4.7 Article

Macroscopic symbiotic endobionts in Phanerozoic bryozoans

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2023.111453

Keywords

Bryozoa; Symbiosis; Evolutionary paleoecology; Endobionts; Borings; Bioclaustrations; Phanerozoic

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Trepostome bryozoans formed the largest number of symbiotic associations with endobionts in the Phanerozoic, and such associations were also formed by other bryozoans and cyclostomes. Most of the associations were with cnidarians, while fewer were with worms and lophophorates. The evolution of symbiotic relationships and the decrease in parasitic associations in bryozoans can be attributed to their selective behavior and the development of defense mechanisms.
Trepostome bryozoans, with their thick calcitic skeletons, formed the largest number of symbiotic associations with endobionts in the Phanerozoic. Such associations were also formed by cystoporates, fenestrates, cyclostomes and cheilostomes. Bryozoans formed most of their symbiotic associations with endobiotic cnidarians, and markedly fewer with endobiotic worms and endobiotic lophophorates. The majority of Ordovician endobionts colonized borings in living bryozoans, or bored themselves into living hosts, during the Ordovician Bioerosion Revolution, which created new niches for the evolution of symbiotic relationships. The bryozoans likely became more selective and less symbiont tolerant over the time. Assumed mutualistic endobionts were more common than likely parasites in Phanerozoic bryozoans. The decrease in diversity of parasitic associations and the increase in the number of mutualistic associations from the Ordovician to Devonian can be explained by the evolution of possible bryozoan defense mechanisms likely in the form of chemical secretions. Paleozoic endobiont faunas were more diverse than their Mesozoic and Cenozoic counterparts because of endobiont-friendly Paleozoic trepostomes, and because of the peak in diversity of bryozoans with massive colonies in the early and middle Paleozoic.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available