4.2 Article

Corals from the Carboniferous of the central Sahara (Algeria): the collection Marie Legrand-Blain

期刊

GEODIVERSITAS
卷 33, 期 4, 页码 581-624

出版社

MUSEUM NATL HISTOIRE NATURELLE
DOI: 10.5252/g2011n4a3

关键词

Carboniferous; Mississippian; Pennsylvanian; Rugosa; Tabulata; Algeria; Sahara; Mid-Carboniferous Boundary; new genus; new species

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The collection Marie Legrand-Blain contains a diverse fauna of Carboniferous corals from the marine strata of the Algerian Sahara. Among 96 specimens, there are 34 rugose coral taxa and four tabulate coral taxa. Saharaphrentis tirechouminoidense n. gen., n. sp., ?Amplexizaphrentis illizidensis n. sp. and Haplolasma paraarciferum n. sp. are new. The supposed high coral diversity of the Sahara basins is confirmed by the present study. The interspecific and intraspecific variabilities are hardly known, because the number of specimens is limited; commonly a single or few specimens. Thus populations could not be studied and in some cases only an assignment at generic level is possible. Two main coral associations can be distinguished. Undissepimented solitary rugose corals (zaphrentids) and michelinid tabulate corals dominate the shaly environments. Larger and more complex solitary and colonial rugose corals occur mainly in carbonate environments. The Mid-Carboniferous Boundary is an important faunal break. It is characterized by the disappearance of typical Mississippian solitary and colonial taxa. Colonial aulinid corals have only been found below and above the boundary level. The new Bashkirian coral stock shows palaeobiogeographic connections to the western United States and the Donets Basin. The studied coral fauna does not support the assignment of a Bashkirian age for strata in the Iliizi Basin and the Ahnet and Reggane basins. The Marie Legrand-Blain collection is a good example of the utility of such old collections for the study of Carboniferous corals from the often remote and hardly accessible Algerian basins.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据