SQUIDCAM 2: Fossil Cephcam

I don't think this rock type is confined to the area around the aperture of the fossil, but is found through out the concretionary mass, sometimes up to 1 meter dia. and a half meter thick. This is why I wish I could get out to the locality this fossil was found, all I brought home were the fossils.

The snow is beautiful, and winter is nice and cool, just makes it really hard to see anything. :smile:
 
My rambling has a point (I hope). When did seaweeds first appear?? If you had rafts of these things (weeds) might it not be an appropriate habitat in which to look (or photoshop) for juvenile ammonites, belemnites and nautiloids .... If not weeds then perhaps the buoyant rafts of dead ceph (ammonite/nautiloid) shells would have done the trick (surely there were rafts of these things in the good ol' days, with myriad epiphyte growths and elevated diversity and density of associated taxa ... aka baby ammonite food).

Mr. O'Shea: no expert am i but i reckon your rambling makes a good very point.

if we are to accept the widely held theory that algae is responsible for initiating oxygen production on earth, it follows that algae preceeded invertebrates of the sea. to my knowledge, seaweed came into the picture some 500 mn years ago, around the same time as sea invertebrates. here is where i get into a muddle (i welcome any correction to the following): i have always regarded seaweed as algae-based in evolutionary terms; a sort of sophisticated split-off, if you will. if that is the case, your theory is true and you should find much interesting data.

a view from the octopeanut gallery.. atticus finch
 
Steve wrote said:
My rambling has a point (I hope). When did seaweeds first appear?? If you had rafts of these things (weeds) might it not be an appropriate habitat in which to look (or photoshop) for juvenile ammonites, belemnites and nautiloids ....


It's hard to imagine life in the sea without seaweed, isn't it? Having had a quick search around for fossilised seaweed references, it seems that it has been around in some form at least since the mid-Cambrian, and possibly earlier. I've found an interesting reference to fossils of tiny Cambrian agnostid trilobites (four or five millimetres long) that have been found arranged in long strips, the strand of seaweed they presumably were living on long since rotted away and unpreserved. One of the theories about the lifestyle of Plectronoceras and Palaeoceras, the first recognised upper Cambrian cephalopods, is that they may have been tiny drifters, perhaps they were attached to rafts of seaweed feeding on such herbivorous trilobites or their planktonic larvae(?) (Another theory holds they were more snail like and crawled along the substrate). So perhaps, just possibly, seaweed may have provided the right environment for the earliest cephalopod evolution?

Many forms of graptolite, though not all, were believed to have been attached to seaweed as were some forms of ancient crinoids. I totally agree that rafts of seaweed may have supported a wealth of fauna, perhaps nautiloids would have drifted with them feeding off associated trilobites? Their conches remained bouyant after death and did not sink down, held aloft by remnants of gasses in the chambers. One can imagine mats of these shells intertwined with seaweed drifting for months; afterall, if they had all sunk to implosion depth ammonite fossils would be rare fossils indeed!

Such ammonoid and nautiloid shells must have occasionally drifted for years on the ocean currents as Nautilus shells do today. One would think specimens must have been published with growths of barnacle-type animals attached as the conch of the dead animal formed a host, much as Kevins specimen may be an example of.
 
On a more serious note, I decided to put them all in the same tank to see what happens.

Belemncam2.PNG
 
Phil: my point entirely (albeit not made well since i opted to omit pointing out 500 mn odd years ago equates to the Cambrian period). evolution of both terrestrial and higher marine life would have been impossible without seaweed. i concur with you. in no sense do i wish to imply that i think myself an authority akin to the likes of you lot. but, many of us who are not, can and do think about this stuff. i cheer myself up by reminding myself that Darwin himself was an amateur. ~ a.f. :smile:
 
Thanks atticus, thats some real food for thought you've given about seaweed. I've never really thought about it before.

atticus_finch said:
Phil: my point entirely (albeit not made well since i opted to omit pointing out 500 mn odd years ago equates to the Cambrian period). evolution of both terrestrial and higher marine life would have been impossible without seaweed. i concur with you.

Yes, the more one thinks about it, the more sense it makes. Having watched the 'Blue Planet' :notworth: recently I distinctly remember the episode with the huge mass of seaweed harbouring a vast diversity of animals and being picked at by Sunfish. Would the principle have been any different in the Cambrian, I wonder? Seaweed mats provide shelter, food, protection and a diverse habitat in a small area. They could have been a catalyst to the early evolution of the arthropods and molluscs, amonsgst others.

I've sometimes wondered about the earliest terrestrial arthropods too, whether the earliest eurypterids and arachnids that ventured onto land lived amongst masses of kelp-type weed in the tidal zones. Hmmm...

atticus_finch said:
in no sense do i wish to imply that i think myself an authority akin to the likes of you lot. but, many of us who are not, can and do think about this stuff.

(I know the feeling. Don't tell anyone but I've never studied biology in my life. I'm completely in awe of many of the experts here too!)

Cheers,

Phil
 
Phil: many thanks (check your PMs). All: i asked Phil if he knew anything about this fish and he kindly directed me to this site. a documentary i recently viewed made claim that they engage in tetropod form of swimming; ergo, are seen to be in direct evolutionary line leading toward the higher vertebrates. thanks again, Phil, and kudos. :smile: ~ a.f.
 
How are those belemnites doing Phil? Have they eaten everything else yet (my money is on them)

....ooooooh .... I just took a peek; they've evolved!!!

download.php
 
I was just ploughing through an old CD and found these pictures that were once posted in this thread. As I can't seem to edit these old posts, here's a couple of them tacked on at the end, better late than never.

This was one of my favourite threads from the past, so please forgive.
 

Attachments

  • conv_288762.png
    conv_288762.png
    190.6 KB · Views: 72
  • conv_288763.png
    conv_288763.png
    211.1 KB · Views: 58
  • conv_288764.png
    conv_288764.png
    254.3 KB · Views: 72
Three more from the Nautiloidcam.
 

Attachments

  • conv_288765.png
    conv_288765.png
    278.8 KB · Views: 66
  • conv_288766.png
    conv_288766.png
    241.2 KB · Views: 55
  • conv_288767.png
    conv_288767.png
    281.6 KB · Views: 52
Phil I hope your not feeding the euripy (aka cuddly water love bug of death) fresh water fish without gut loading them first. you know that fresh water fish lack the nutrients a growing euripy needs.
 

Shop Amazon

Shop Amazon
Shop Amazon; support TONMO!
Shop Amazon
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Back
Top