pp 1–14 | Cite as

The cycadalean megasporophyll Dioonitocarpidium in the Carnian (Late Triassic) flora of Lunz am See, Austria

  • Christian PottEmail author
Research Paper


Twenty-seven specimens from the Carnian flora of Lunz am See, Austria, belonging to Dioonitocarpidium, a genus to accommodate cycadalean megasporophylls, have been examined. In agreement with older reports, two clearly separable species have been identified, viz. Dioonitocarpidium titzei (Krasser 1917) Pott, comb. nov., and Dioonitocarpidium liliensternii Kräusel 1953, emend. Pott. Both species required a revision after examination of the original specimens and the related bibliography. For the first time, epidermal anatomy is described for a Dioonitocarpidium species from cuticle remains. The sterile foliage of the Dioonitocarpidium parent plant is discussed and giant cycad-like foliage assigned to Nilssonia is identified as the most plausible option. The putative assignment of the Dioonitocarpidium megasporophylls to the Cycadales is also discussed.


Cycadales Cycads Seeds Taeniopteris Nilssonia Dioonites 



The author greatly acknowledges the permission of the Museum of Natural History (NHMW), Vienna, Austria, and the Swedish Museum of Natural History (NRM), Stockholm, Sweden, to use some of the fossils for destructive sampling for isolation, preparation and maceration of cuticles, without which this study would not have been possible. Staff of the palaeontological departments of NHMW, especially Andreas Kroh, the Geological Survey of Austria, Vienna, Austria, especially Irene Zorn, and NRM, especially Ove Johansson, are thanked for permissions and all support provided. Johannes Bouchal, NRM, Stockholm, Sweden, is thanked for helping with providing literature and photography of specimens and slides. Johanna H.A. van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden, The Netherlands, and Klaus-Peter Kelber, Würzburg, Germany, are thanked for reviewing the manuscript. This study was performed during periods when the author received funding through the German Research Council (DFG, Bonn) under Grant number KR 2125/3 and from the Swedish Research Council (VR, Stockholm) under Grant number 2012-4375.


  1. Axsmith, B.J., R. Serbet, M. Krings, T.N. Taylor, E.L. Taylor, and S.H. Mamay. 2003. The enigmatic Paleozoic plants Spermopteris and Phasmatocycas reconsidered. American Journal of Botany 90: 1585–1595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berchtold, F. Graf von, and J. Presl. 1820. O přirozenosti rostlin, aneb rostlinár. Prague: Krala Wiljma Endersa.Google Scholar
  3. Broglia Loriga, C., A. Fugagnoli, J.H.A. van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, E. Kustatscher, R. Posenato, and M. Wachtler. 2002. The Anisian macroflora from the Northern Dolomites (Monte prà della Vacca/Kühwiesenkopf, Braies): a first report. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia 108: 381–390.Google Scholar
  4. Brongniart, A. 1825. Observations sur les végétaux fossiles renfermés dans les grès de Hoer en Scanie. Annales des Sciences Naturelles 4: 200–224.Google Scholar
  5. Brongniart, A. 1828. Prodrome d’une histoire des végétaux fossiles. Paris: Levrault.Google Scholar
  6. Brongniart, A. 1843. Énumération des genres de plantes cultivés au Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris suivant l’ordre établi dans l’École de Botanique. Paris: Baillière.Google Scholar
  7. Chamberlain, J.C. 1919. The living cycads. Chicago, Ill.: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Compter, G. 1874. Ein Beitrag zur fossilen Keuperflora. Nova Acta der kaiserlichen Leopoldinisch-Carolinischen Deutschen Akademie der Naturforscher 37: 10–13.Google Scholar
  9. Compter, G. 1894. Die fossile Flora des unteren Keupers von Ostthüringen. Zeitschrift für Naturwissenschaften 37: 205–230.Google Scholar
