The annelids are segmented protostomes that are represented today by animals such as the earthworms and leaches. Recent species are important, widely distributed, benthic predators and occur from intertidal to abyssal depths. Modern molecular studies suggest they form a sister group to the mollusks and, in fact, share a number of morphological characters such as the possession of chaetae. In general the group has a fairly sparse fossil record, appearing fleetingly in Lagerstätte deposits such as the Burgess Shale and Mazon Creek fauna. However many residues of acid-etched Paleozoic limestones contain scolecodonts (Fig. 13.28). These were the jaws of ancient annelids and are abundant and diverse at many horizons. They were similar to conodonts (see p. 429), forming multielement apparatuses with similar functions but were composed of collagen fibers and various minerals such as zinc. The group first appeared in the Lower Ordovician and diversified rapidly to become common in Upper Ordovician-Devonian carbonate facies. Scolecodonts were relatively rare after the Permian, but nevertheless have proved useful in biostratigraphic and thermal maturation studies.
1 There has been some difficulty identifying the first mollusk. What are the key features of the phylum and how would they be recognized in the first mollusk?
2 Many taxa that form part of the Early Cambrian biota are undoubtedly mol-lusks. Which mollusk groups are already present in the small shelly fauna?
3 Theoretical morphospace is a useful tool to investigate shell morphology. Some groups are more constrained in their developmental opportunities than others. What advantages should univalved mol-lusks have over bivalved mollusks in a quest to generate extreme morphotypes?
4 Belemnites seem an unlikely group to test models for microevolution. What conditions should be met in such tests of micro-evolutionary hypotheses?
5 The Mesozoic marine revolution (or arms race) was a complex ecological event that set the agenda for marine life in the Modern evolutionary fauna. How did mollusks react to predation pressures?
Clarkson, E.N.K. 1998. Invertebrate Palaeontology and Evolution, 4th edn. Chapman and Hall, London. (An excellent, more advanced text; clearly written and well illustrated.)
Lehmann, U. 1981. The Ammonites - their Life and their World. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Morton, J.E. 1967. Molluscs. Hutchinson, London.
Peel, J.S., Skelton, P.W. & House, M.R. 1985. Mollusca. In Murray, J.W. (ed.) Atlas of Invertebrate Macrofos-sils. Longman, London. (A useful, mainly photographic review of the group.)
Pojeta, J. Jr., Runnegar, B., Peel, J.S. & Gordon, M. Jr. 1987. Phylum Mollusca. In Boardman, R.S., Cheetham, A.H. & Rowell, A.J. (eds) Fossil Invertebrates. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK, pp. 270-435. (A comprehensive, more advanced text with emphasis on taxonomy; extravagantly illustrated.)
Vermeij, G.J. 1987. Evolution and Escalation. An Ecological History of Life. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. (Visionary text.)
Batt, R. 1993. Ammonite morphotypes as indicators of oxygenation in a Cretaceous epicontinental sea. Lethaia 26, 49-63. Caron, J.-B., Acheltema, A., Schander, A. & Rudkin, D. 2006. A soft-bodied mollusc with radula from the
Middle Cambrian Burgess Shale. Nature 442, 159-163.
Christensen, W.K. 2000. Gradualistic evolution in Belemnitella from the middle Campanian of Lower Saxony, NW Germany. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Denmark 47, 135-63.
Doyle, P. & MacDonald, D.I.M. 1993. Belemnite battlefields. Lethaia 26, 65-80.
Erwin, D.H. 2007. Disparity: morphological pattern and developmental context. Palaeontology 50, 57-73.
Fedonkin, M. & Waggoner, B.M. 1997. The Late Pre-cambrian fossil Kimberella is a mollusk-like bilate-rian organism. Nature 388, 868-71.
Harper, E.M. 2006. Disecting post-Palaeozoic arms races. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeo-ecology 232, 322-43.
Jacobs, D.K. & Landman, N.H. 1993. Nautilus - a poor model for the function and behavior of ammo-noids. Lethaia 26, 101-11.
Milsom, C. & Rigby, S. 2004. Fossils at a Glance. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Peel, J.S. 1991. Functional morphology, evolution and systematics of early Palaeozoic univalved molluscs. Gronlands Geologiske Undersogelse 161, 116 pp.
Raup, D.M. 1966. Geometric analysis of shell coiling: general problems. Journal of Paleontology 40, 1178-90.
Reboulet, S., Giraud, F. & Proux, O. 2005. Ammonoid abundance variations related to changes in trophic conditions across the Oceanic Anoxic Event 1d (Latest Albian, SE France). Palaios 20, 121-41.
Runnegar, B. & Pojeta, J. 1974. Molluscan phylogeny: the palaeontological viewpoint. Science 186, 311-17.
Sigwart, J.W. & Sutton, M.D. 2007. Deep molluscan phylogeny: synthesis of palaeontological and neon-tological data. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 274, 2413-19.
Stanley, S.M. 1970. Relation of shell form to life habits of Bivalvia. Geological Society of America Memoir 125, 296 pp.
Swan, A.R.H. 1990. Computer simulations of invertebrate morphology. In Bruton, D.L. & Harper, D.A.T. (eds) Microcomputers in Palaeontology. Contributions from the Palaeontological Museum, University of Oslo, Vol. 370. pp. 32-45. University of Oslo, Oslo.
Vinther, J. & Nielsen, C. 2004. The Early Cambrian Halkieria is a mollusc. Zoologica Scripta 34, 81-9.
Wagner, P.J. 1995. Diversity patterns among early gastropods: contrasting taxonomic and phylogenetic descriptions. Paleobiology 21, 410-39.
Wani, R., Kase, T., Shigeta, Y. & De Ocampo, R. 2005. New look at ammonoid taphonomy, based on field experiments with modern chambered nautilus. Geology 33, 849-52.
Williamson, P.G. 1981. Palaeontological documentation of speciation in Cenozoic molluscs from Turkana basin. Nature 293, 140-2.
Was this article helpful?