Open Access
How to translate text using browser tools
6 June 2022 Gennaeocrinus tariatensis, a new Emsian (Devonian) monobathrid crinoid from the Tarvagatay Terrane of Mongolia
Johnny A. Waters, William I. Ausich
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Gennaeocrinus tariatensis new species is an Emsian (Devonian) monobathrid crinoid described from the Tarvagatay Terrane of Mongolia and part of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. The Tarvagatay Terrane is an arc terrane that accreted to the southern margin of the Siberian Craton. Gennaeocrinus tariatensis was collected from the Emsian Tariat Formation, a terrigenous sequence of conglomerates, sandstones, and siltstones. Associated faunas include brachiopods, molluscs, and rare tabulate corals. Although Gennaeocrinus is well known from the Emsian–Givetian of North America, this is the first occurrence of the genus outside Laurussia. Mongolia is a large country with many terranes having varied paleogeographic, sedimentological, and tectonic histories; but reports of Paleozoic echinoderms are rare. The crinoid occurrence from the Tariat Formation is from the same age as previously described Emsian crinoids from the Chuluum Formation but differs significantly in sedimentology, paleogeography, and paleolatitude.

Introduction

The analysis of patterns of paleobiogeography depends on a global data set. Efforts to collect information on the age and location of disparate fossil species, such as the Paleobiology Database and the Geobiodiversity Database, among others, are critical in defining global patterns, but these depend on a robust primary literature describing occurrences of fossil taxa.

Reports of Paleozoic crinoids from Mongolia are infrequent, and many of the earliest papers described only stems (Stukalina, 1973, 1994, 1997; Tungalag, 1998). Webster and Ariunchimeg (2004) described a Lower Devonian (Emsian) fauna from Shine Jinst in southern Mongolia, including the first crinoid cups and thecae from Mongolia. They recognized five distinct taxa but named only Cyathocrinites because of poor preservation. Waters et al. (2021) described a Late Devonian (Famennian) echinoderm fauna of twelve crinoid genera and two blastoid genera from southwestern Mongolia. Recently, Carboniferous (Serpukhovian) crinoids have been collected from southwestern Mongolia, but they are too fragmentary for identification (Waters, personal observation, 2020).

In this paper, we describe the new periechocrinitid Gennaeocrinus tariatensis new species from the Emsian of Mongolia. Gennaeocrinus is well known from multiple species from the Devonian of North America and is questionable from western Europe. In terms of Devonian plate tectonics, it is well known from cratonic settings on east/southeast Laurentia and questionably known from similar settings on southwest Baltica and Iberia in the reconstructions of Domeier and Torsvik (2014). However, G. tariatensis was collected from a collage of small terranes and active island arc complexes in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt on the southeastern margin of Siberia. Thus, its tectonic, paleogeographic, sedimentological, and paleolatitudinal occurrence differs from all other species of the genus.

Geological setting

Mongolia is a very large country and occupies a primary position in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (Fig. 1), the largest Paleozoic orogenic belt that evolved in a manner similar to the modern Indonesia and western Pacific. Mongolia comprises 44 terranes (Badarch et al., 2002), including cratonic, metamorphic, passive margin, island arc, forearc/backarc, accretionary complex, and ophiolitic terranes (Fig. 2).

The crinoid described herein was collected from the Tariat Formation, which is part of the Tarvagatay Terrane of Badarch et al. (2002). The Tarvagatay Terrane occurs in the northern Hangay mountains. The Terrane consists of Precambrian basement overlain by lower Cambrian stromatolitic limestone and volcaniclastic rocks. Devonian and Mississippian conglomerate, sandstone, and siltstone containing marine fossils complete the sequence. Alekseeva (1993) described the Tariat Formation as a terrigenous sequence with 70 m of basal conglomerates overlain by 150 m of green sandstones, siltstones, and mudstones with abundant brachiopods and plant fossils in darker siltstones. An overlying terrigenous sequence contains 250 m dark-gray to greenish siltstones and sandstones also with abundant brachiopods. The Tariat Formation is unconformably overlain by lower Carboniferous conglomerates. The Tariat Formation is Emsian in age according to the presence of the strophomenoid Maoristrophia kailensis Shishkina, 1990, a brachiopod that defines the Mongolian Chulun Horizon (Alekseeva, 1993). This horizon correlates with the Salairka Horizon in Siberia and the Polygnathus kitabicus Conodont Biozone in the basal Emsian (Yolkin et al., 2000).