  10. Compter, G. 1911. Revision der fossilen Keuperflora Ostthüringens. Zeitschrift für Naturwissenschaften 83: 81–116.Google Scholar
  11. Compter, G. 1922. Aus der Urzeit der Gegend von Apolda. Leipzig: Weg.Google Scholar
  12. Cridland, A.A., and J.E. Morris. 1960. Spermopteris, a new genus of pteridosperms from the Upper Pennsylvanian series of Kansas. American Journal of Botany 47: 855–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DiMichele, W.A., S.H. Mamay, D.S. Chaney, R.W. Hook, and W.J. Nelson. 2001. An early Permian flora with late Permian and Mesozoic affinities from North-Central Texas. Journal of Paleontology 75: 449–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Florin, R. 1933. Studien über die Cycadales des Mesozoikums nebst Erörterungen über die Spaltöffnungsapparate der Bennettitales. Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar, Tredje Serien 12: 1–134.Google Scholar
  15. Frentzen, K. 1922. Die Keuperflora Badens. Verhandlungen des naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins Karlsruhe 28: 1–76.Google Scholar
  16. Gao, Z., and B.A. Thomas. 1989. A review of fossil cycad megasporophylls, with new evidence of Crossozamia Pomel and its associated leaves from the Lower Permian of Taiyuan, China. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 60: 205–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harris, T.M. 1961. The fossil cycads. Palaeontology 4: 313–323.Google Scholar
  18. Heer, O. 1877. Flora fossilis Helvetiae. Zürich: Wurster.Google Scholar
  19. Kelber, K.-P. 1990. Die versunkene Pflanzenwelt aus den Deltasümpfen Mainfrankens vor 230 Millionen Jahren. Beringeria 1: 1–67.Google Scholar
  20. Kelber, K.-P. 1998. Phytostratigraphische Aspekte der Makrofloren des süddeutschen Keupers. Documenta Naturae 117: 89–115.Google Scholar
  21. Kelber, K.-P. 2009. Lebensbilder der Unterkeuperzeit im Spiegel der paläontologischen Forschung. Veröffentlichungen Naturhistorisches Museum Schleusingen 24: 27–52.Google Scholar
  22. Kelber, K.-P., and W. Hansch. 1995. Keuperpflanzen. Die Enträtselung einer über 200 Millionen Jahre alten Flora. Museo 11: 1–157.Google Scholar
  23. Kelber, K.-P., and E. Nitsch. 2005. Paläoflora und Ablagerungsräume im unterfränkischen Keuper (Exkursion H am 1. April 2005). Jahresberichte und Mitteilungen des Oberrheinischen Geologischen Vereins, N.F. 87: 217–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krasser, F. 1909. Zur Kenntnis der fossilen Flora der Lunzer Schichten. Jahrbuch der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Geologischen Reichsanstalt 59: 1–26.Google Scholar
  25. Krasser, F. 1917. Studien über die fertile Region der Cycadophyten aus den Lunzer-Schichten: Mikrosporophylle und männliche Zapfen. Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse 94: 489–553.Google Scholar
  26. Kräusel, R. 1949. Koniferen und andere Gymnospermen aus der Trias von Lunz, Nieder-Österreich. Palaeontographica (B: Paläophytologie) 89: 35–82.Google Scholar
  27. Kräusel, R. 1953. Ein neues Dioonitocarpidium aus der Trias von Lunz. Senckenbergiana 34: 105–108.Google Scholar
  28. Kustatscher, E., and J.H.A. van Konijnenburg-van Cittert. 2010. Seed ferns and Cycadophytes from the Triassic Flora of Thale (Germany). Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen 258: 195–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kustatscher, E., M. Wachtler, and J.H.A. van Konijnenburg-van Cittert. 2004. A number of additional and revised taxa from the Ladinian flora of the Dolomites, Northern Italy. GeoAlp 1: 57–69.Google Scholar
  30. Kustatscher, E., K.-P. Kelber, and J.H.A. van Konijnenburg-van Cittert. 2012. Danaeopsis Heer ex Schimper 1869 and its European Triassic species. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 183: 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Langer, J. 1943. Über einige Stücke der Keuper-Flora von Lunz (Niederdonau). Berichte des Reichsamts für Bodenforschung 1943: 52–58.Google Scholar
