search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
4


Journal of Paleontology 92(1):3–13


Figure 1. Carinachitids from the lower Cambrian Kuanchuanpu Formation in South China. (1) Triradiate Emeiconularia amplicanalis Liu et al., 2005. (2) Pentamerous Pentaconularia ningqiangensis Liu et al., 2011. (1, 2) Courtesy of Y.H. Liu. (3–6) Tetraradiate Carinachites spinatus Qian, 1977. (3, 4) ELISN93-157, showing the displacement between neighboring arcuate ribs, which are connected in the middle by striations. Both the faces and ribs widen slightly toward the apertural end of the skeleton. (5) ELISN93-45. (6–12) ELISN148-52. (6, 7) Lateral view of the tube. (8, 9) Close-up of the tube aperture shows one of the plicate apertural lobes being elevated above the others. (10) The elevated, plicate apertural lobes with converging striated folds. (11) Single plicate apertural lobe with converging striated folds and the corner sulci with parallel striations. (12) Close-up of (11) showing secondary cracks on the striated surface. IR = interradius; PR = perradius; cs = corner sulci; pal = plicate apertural lobes; st = striations; tr = transverse ribs; ts = thorn-like spines.


(see Steiner et al., 2014), have been assigned to the order Conulariida of the subclassConulata (He, 1987;Qian et al., 1999). Because carinachitids and hexangulaconulariids are very small (<5mm long) and lack the facial midline and carina typical of many Ordovician and younger conulariids, they have been classified as protoconulariids (Qian et al., 1999). The zoological affinities of Conulata have been controversial (Babcock et al.,


1986;Brood, 1995), but the group is nowgenerally assigned to the subphylum Medusozoa of the phylum Cnidaria (Bengtson and Yue, 1997; Van Iten et al., 2006, 2010, 2014). Phylogenetic relationships among protoconulariids remain poorly understood as all previously collected specimens of carinachitids lack both the apical and apertural regions, and thus their complete morphology and growth patterns are unknown.Herewe describe a tetramerous


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124