Figure 1.

The Central Asian Orogenic Belt accretionary zone located between the European and Siberian cratons to the north and the Tarim and North China cratons to the south. Map after Ju and Hou (2014).

img-z2-1_631.jpg

Paleobiogeography

The tectono-stratigraphic compilations of Mongolia by Badarch et al. (2002) and Windley et al. (2007) recognized the Main Mongolian Lineament, which divides the country into an early Paleozoic domain in the north and a late Paleozoic domain in the south. The Tarvagatay Terrane is part of the Mongol–Okhotsk Belt north of the Main Mongolian Lineament. The Tariat Formation was deposited in a trench–accretionary wedge environment in the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean to the south (in current orientation) of the Siberian Craton (Bussien et al., 2011).

Emsian paleobiogeography is based primarily on brachiopods and shows differentiation into the Rhenish–Bohemian Realm, the Appalachian Realm, and the high-latitude Malvinokaffric Realm. Some Devonian workers combine the Rhenish–Bohemian Realm into the Appalachian Realm. Brachiopods with a cosmopolitan distribution from the Mongol–Okhotsk fauna support the conclusions of Hou and Boucot (1990) that they are part of the Old World Realm even though geographic distances between the areas are quite large. Paleobiogeographic reconstructions by Torsvik and Cocks (2017) placed the Mongolian terranes, including the Tarvagatay Terrane, along the southern margin of the Siberian Craton at a latitude of approximately 50°N. The Old World Realm is primarily equatorial to mid-latitudes, and the Malvinokaffric Realm is located in the high latitudes of the Southern Hemisphere (Torsvik and Cocks, 2017).

Emsian faunas have a high degree of cosmopolitan distribution of taxa where adequate data are available. The Emsian marked the acme of a remarkable spread of reefs, the largest known and most latitudinally widespread reefs in the Phanerozoic according to Copper and Scotese (2003). Judging from the distribution of reefs, they concluded that the Middle Devonian (Emsian–Givetian) had a supergreenhouse climate. However, Joachimski et al. (2009), concluded that the Middle Devonian had sea surface temperatures closer to 23–25°C and was not a supergreenhouse climate according to oxygen isotopes in conodont apatite. Regardless of which temperature model is correct, Emsian sea levels were high, and geographically disparate faunas contained many similar, cosmopolitan genera.

Materials and methods

The holotype of Gennaeocrinus tariatensis n. sp. was collected from an outcrop of the Tariat Formation at 48°12′23″N, 100°1′49″E (measured by GPS) in Arkhangai Aimag, Tariat Somon, Mongolia (Fig. 3). The specimen was a mold preserved in a greenish–gray fossiliferous siltstone. Descriptions of the specimen are based on a latex cast prepared at the Paleontological Center of the Mongolian Academy of Science and photographed with ammonium chloride sublimate.

Repository and institutional abbreviation.—The latex cast of the holotype is reposited in the collections of the Mongolian University of Science and Technology (MUST) research collections in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.

Systematic paleontology

The superfamilial classification used here follows Cole (2017), Wright (2017), and Wright et al. (2017); family-level classifications follow Moore and Teichert (1978). Morphologic terminology follows Ubaghs (1978) and Ausich et al. (2020). The plating of interrays is given by the number of plates in each range from proximalmost plate to the last range before the tegmen. In the posterior interray, the primanal is indicated by “P,” and the first interradial plate in regular interrays is indicated by “1.”