  32. Leonardi, P. 1953. Flora continentale ladinica delle Dolomiti. Memorie di Scienze Geologiche Università di Padova 18: 1–22.Google Scholar
  33. Leuthardt, F. 1903. Die Keuperflora von Neuewelt bei Basel—I. Teil. Phanerogamen. Abhandlungen der Schweizerischen Paläontologischen Gesellschaft 30: 1–23.Google Scholar
  34. Linnæus, C. 1753. Species plantarum, exhibentes plantas rite cognitas, ad genera relatas, cum differentiis specificis, nominibus trivialibus, synonymis selectis, locis natalibus, secundum systema sexuale digestas. Tomus II. Holmiæ [= Stockholm]: Laurentius Salvius.Google Scholar
  35. Looy, C.V., H. Kerp, I.A.P. Duijnstee, and W.A. DiMichele. 2014. The late Paleozoic ecological-evolutionary laboratory, a land-plant fossil record perspective. The Sedimentary Record 12: 4–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mamay, S.H. 1973. Archaeocycas and Phasmatocycas—new genera of Permian cycads. Journal of Research US Geological Survey 1: 687–689.Google Scholar
  37. Mamay, S.H. 1976. Paleozoic origin of the cycads. US Geological Survey, Professional Paper 934: 1–48.Google Scholar
  38. Miquel, F.A.W. 1851. Over de rangschikking der fossiele Cycadeae. Tijdschrift voor de Wis- en Natuurkundige Wetenschappen 4: 205–227.Google Scholar
  39. Nathorst, A.G. 1909. Über die Gattung Nilssonia Brongn. Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar 43: 3–37.Google Scholar
  40. Norstog, K.J., and T.J. Nicholls. 1997. The biology of the cycads. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Persoon, C.H. 1807. Synopsis plantarum seu enchridium botanicum, complectens enumerationem systematica specierum hucusque cognitarum. Paris: Treuttel & Würth.Google Scholar
  42. Pott, C. 2007. Cuticular analysis of gymnosperm foliage from the Carnian (Upper Triassic) of Lunz, Lower Austria. PhD thesis. Münster: University Münster.Google Scholar
  43. Pott, C. 2014. A revision of Wielandiella angustifolia—a shrub-sized bennettite from the Rhaetian-Hettangian of Scania, Sweden, and Jameson Land, Greenland. International Journal of Plant Sciences 175: 467–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pott, C. 2016. Westersheimia pramelreuthensis from the Carnian (Upper Triassic) of Lunz, Austria: more evidence for a unitegmic seed coat in early Bennettitales. International Journal of Plant Sciences 177: 771–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pott, C., and S. McLoughlin. 2009. Bennettitalean foliage in the Rhaetian-Bajocian (latest Triassic-Middle Jurassic) floras of Scania, southern Sweden. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 158: 117–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pott, C., and A. Launis. 2015. Taeniopteris novomundensis sp. nov.—“cycadophyte” foliage from the Carnian of Switzerland and Svalbard reconsidered: how to use Taeniopteris? Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen 275: 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pott, C., H. Kerp, and M. Krings. 2007a. Pseudoctenis cornelii nov. spec. (cycadalean foliage) from the Carnian (Upper Triassic) of Lunz, Lower Austria. Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums Wien 109A: 1–17.Google Scholar
  48. Pott, C., H. Kerp, and M. Krings. 2007b. Morphology and epidermal anatomy of Nilssonia (cycadalean foliage) from the Upper Triassic of Lunz (Lower Austria). Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 143: 197–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pott, C., M. Krings, and H. Kerp. 2007c. The first record of Nilssoniopteris (Gymnospermophyta, Bennettitales) from the Carnian (Upper Triassic) of Lunz, Lower Austria. Palaeontology 50: 1299–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pott, C., J.H.A. van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, H. Kerp, and M. Krings. 2007d. Revision of the Pterophyllum species (Cycadophytina: Bennettitales) in the Carnian (Late Triassic) flora from Lunz, Lower Austria. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 147: 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pott, C., M. Krings, and H. Kerp. 2008. The Carnian (Late Triassic) flora from Lunz in Lower Austria: palaeoecological considerations. Palaeoworld 17: 172–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pott, C., M. Krings, H. Kerp, and E.M. Friis. 2010. Reconstruction of a bennettitalean flower from the Carnian (Upper Triassic) of Lunz, Lower Austria. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 159: 94–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pott, C., S. McLoughlin, A. Lindström, S.-Q. Wu, and E.M. Friis. 2012. Baikalophyllum lobatum and Rehezamites anisolobus: two seed plants with “cycadophyte” foliage from the Early Cretaceous of eastern Asia. International Journal of Plant Sciences 173: 192–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pott, C., T. Fischer, and B. Aschauer. 2017. Lunzia austriaca—a bennettitalean microsporangiate structure with Cycadopites-like in situ pollen from the Carnian (Upper Triassic) of Lunz, Austria. Grana 56: 321–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pott, C., J.M. Bouchal, T.Y.S. Choo, R. Yousif, and B. Bomfleur. 2018. Ferns and fern allies from the Carnian (Upper Triassic) of Lunz am See, Lower Austria: a melting pot of Mesozoic fern vegetation. Palaeontographica (B: Paläophytologie) 297: 1–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rozynek, B. 2008. Schozachia donaea n. gen., n. sp., a new cycad megasporophyll from the Middle Triassic (Ladinian) of Southern Germany. Palaeodiversity 1: 1–17.Google Scholar
  57. Rühle von Lilienstern, H. 1928. “Dioonites pennaeformis Schenk”, eine fertile Cycadee aus der Lettenkohle. Paläontologische Zeitschrift 10: 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schenk, A. 1864. Beiträge zur Flora des Keupers und der rhätischen Formation. Berichte der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft zu Bamberg 7: 1–91.Google Scholar
  59. Schenk, A. 1866. Bemerkungen über einige Pflanzen der Lettenkohle und des Schilfsandsteines. Würzburger Naturwissenschaftliche Zeitschrift 6: 49–63.Google Scholar
  60. Schuster, J. 1931. Über das Verhältnis der systematischen Gliederung, der geographischen Verbreitung und der paläontologischen Entwicklung der Cycadaceen. Engler’s Botanische Jahrbücher 54: 165–260.Google Scholar
  61. Seward, A.C. 1911. The Jurassic flora of Sutherland. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 47: 643–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stur, D. 1871. Geologie der Steiermark. Graz: Verlag des geognostisch-montanen Vereines für Steiermark.Google Scholar
  63. Stur, D. 1885. Die obertriadische Flora der Lunzer-Schichten und des bituminösen Schiefers von Raibl. Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien 3: 93–103.Google Scholar
  64. Taylor, T.N., E.L. Taylor, and M. Krings. 2009. Palaeobotany—the biology and evolution of plants. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  65. Wachtler, M., and J.H.A. van Konijnenburg-van Cittert. 2000. The fossil flora of the Wengen Formation (Ladinian) in the Dolomites (Italy). Beiträge zur Paläontologie 25: 105–141.Google Scholar
  66. Zhu, J.-N., and X.-M. Du. 1981. A new cycad—Primocycas chinensis gen. et sp. nov. discovers from the Lower Permian in Shanxi, China and its significance. Acta Botanica Sinica 23: 401–404. (in Chinese).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Paläontologische Gesellschaft 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LWL-Museum für NaturkundeMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations