grund und im Innerstetal. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 30, 4–7.Google Scholar
  106. Scupin, H. (1900). Die Spiriferen Deutschlands. Palaeontologische Abhandlungen, Neue Folge 4, 8(3), 207–344.Google Scholar
  107. Semenow, P. v. (1854). Fauna des schlesischen Kohlenkalkes. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 6, 317–404.Google Scholar
  108. Sokolskaya, A. N. (1941). Lower Carboniferous and Devonian–Carboniferous brachiopods of the Moscow Basin (Tschernishino, Upa and Malevka-Murajevnia beds; Part 1, Spiriferidae). Akademiia Nauk SSSR, Paleontologicheskii Institut, Trudy, 12(2), 1–138 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  109. Sowerby, J. (1812–1815). The Mineral Conchology of Great Britain or coloured figures and descriptions of those remains of testaceous animals or shells, which have been preserved at various times and depths in the earth. Volume 1 (parts 1–18). London: B. Meredith.Google Scholar
  110. Struve, W. (1970). “Curvate Spiriferen” der Gattung Rhenothyris und einige andere Reticulariidae aus dem Rheinischen Devon. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 51, 449–577.Google Scholar
  111. Thayer, C. W. (1974). Marine paleoecology in the Upper Devonian of New York. Lethaia, 7, 121–155.Google Scholar
  112. Tietze, E. (1870). Ueber die devonischen Schichten von Ebersdorf unweit Neurode in der Grafshaft Glatz, eine geognostisch-paläontologische Monographie. Palaeontographica, 19, 103–158.Google Scholar
  113. Trenkner, W. (1862). Ueber das Vorkommen des Kohlenkalks bei Grund a/H. Zeitschrift für die Gesammten Naturwissenschaften (naturwissenschaftlicher Verein von Sachsen und Thüringen in Halle), 19, 1–11.Google Scholar
  114. Trenkner, W. (1867). Paläontologische Novitäten vom Nordwestlichen Harze. 1. Iberger Kalk und Kohlengebirge von Grund. Abhandlungen der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft zu Halle, 10, 123–182.Google Scholar
  115. Veevers, J. J. (1959). The type species of Productella, Emanuella, Crurithyris and Ambocoelia (Brachiopoda). Journal of Paleontology, 33, 902–908.Google Scholar
  116. Voges, A. (1960). Die Bedeutung der Conodonten für die Stratigraphie des Unterkarbons I und II (Gattendorfia- und Pericyclus-Stufe) im Sauerland. Fortschritte in der Geologie von Rheinland und Westfalen, 3, 197–228.Google Scholar
  117. Waagen, W. H. (1883). Salt Range fossils, I. Productus-Limestone Fossils. Brachiopoda. Palaeontologia Indica, Series 13, 4, 391–546.Google Scholar
  118. Waterhouse, J. B. (1968). The classification and descriptions of Permian Spiriferida (Brachiopoda) from New Zealand. Palaeontographica, Abteilung A, 129, 1–94.Google Scholar
  119. Webster, G. D., & Groessens, E. (1990). Conodont subdivision of the Lower Carboniferous. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 130, 31–40.Google Scholar
  120. Weigelt, J. (1918). Die Gliederung und die Faunenverteilung im Unteren Culm des Oberharzes. Jahrbuch der Preussischen Geologischen Landesanstalt, 37, 157–271.Google Scholar
  121. Weller, S. (1914). The Mississippian Brachiopoda of the Mississippi Valley Basin. Illinois State Geological Survey Monograph, 1, 1–508.Google Scholar
  122. Weyer, D. (1972). Rozmanaria, ein neues Rhynchonellida-Genus aus dem europäischen Oberfamenne (Brachiopoda, Oberdevon). Geologie, 21(1), 84–99.Google Scholar
  123. Weyer, D. (2018). Famennian Corals from Morocco. 2. Actinotheca Frech, 1889 (Tabulata). Freiberger Forschungshefte, C, Paläontologie, Stratigraphie, Fazies, 553, 15–50.Google Scholar
  124. Weyer, D., & Menning, M. (2006). Geologische Zeitskala, stratigraphische Nomenklatur und Magnetostratigraphie. In Deutsche Stratigraphische Kommission (Ed.), Stratigraphie von Deutschland VI, Unterkarbon (Mississippium) (Red.: M. R. W. Amler, & D. Stoppel). Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Geowissenschaften, 41, 27–50.Google Scholar
  125. Winkler Prins, C. F., & Amler, M. R. W. (2006). Brachiopoden. In Deutsche Stratigraphische Kommission (Ed.), Stratigraphie von Deutschland VI, Unterkarbon (Mississippium) (Red.: M. R. W. Amler, & D. Stoppel). Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Geowissenschaften, 41, 89–100.Google Scholar
  126. Ziegler, W. (1960). Die Conodonten aus den Geröllen des Zechstein-konglomerates von Rossenray (südwestlich Rheinberg/Niederrhein), mit der Beschreibung einiger neuen Conodontenformen. Fortschritte in der Geologie von Rheinland und Westfalen, 6, 391–406.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.O.D. Earth and History of LifeRoyal Belgian Institute of Natural SciencesBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Museum of Natural History (Leibniz Institute) at Humboldt UniversityBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations