Trace fossil classification: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:09, 18 September 2022

Latest revision as of 09:02, 25 May 2025

(7 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Systems for grouping fossilised evidence of biological activity}}

{{redirect|Ichnos|the Tony Oxley album|Ichnos (album)}}

[[Trace fossil]]s are [[Biological classification|classified]] in various ways for different purposes. Traces can be classified [[#Taxonomic classification|taxonomically]] (by morphology), [[#Ethologic classification|ethologically]] (by behavior), and [[#Toponomic classification|toponomically]], that is, according to their relationship to the surrounding sedimentary layers. Except in the rare cases where the original maker of a trace fossil can be identified with confidence, phylogenetic classification of trace fossils is an unreasonable proposition.

==Taxonomic classification== <!--intro links here-->

The '''taxonomic classification of trace fossils''' parallels the taxonomic classification of [[organism]]s under the [[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature]]. In [[trace fossil]] nomenclature a [[Latin]] [[binomial nomenclature|binomial name]] is used, just as in [[animal]] and [[plant]] [[Taxonomy (biology)|taxonomy]], with a [[genus]] and [[specific name (zoology)|specific epithet]]. However, the [[binomial names]] are not linked to an organism, but rather just a trace fossil. This is due to the rarity of association between a trace fossil and a specific organism or group of organisms. Trace fossils are therefore included in an ''[[ichnotaxon]]'' separate from [[Linnaean taxonomy]]. When referring to trace fossils, the terms ''ichnogenus'' and ''ichnospecies'' parallel genus and [[species]] respectively.

The most promising cases of phylogenetic classification are those in which similar trace fossils show details complex enough to deduce the makers, such as [[bryozoan]] [[bioerosion|borings]], large [[trilobite]] trace fossils such as ''[[Cruziana]]'', and [[vertebrate]] [[footprints]]. However, most trace fossils lack sufficiently complex details to allow such classification.

Line 16 ⟶ 18:

* ''[[Fodinichnia]]'' are feeding traces which are formed as a result of organisms disturbing the sediment in their search for food. They are normally created by [[deposit feeder]]s as they tunnel through soft sediments, usually producing a 3D structure.

* '''''Pascichnia''''' are a different type of feeding trace for which the trophic guild responsible are [[grazing|grazer]]s. They create 2D features as they scour the surface of a hard or soft [[Substrate (biology)|substrate]] in order to obtain [[nutriment]].

* '''''Repichnia''''' are locomotory tracks that show evidence of organisms moving from one station to another, usually in a near-straight to slightly curved line. Most of the very few traces to be verifiably assigned to a specific organism are in this category, such as various [[arthropod]] and [[vertebrate]] trackways.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Seilacher |first=A. |year=1967 |title=Bathymetry of trace fossils |journal=Marine Geology |volume=5 |issue= 5–6|pages=413–428 |doi=10.1016/0025-3227(67)90051-5 |bibcode=1967MGeol...5..413S }}</ref>

===Other ethological classes===

Line 22 ⟶ 24:

Since the inception of behavioural categorization, several other ethological classes have been suggested and accepted, as follows:

* ''Aedificichnia'':<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bown |first1=T. M. |last2=Ratcliffe |first2=B. C. |year=1988 |title=The origin of ''Chubutolithes'' Ihering, ichnofossils from the Eocene and Oligocene of Chubut province, Argentina |journal=Journal of Paleontology |volume=62 |issue=2 |pages=163–167 |doi=10.1017/S0022336000029802 |bibcode=1988JPal...62..163B |s2cid=20261299 |url=http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1136&context=entomologypapers |url-access=subscription }}</ref> evidence of organisms building structures outside of the [[infauna]]l realm, such as [[termite]] mounds or [[wasp]] nests.

* ''Agrichnia'':<ref>Ekdale, AA; Bromley, RG; Pemberton, SG (1984) Ichnology: Trace fossils in sedimentology and stratigraphy. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Short Course, no 15, 317 pp.</ref> so called "gardening traces", which are systematic burrow networks designed to capture migrating [[meiofauna]] or perhaps even to culture [[bacteria]]. The organism would have continually inspected this burrow system to prey on any smaller organisms that strayed into it.

* ''Calichnia'':<ref>Genise, JF & Bown, TM (1991) New Miocene scarabaeid and hymenopterous nests and Early Miocene (Santacrucian) palaeoenvironments, Patagonian Argentina. Ichnos, 3: 107–117.</ref> structures that were created by organisms specifically for [[Reproduction|breeding]] purposes, e.g. [[bee]] cells.

* ''Equilibrichnia'':<ref>Bromley, RG (1990) Trace fossils: biology and taphonomy. Unwin Hyman Ltd, London, 280 pp.</ref> burrows within the sediment that show evidence for organisms' responses to variations in sedimentation rate (i.e. the burrow moves upwards to avoid burial, or downwards to avoid exposure). Typically this evidence will be in the form of [[spreiten]], which are small laminations in the sediment that reflect previous positions the organisms were in.

* ''[[Fugichnia]]'':<ref>Simpson, S (1975) The morphological classification of trace fossils. In Frey, RW (ed.) The study of trace fossils. New York, Springer-Verlag, pp 39-54.</ref> "escape traces" that are formed as a result of organisms' attempts to escape burial in sudden high-sedimentation events like [[turbidity current]]s. The burrows are often marked with chevron patterns showing the upward direction the organisms were tunnelling.

* ''Praedichnia'':<ref>Ekdale, AA (1985) Palaeoecology of the marine endobenthos. Palaeogeography, Palaeoecology, Palaeoclimatology 50: 63-81.</ref> trace fossils that show evidence of [[predator]]y behaviour, such as the drill holes ([[bioerosion|borings]]) left in [[Animal shellExoskeleton|shell]]s by [[carnivorous]] [[gastropod]]s, or more dramatically, the bite marks found on some [[vertebrate]] [[bone]]s.

Over the years several other behavioural groups have been proposed, but in general they have been quickly discarded by the ichnological community. Some of the failed proposals are listed below, with a brief description.

Line 43 ⟶ 45:

* ''Volichnia'': traces that show the position a flying organism (usually an insect) landed on a soft sediment.

Fixichnia<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gibert |first1=J. M. de |last2=Domènech |first2=R. |last3=Martinell |first3=J. |year=2004 |title=An ethological framework for animal bioerosion trace fossils upon mineral substrates with proposal of new class, fixichnia |journal=Lethaia |volume=37 |issue=4 |pages=429–437 |doi=10.1080/00241160410002144 |bibcode=2004Letha..37..429G }}</ref> is perhaps the group with the most weight as a candidate for the next accepted ethological class, being not fully described by any of the eleven currently accepted categories. There is also potential for the three plant traces (cecidoichnia, corrosichnia and sphenoichnia) to gain recognition in coming years, with little attention having been paid to them since their proposal.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Mikuláš |first=R. |year=1999 |title=Notes on the concept of plant trace fossils related to plant-generated sedimentary structures |journal=Věštník Českého Geologického ústavu |volume=74 |issue=1 |pages=39–42 }}</ref>

==Toponomic classification==

Line 73 ⟶ 75:

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20090416063931/http://www.peripatus.gen.nz/paleontology/trafos.html "Trace Fossils" by Kristian Saether & Christopher Clowes]

[[Category:Trace fossils|Classification ]]

[[Category:Biological classification]]

[[Category:Zoological nomenclature]]