Subclass Camerata Wachsmuth and Springer, 1885
Infraclass Eucamerata Cole, 2017
Order Monobathrida Moore and Laudon, 1943
Family Periechocrinidae Bronn, 1849
Genus Gennaeocrinus Wachsmuth and Springer, 1881

  • Type species.Actinocrinus kentuckiensis Shumard, 1868, by original designation.

  • Other species.G. carinatus Wood, 1901; G. carinatus crassicostatus Goldring, 1923; G. chilmanae Kesling, 1968; G. chilmanae Kesling, 1968; G. cornigerus (Lyon and Casseday, 1859); G. decorus Goldring, 1923; G. dulukae Kesling, 1969; G. eucharis (Hall, 1862); G. facetus Rowley, 1903; G.? germanicus Schmidt, 1941; G. goldringae Ehlers, 1925; G. maxwelli Johnson and Lane, 1969; G. mourantae Goldring, 1934; G. nyssa (Hall, 1862); G. perculiaris Goldring, 1923; G. percarinatus Goldring, 1935; G. romingeri Kesling, 1964; G. sculptus Rowley, 1903; G. seversoni Laudon, 1973; G. similis Goldring, 1935; G. simulans Rowley, 1904; and G. variabilis Kesling and Smith, 1962.

  • Occurrence.—Previously, this genus was known from the Emsian to Givetian in North America, with questionable occurrences in Germany and Spain. The specimen described herein is from the Emsian of Mongolia.

  • Remarks.—Wachsmuth and Springer (1881, p. 160) proposed Gennaeocrinus “for a little group of crinoids from the Upper Devonian, which cannot be satisfactorily referred to any established genus.” They noted differences in the plating of the anal area and the number and arrangement of both anal and interradial plates. As presently understood, Gennaeocrinus is a common periechocrinid crinoid from the Lower and Middle Devonian of North America with questionable occurrences in Germany and Spain (Ausich and Kammer, 2008; Webster and Webster, 2014), but this Devonian genus has a high morphological disparity with, for example, aboral cup shapes varying from very low cone or bowl shape to medium globe shape and a wide range in aboral plate sculpturing, presence or absence of a basal ridge and a basal concavity, plating arrangements in all interrays, the number of fixed secundibrachials, and number of free arms. A comprehensive review of Gennaeocrinus is needed, but this is beyond the scope of the present study.

  • The generic assignment of this new Mongolian species would be questionable, except that it belongs to a group of Gennaeocrinus species that includes G. kentuckiensis (Shumard, 1868), the type species of the genus. Although this new specimen is a partial calyx, its morphology is distinct from other species and is considered a new species. The Gennaeocrinus species grouping to which G. tariatensis n. sp. belongs includes G. comptus Rowley, 1903, G. kentuckiensis (type species), G. maxwelli, G. percarinatus, G. romingeri, and G. sculptus. These seven species all have a calyx shape of low cone/bowl to very low cone/bowl, multiple radiating ridges connecting to like ridges on adjoining calyx plates, basal concavity absent, and posterior interray plating P-3- (where known). As delineated in the following, species diagnostic characters for this group of species include calyx shape, presence or absence of an arcuate ridge on the radial plates, presence or absence of a central node on calyx plates where radiating ridges coalesce, presence or absence and character, if present, of a rim around the base of the calyx, presence or absence of prominent ray ridges, proximal regular interray plating, presence or absence of an anitaxial ridge, presence or absence or spinose tegmen plates, and number of free arms per ray.

  • Figure 2.

    Map of the 44 tectonic terranes of Mongolia (after Badarch et al., 2002). The crinoid locality, indicated by the arrow, is located on the Tarvagatay Terrane, an arc terrane that accreted to the southern margin of the Siberian Craton.

    img-z3-1_631.jpg

    Figure 3.

    Field photo of outcrops of the Tariat Formation located in the Arkhangai Aimag, Tariat Somon, Mongolia. The Tariat is an Emsian fossiliferous unit composed primarily of conglomerates, sandstones, and siltstones. The arrow points to the crinoid locality.

    img-z3-3_631.jpg

    Gennaeocrinus tariatensis new species
    Figure 4

  • Holotype.—The holotype and only known specimen is IV.JW.2013.1-5 reposited in the collections of the Paleontological Center of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.

