Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T10:42:10.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolutionary trends and ecology of Mesozoic decapod crustaceans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

Reinhard Förster
Reinhard Förster
Affiliation:
Bayerische Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und historische Geologie, Richard-Wagner-Straβe 10, D-8000 München 2, B.R.D.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The fossil record of unquestionable decapod remains dates back to Permo Triassic times. Evaluation of all available data from the fossil record, trace fossils and facies reveals various trends within the evolution of Mesozoic decapods, and its relation to their ecology. One of these trends is the protection of the long vulnerable abdomen. The most successful method, gradual reduction and inflection of the abdomen against the ventral cephalothorax, led to the Brachyura. Brachyurans exhibit the broadest spectrum of habitat adaptions.

Keywords

AnomuraAstacideaBrachyuraburrowscoprolitesDecapodaDromioideaecologyevolutionfossil recordHomolodromioideaMesozoicPalinuraPenaeoideataphonomy.
Type
Life and environment of fossil forms
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 76 , Issue 2-3: Fossil Anthropods as Living Animals , 1985 , pp. 299 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bachmayer, F. & Malzahn, E. 1983. Der erste Nachweis eines dekapoden Krebses im niederrheinischen Kupferschiefer. ANN NAT HIST MUS WIEN 85A, 99–106.Google Scholar
Besairie, H. & Collignon, M. 1960. Madagascar (Supplement). Lexique Stratigraphique International, Vol. IV Afrique, Fasc. 11. Paris: Congrès Géologique International.Google Scholar
Birshtein, Y. A. 1958. Drevneishii predstavital otryada desyatinogikh rakoobraznikh, Protodytiopsis antiqua, iz Permakikh otlozhenii zapadnoi Sibiri. DOKL AKAD NAUK SSSR 122, 477–80.Google Scholar
Brönnimann, P. 1972. Remarks on the classification of fossil Anomuran coprolites. PALAEONTOL Z 46, 99–103.Google Scholar
Förster, R. 1966. Über die Erymiden, eine alte konservative Familie der mesozoischen Dekapoden. PALAEONTOGRAPHICA 125, 61–175.Google Scholar
Förster, R. 1967. Die reptanten Dekapoden der Trias. NEUES JAHRB GEOL PALAEONTOL ABH 128, 136–94.Google Scholar
Förster, R. 1979. Eocarcinus praecursor Withers (Decapoda, Brachyura) from the Lower Pliensbachian of Yorkshire and the early crabs. NEUES JAHRB PALAEONTOL MONATSH 1979, 15–27.Google Scholar
Förster, R. 1984. Bärenkrebse (Crustacea, Decapoda) aus dem Cenoman des Libanon und dem Eozän Italiens. MITT BAYERISCHE STAATSSAMML PALAEONTOL HIST GEOL 24, 57–66.Google Scholar
Förster, R. & Crane, M. D. 1984. A new species of the penaeid shrimp Aeger Münster (Crustacea, Decapoda) from the Upper Triassic of Somerset, England. NEUES JAHRB GEOL PALAEONTOL MONATSH 1984, 455–62.Google Scholar
Förster, R., Gazdzicki, A. & Wrona, R. 1985. First record of homolodromiid crab from a Lower Miocene glacio-marine sequence of West Antarctica. NEUES JAHRB GEOL PALAEONTOL MONATSH 1985, 340–48.Google Scholar
Förster, R. & Hillebrandt, A. v. 1984. Das Kimmeridge des Profeta-Jura in Nordchile mit einer Mecochirus–Favreina– Vergesellschaftung (Crustacea, Decapoda-Ichnogenus). MITT BAYERISCHE STAATSSAMML PALAEONTOL HIST GEOL 24, 67–87.Google Scholar
Förest, J. & Saint Laurent, M. de 1981. La morphologie externe de Neoglyphea inopinata, espèce actuelle de Crustacé Décapode Glyphéide. In Résultats des Campagnes MUSORSTOM, I. Philippines, vol. 1, 2. MEM ORSTOM 91, 51–84.Google Scholar
Frey, R. W., Curran, H. A. & Pemberton, S. G. 1984. Tracemaking activities of crabs and their environmental significance: the ichnogenus Psilonichnus. J. PALEONTOL 58, 333–50.Google Scholar
Frey, R. W., Howard, J. D. & Pryor, W. A. 1978. Ophiomorpha: its morphologic, taxonomic, and environmental significance. PALAEOGEOGR PALAEOCLIM PALAEOECOL 23, 199–229.Google Scholar
Glaessner, M. F. 1969. Decapoda. In Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part R, Arthropoda 4, 399–533. Lawrence, Kansas: Geol. Soc. Am. & Univ. Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Hüssner, H. 1983. Die Faunenwende Perm/Trias. GEOL RUNDSCH 72, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaestner, A. 1967. Lehrbuch der Speziellen Zoologie, Bd.I.: Wirbellose 2. Teil Crustacea, 849–1242. Stuttgart: Fischer.Google Scholar
Schopf, T. J. M. 1974. Permo-Triassic extinctions: Relation to sea-floor spreading. J GEOL 82, 129–43.Google Scholar
Schram, F. R., Feldmann, R. M. & Copeland, M. J. 1978. The Late Devonian Palaeopalaemonidae and the earliest decapod crustaceans. J PALEONTOL 52, 1375–87.Google Scholar
Schram, F. R. & Mapes, R. H. 1984. Imocaris tuberculata, n.gen., n.sp. (Crustacea: Decapoda) from the upper Mississippian Imo Formation, Arkansas. TRANS SAN DIEGO SOC NAT HIST 20, 165–8.Google Scholar
Warner, G. F. 1977. The Biology of Crabs. New York: Van Nostrand-Reinhold.Google Scholar
Weimer, R. J. & Hoyt, J. H. 1964. Burrows of Callianassa major Say, geologic indicators of littoral and shallow neritic environments. J PALEONTOL 38, 761–7.Google Scholar