Ausich et al.—Fort Payne Formation Batocrinidae
were collected from the Lake Cumberland area. One specimen, USNM 123338, is labeled as from the Fern Glen Formation (lower Tournaisian) at Fern Glen, Missouri; but this latter occurrence is considered erroneous, herein.
Materials.—Ten specimens, USNM S 929, constitute the syntype suite from which a lectotype, USNM S 929a, and paralectotypes, USNM S 929b–j, are designated. Three additional specimens USNM S 930, USNM 777, and USNM 123338 were also examined.
Remarks.—Although not known at this time to occur in the Fort Payne Formation, this is the type species for the genus. In addition, this taxon is illustrated (Fig. 10.1, 10.2) because it is known from coeval deep-water, toe-of-slope facies in north- central Kentucky. For comparison to other species of Magnuscrinus discussed here, see remarks of M. cumberlandensis.
Magnuscrinus kammeri Krivicich, Ausich, and Keyes, 2013 Figure 10.3, 10.4
2013 Magnuscrinus kammeri Krivicich et al., p. 140, fig.2A–E. Holotype.—Holotype: USNM 546039.
Diagnosis.—Relatively small in size, very low cone-shaped calyx, interradial positions around arm periphery slightly indented, radial plates relatively low, calyx plates with gnarled or highly pustulose sculpturing.
Occurrence.—The holotype of Magnuscrinus kammeri is from Lawrence County (Krivicich et al., 2013, Locality 5), Tennes- see, and paratypes were from the Fort Payne Formation at Gross Creek, Russell County, Kentucky and Lawrence County (Krivicich et al., 2013, Locality 5), Tennessee. All occurrences are early Viséan in age. The Gross Creek locality along Lake Cumberland is an example of the crinoidal packstone buildup facies.
Description.—Calyx size relatively small for genus, very low cone shape (Fig. 10.3), base with continuous ridge formed by nodes (Fig. 10.4), shallow basal concavity, arms grouped, but not lobate (Fig. 10.4), calyx plates with numerous small nodes (Fig. 10.4) that may be coalesced into short ridges, plate sutures distinct. Basals three, wider than high, equal in size, lower than
705
openings subelliptical, higher than wide, directed obliquely upward (from Krivicich et al., 2013). Tegmen low inverted cone shape (Fig. 10.3), plates with
very large nodes; anal tube high and slender, central, plates with large elongate nodes. Twenty facets for free arms, other aspects of arms not known. Column unknown.
Materials.—Holotype: USNM 546039 (locality 5); paratype: USNM 546040 (locality 5); paratypes: USNM 546041–USNM 546043 (Gross Creek West).
Measurements.—USNM 546039 (holotype): calyx height, 9.3mm; calyx width, 35.0* mm, tegmen height, 22.0* mm. Paratypes: USNM 546040: calyx height, 10.5mm; calyx width, 31.5mm; USNM 546041: calyx height, 13.4mm; calyx width, 34.8mm; USNM 546043: calyx height, 9.1* mm; calyx width, 17.5* mm; anal tube height, 37.2* mm.
Remarks.—Magnuscrinus kammeri is distinct from all con- geners by having unique calyx plate sculpturing, high calyx width to height ratio, and high radial plate width to height ratio. In terms of overall calyx shape, M. kammeri is closest to E. ramulosus. For comparison to other species of Magnuscrinus dis-
cussed here, see remarks of M. cumberlandensis. Magnuscrinus praegravis Miller, 1892a
1849 Actinocrinites cornutus Troost, p. 419 (nomen nudum). 1892b Eretmocrinus prægravis Miller, p. 678.
1892c Eretmocrinus praegravis Miller; Miller, p. 37, pl. 6, figs. 5, 6.
1894b Alloprosallocrinus celsus Miller and Gurley, p. 47, pl. 4, figs. 9–11.
1958 Eretmocrinus praegravis Miller; Lane, p. 173.
2013 Magnuscrinus praegravis Miller; Webster and Webster, p. 1795.
Complete synonymy list in Supplemental Data 2. Holotype.—USNM S 5747.
Diagnosis.—Relatively small in size, cone-shaped calyx, inter- radial positions around arm periphery not indented, radial plates relatively low, calyx plates with pronounced commonly elongate nodes that dominate the central part or the entire plate.
radials. Radials five, hexagonal or heptagonal in shape, wider than high, higher than basals. Primanal hexagonal, larger than radial plates, interrupts radial circlet, second range in the posterior with two much smaller plates; posterior plating P-2-1 or P-2-1-1; posterior interray in contact with tegmen. Normal interrays slightly narrower than CD interray, first interradial 10-sided; plating 1-2, may or may not be in contact with tegmen. First primibrachial tetragonal, much wider than high; second primibrachial axillary, pentagonal, slightly larger than first primibrachial, wider than high; first and second secundibra- chials approximately the same size as second primibrachials; last fixed brachial second or third tertibrachial (Fig. 10.4); arm
Occurrence.—The holotype of Magnuscrinus praegravis was described from Pilot Knob, near Louisville, Kentucky (exact location and stratigraphic horizon not known). The type specimens of junior synonyms are from the following: Actinocrinites cornutus holotype: Cannon Co., Tennessee; and Alloprosallocrinus celsus: “Warsaw Group” Tennessee, both presumed to be from the Fort Payne Formation.
Materials.—In addition to the holotype (USNM S5747), the holotype of the junior synonym, Actinocrinites cornutus is USNM 39891. The holotype for Alloprosallocrinus celsus has not been located.
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 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232