  • Diagnosis.—Low to very low bowl calyx shape, multiple stellate ridges connecting to like ridges on adjoining plates throughout the calyx, arcuate ridge on radial plates absent, central node on calyx plates absent, basal ridge around base of calyx absent, prominent ray ridges absent, regular interray plating 1-3, anitaxial ridge absent or very weak, nature of tegmen plates and free arms per ray unknown.

  • Occurrence.—Tariat Formation (Emsian), Arkhangai Aimag, Tariat Somon, Mongolia.

  • Description.—Calyx low to flat bowl shaped, arms probably grouped; calyx plate sculpturing multiple radiating ridges from plate centers and connecting with like ridges on adjacent plates; central nodes are not formed where ridges coalesce at plate centers. Basal circlet flat cone shaped, a small percentage of overall calyx height, column cicatrix occupying most of basal circlet, individual sutures between basal plates not clearly preserved. Radial circlet projects outward, presumably slightly visible in lateral view, a small percentage of overall calyx height, radial plates presumably five, hexagonal or heptagonal, approximately as wide as high, in lateral contact except in the CD interray.

  • Regular interrays do not interrupt radial plate circlet, in contact with tegmen. First interradial plate hexagonal, higher than wide, approximately the same size as radial plates and first primibrachial plates; second range with two plates, more distal plating not preserved, but more than two plates. Interradial regions connect to tegmen.

  • Primanal higher than wide, probably hexagonal, positioned between the C and D radial plates, CD interray much wider that regular interrays, plating P-3-6-?.

  • First primibrachial fixed, hexagonal wider than high, smaller than radial plates and approximately the same size as the first interradial plate in regular interrays and the second primibrachial; second primibrachial axillary, presumably pentagonal or heptagonal; fixed secundibrachials present.

  • Tegmen and free arms unknown. Proximal column circular, but other aspects unknown.

  • Etymology.—A species of Gennaeocrinus from the Tariat Formation (Emsian).

  • Remarks.Gennaeocrinus tariatensis n. sp. is represented by one specimen, which is an incomplete calyx with breaks in plating in places. Normally such a specimen would be insufficient as the foundation of a new species. However, as previously noted, this specimen can be confidently placed in Gennaeocrinus, and its morphology is unique among species of Gennaeocrinus. The following characters distinguish Gennaeocrinus tariatensis within the grouping of similar species: a low to very low bowl calyx shape; arcuate ridge on radial plates absent; central node on calyx plates absent; sharp ridge around base of calyx absent; ray ridges absent, proximal normal interray plating 1-2-; absent or weak anitaxial ridge; tegmen unknown; character of tegmen plates and number of free arms per ray unknown. By contrast, G. comptus has a very low cone calyx shape; arcuate ridge on radial plates present; central node on calyx plates absent, discontinuous, sharp ridge around base of calyx; prominent ray ridges; proximal normal interray plating 1-3?-; prominent anitaxial ridge; one central spine on tegmen; six arms per ray. G. kentuckiensis (type species) has a low bowl shape; arcuate ridge on radial plates absent; central node on calyx plates; continuous, low ridge around base of calyx; prominent ray ridges; proximal normal interray plating 1-2- or 1-3?-; weak anitaxial ridge; spines on tegmen plates; and eight arms per ray. G. percarinatus has a low(?) bowl calyx shape; presence or absence of arcuate ridge on radial plates unknown; central node on calyx plates; sharp ridge around base of calyx discontinuous, small, sharp; prominent ray ridges; proximal normal interray plating 1-2-; weak anitaxial ridge; tegmen unknown; and number of free arms unknown. G. romingeri has a very low bowl shape; arcuate ridge on radial plates absent; central node on calyx plates; sharp ridge around base of calyx absent; prominent ray ridges; proximal normal interray plating 1-2-; weak anitaxial ridge; tegmen unknown; and four free arms per ray. G. sculptus has a low bowl shape; arcuate ridge on radial plates absent; central node on calyx plates; sharp, continuous ridge around base of calyx unknown; prominent ray ridges; proximal normal interray plating 1-2-; anitaxial ridge absent; tegmen spines absent; six free arms per ray. G. maxwelli is a very poorly preserved, silicified specimen, and characters other than recognizing its presence within this grouping of species cannot be discerned with confidence.

  • Figure 4.

    Gennaeocrinus tariatensis n. sp. (1) Photograph of the holotype of Gennaeocrinus tariatensis preserved as a mold in a greenish-gray siltstone. (2) Latex cast of the holotype showing prominent ornament of radiating ridges that cross plate boundaries. (3) Plate diagram of Gennaeocrinus tariatensis prepared by W.I.A. (4) Enlargement of the latex cast of Gennaeocrinus tariatensis showing subtle plate boundaries largely obscured by strong radiating ridges. Scale bars = 1 cm.

    img-z5-1_631.jpg

    Discussion

    Gennaeocrinus is a monobathrid crinoid that is well known from the Emsian and Givetian of North America with possible occurrences from Germany and Spain. By contrast, G. tariatensis n. sp. is the first species of the genus found in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB). It was collected from Emsian terrigenous sediments on a convergent margin terrane in the Mongol–Okhotsk Belt, which accreted onto the Siberian Craton. In terms of paleolatitude, previously known species of Gennaeocrinus have an equatorial distribution, but Gennaeocrinus tariatensis occurs at 50°N. The occurrence of Gennaeocrinus tariatensis significantly increases the paleogeographic range of Gennaeocrinus, but information is still lacking to hypothesize on patterns of migration. The occurrence of Gennaeocrinus in the Mongol–Okhotsk fauna is not completely unexpected as Emsian brachiopods have a high degree of cosmopolitanism and significant similarity between taxa in the Old World Realm and the Mongol–Okhotsk fauna (Hou and Boucot, 1990).

    Webster and Arunichimeg (2004) described an Emsian crinoid fauna from the Chuluun Formation in the Shine Jinst area of Mongolia. In contrast to the terrigenous nature of the Tariat Formation, the Chuluun Formation is dominated by carbonates with mound- and reef-forming stromatoporoids and corals in addition to crinoidal grainstones. This locality is south of the Main Mongolian Lineament and is located on either the Mandavooloo or Gobi Altai Terrane. In contrast to assertions by Webster and Arunichimeg (2004) that the Chuluun crinoids were the most northerly known Emsian crinoid fauna, recent paleogeographic reconstructions (Torsvik and Cocks, 2017) of the CAOB place the Mandavooloo and Gobi Altai Terranes at a latitude of 25–30°N. Gennaeocrinus tariatensis is the most northerly known Emsian crinoid, with a paleolatitude of approximately 50°N.

    Acknowledgments

    J.A.W.'s participation in fieldwork in Mongolia was funded in part by a grant to M.D. Brazeau, Imperial College, London, by the European Research Council. Y.A. Ariunchmeg provided critical assistance during the fieldwork. S. Gonchigdorj provided access to historical literature on the Devonian of Mongolia. We also thank P. Dittoe for helping attain access to crinoid literature when OSU libraries were closed. We thank the two reviewers who improved this manuscript.

    References

    1.

    Alekseeva, R.E., 1993, Biostratigraphy of the Devonian of Mongolia: Joint Soviet–Mongolian Expedition: Moscow, Nauka, v. 44, 265 p. Google Scholar

    2.

    Ausich, W.I., and Kammer, T.W., 2008, Evolution and extinction of a Paleozoic crinoid clade: phylogenetics, paleogeography, and environmental distribution of the Periechocrinids, in Ausich, W.I., and Webster, G.D., eds., Echinoderm Paleobiology: Bloomington, Indiana, Indiana University Press, p. 144–171. Google Scholar

    3.

    Ausich, W.I., Wright, D.F., Cole, S.R., and Sevastopulo, G.D., 2020, Homology of posterior interray plates in crinoids: a review and new perspectives from phylogenetics, the fossil record, and development: Palaeontology, v. 63, p. 552–545. Google Scholar

    4.

    Badarch, G., Cunningham, W.D., and Windley, B.F., 2002, A new terrane subdivision for Mongolia: implications for the Phanerozoic crustal growth of Central Asia: Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, v. 21, p. 87–104. Google Scholar

    5.

    Bronn, H.G., 1849, Einige Betrachtungen über paläontologische Statik. Leon-hard u. Bronn: Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, p. 129–137. Google Scholar

    6.

    Bussien, D., Gombojav, N., Winkler, W., and von Quadt, A., 2011, The Mongol–Okhotsk Belt in Mongolia—an appraisal of the geodynamic development by the study of sandstone provenance and detrital zircons: Technophysics, v. 510, p. 132–150. Google Scholar

    7.

    Cole, S.R., 2017, Phylogeny and morphologic evolution of the Ordovician Camerata (class Crinoidea, phylum Echinodermata): Journal of Paleontology, v. 91, p. 815–828. Google Scholar

    8.

    Copper, P., and Scotese, C.R., 2003, Megareefs in Middle Devonian supergreenhouse climates, in Chan, M.A., and Archer, A.W., eds., Extreme Depositional Environments: Mega End Members in Geologic Time: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America Special Paper 370, p. 209–230. Google Scholar

    9.

    Domeier, M., and Torsvik, T. H., 2014, Full-plate modelling in pre-Jurassic time: Geological Magazine, v. 156, p. 261–280. Google Scholar

    10.

    Ehlers, G.M., 1925, Two new crinoids from the Devonian of Michigan: University of Michigan Contributions from Museum of Paleontology, v. 2, p. 99–204. Google Scholar

    11.

    Goldring, W., 1923, The Devonian crinoids of the state of New York: New York State Museum Memoir 16, 670 p. Google Scholar

    12.

    Goldring, W., 1934, Some Hamilton crinoids of New York and Canada: Bulletin of the Buffalo Society of Natural Science, v. 15, p. 182–200. Google Scholar

    13.

    Goldring, W., 1935, Crinoids of the Tully Formation: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 46, p. 831–837. Google Scholar

    14.

    Hall, J., 1862, Preliminary notice of some of the species of Crinoidea known in the Upper Helderberg and Hamilton groups of New York: New York State Cabinet of Natural History 15th Annual Report, p. 115–153. Google Scholar

    15.

    Hou, H.-F., and Boucot, A.J., 1990, The Balkhash–Mongolia–Okhotsk region of the Old World Realm (Devonian), in McKerrow, W.S., and Scotese, C.R., eds., Palaeozoic Palaeogeography and Biogeography: Geological Society Memoir, v. 12, p. 297–303. Google Scholar

    16.

    Joachimski, M.M., Bresig, S., Buggisch, W., Talent, J.W., Mawson, R., Gereke, M., Morrow, J. R., Day, J., and Weddige, K., 2009, Devonian climate and reef evolution: insights from oxygen isotopes in apatite: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 284, 599–609. Google Scholar

    17.

    Johnson, J.G., and Lane, N.G., 1969, Two new Devonian crinoids from central Nevada: Journal of Paleontology, v. 43, p. 69–73. Google Scholar

    18.

    Ju, W., and Hou, G., 2014, Late Permian to Triassic intraplate orogeny of the southern Tianshan and adjacent regions, NW China: Geoscience Frontiers. v. 5, p. 83–93. Google Scholar

    19.

    Kesling, R.V., 1964, Two new crinoids of the family Periechocrinitidae from the Middle Devonian Thunder Bay Limestone of Michigan: University of Michigan Contributions from Museum of Paleontology, v. 19, p. 143–155. Google Scholar

    20.

    Kesling, R.V., 1968, Gennaeocrinus chilmanae, a new crinoid from the Middle Devonian Silica Formation in southeastern Michigan: University of Michigan Contributions from Museum of Paleontology, v. 22, p. 127–131. Google Scholar

    21.

    Kesling, R.V., 1969, Two new crinoids from the Middle Devonian Silica Formation: University of Michigan Contributions from Museum of Paleontology, v. 22, p. 199–206. Google Scholar

    22.

    Kesling, R.V., and Smith, R.N., 1962, Gennaeocrinus variabilis, a new species of crinoid from the Middle Devonian Bell Shale of Michigan: University of Michigan Contributions from Museum of Paleontology, v. 17, p. 173–194. Google Scholar

    23.

    Laudon, L.R., 1973, Two new crinoids from the Sappington Formation of Montana: Journal of Paleontology, v. 47, p. 447–451. Google Scholar

    24.

    Lyon, S.S., and Casseday, S.A., 1859, Description of nine new species of Crinoidea from the subcarboniferous rocks of Indiana and Kentucky: American Journal of Science and Arts, ser. 2, v. 28, p. 233–246. Google Scholar

    25.

    Moore, R.C., and Laudon, L.R., 1943, Evolution and classification of Paleozoic crinoids: Geological Society of America Special Paper 46, 151 p. Google Scholar

    26.

    Moore, R.C., and Teichert C., eds., 1978, Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2: Boulder, Colorado, and Lawrence, Kansas, Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, 1027 p. Google Scholar

    27.

    Rowley, R.R., 1903, Description of fossils, in Green, G.K., Contribution to Indiana Palaeontology, no. 11: New Albany, Indiana, Ewing and Zeller, p. 98–109. Google Scholar

    28.

    Rowley, R.R., 1904, Description of fossils. in Green, G K., Contribution to Indiana Palaeontology, no. 18: New Albany, Indiana, Ewing and Zeller, p. 176–184. Google Scholar

    29.

    Schmidt, W.E., 1941, Die Crinoideen des Rheinischen Devons, II. Teil; A. Nachtrag zu: Die Crinoideen des Hunsrückschiefers; B. Die Crinoideen des Unterdevon bis zur Cultrijugatus-Zone (mit Ausschluss des Hunsrückschiefers): Abhandlungen der Reichstelle für Bodenforschung, n. s., v. 182, 253 p. Google Scholar

    30.

    Shishkina, G.R., 1990, Regional'nye stratigraficheskie podrazdeleniya devona Priamur'ya, inStratigrafiya dokembriya i fanerozoya Zabaikal'ya i yuga Dal'nego Vostoka. - Tezisi dokladov IV Dal'nevostochnogo regional'nogo mezhvedomstvennogo stratigraficheskogo soveshchaniya, Khabarovsk: Khabarovsk, GKP PGO “Dal'geologiya,” p. 66–68. Google Scholar

    31.

    Shumard, B.F., 1868, A catalogue of the Palaeozoic fossils of North America. Part I. Paleozoic Echinodermata: Transactions of the St. Louis Academy of Science, v. 2, p. 334–407. Google Scholar

    32.

    Stukalina, G.A., 1973, Pozdnepaleozoiskie Morskie Lilii Zabaikalya i Mongolii [Late Paleozoic crinoids of Transbaikal and Mongolia], in Pormnov, A.G., and Suzukov, A.I., eds., Stratigrafiyi i Paleontologiya Osadochnkh Geologicheskik kh Formapii Zabaikalya [Stratigraphy and Paleontology of the Sedimentary Geological Formations of Transbaikal]: Geograficheskoe Obshchestvo SSSR, Zapiski Zabaikalskogo Filiala, v. 94, p. 16–55. [in Russian] Google Scholar

    33.

    Stukalina, G.A., 1994, Kharakteristike Siluriiskikh krinoidei Mongolii [Characteristics of Silurian crinoids of Mongolia]: Paleontologicheskii Zhurnal, v. 4, p. 55–63. [in Russian] Google Scholar

    34.

    Stukalina, G.A., 1997, Novie Kamennougolnie morskie lilii Mongolii [New Carboniferous crinoids from Mongolia]: Paleontologicheskii Zhurnal, v. 6, p. 39–43. [in Russian] Google Scholar

    35.

    Torsvik, T.H., and Cocks, L.R.M., 2017, Earth History and Paleogeography: Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 317 p. Google Scholar

    36.

    Tungalag, F., 1998, Carboniferous crinoids of Bayankhongaor area: Mongolian Geoscientist, v. 8, p. 2–3. Google Scholar

    37.

    Ubaghs, G., 1978, Camerates, in Moore, R.C., and Teichert, C., eds., Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part T, Echinodermata 2: Boulder, Colorado, and Lawrence, Kansas, Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, p. T409–T519. Google Scholar

    38.

    Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F., 1880–1886, Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea: Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia Part I. The families Ichthyocrinidae and Cyathocrinidae (1880), p. 226–378 (separate repaged p. 1–153). Part II. Family Sphaeroidocrinidae, with the sub-families Platycrinidae, Rhodocrinidae, and Actinocrinidae (1881), p. 177–411 (separate repaged, p. 1–237). Part III, Section 1. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1885), p. 225–364 (separate repaged, 1–138). Part III, Section 2. Discussion of the classification and relations of the brachiate crinoids, and conclusion of the generic descriptions (1886), p. 64–226 (separate repaged to continue with section 1, 139–302). Google Scholar

    39.

    Waters, J.A., Waters, J.W., Königshof, P., Carmichael, S.K., and Ariuntogos, M., 2021, Famennian Crinoids and Blastoids (Echinodermata) from Mongolia: Palaeobiodiversity and Palaeoenvironments, v. 101, p. 725–740. Google Scholar

    40.

    Webster G.D., and Ariunchimeg, Y., 2004, The northern most Emsian crinoids known, a Devonian fauna from the Chuluun Formation, Shine Jinst area, Southern Mongolia: Geobios, v. 37, p. 481–487. Google Scholar

    41.

    Webster, G.D., and Webster, D.W., 2014, Bibliography and index of Paleozoic crinoids, coronates, and hemistreptocrinoids, 1758–2012.  http://crinoids.azurewebsites.net/ [October 2020] Google Scholar

    42.

    Windley, B.F., Alexeiev, D., Xiao, W.J., Kröner, A., and Badarch, G., 2007, Tectonic models for accretion of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt: Journal of the Geological Society, v. 164, p. 31–47. Google Scholar

    43.

    Wood, E., 1901, A new crinoid from the Hamilton of Charlestown, Ind.: American Journal of Science, ser. 4, v. 12, p. 197–300. Google Scholar

    44.

    Wright, D.F., 2017, Bayesian estimation of fossil phylogenies and the evolution of early to middle Paleozoic crinoids (Echinodermata): Journal of Paleontology, v. 91, p. 799–814. Google Scholar

    45.

    Wright, D.F., Ausich, W.I., Cole, S.R., Peter, M.E., and Rhenberg, E.C., 2017, Phylogenetic taxonomy and classification of the Crinoidea (Echinodermata) L Journal of Paleontology, v. 91, p. 829–846. Google Scholar

    46.

    Yolkin, E.A., Gratsianova, R.T., Izokh, N.G., Yazikov, A., Bakharev, N.K., Alekseeva, R.E., Erina, M.V., Kim, A.I., and Shishkina, G.R., 2000, Devonian standard boundaries within the shelf belt of the Siberian Old Continent (southern part of Siberia, Mongolia, Russian Far East) and in the south Tien Shan: Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, v. 225, p. 303–318. Google Scholar
    Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Paleontological Society.
    Johnny A. Waters and William I. Ausich "Gennaeocrinus tariatensis, a new Emsian (Devonian) monobathrid crinoid from the Tarvagatay Terrane of Mongolia," Journal of Paleontology 96(3), 631-637, (6 June 2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/jpa.2021.112
    Accepted: 25 October 2021; Published: 6 June 2022
    Back to Top