James M. Schopf

Modes of fossil preservation

Abstract The processes of geologic preservation are important for understanding the organisms represented by fossils. Some fossil differences are due to basic differences in organization of animals and plants, but the interpretation of fossils has also tended to be influenced by modes of preservation. Four modes of preservation generally can be distinguished: (1) Cellular permineralization (“petrifaction”) preserves anatomical detail, and, occasionally, even cytologic structures. (2) Coalified compression , best illustrated by structures from coal but characteristic of many plant fossils in shale, preserves anatomical details in distorted form and produces surface replicas (impressions) on enclosing matrix. (3) Authigenic preservation replicates surface form or outline (molds and casts) prior to distortion by compression and, depending on cementation and timing, may intergrade with fossils that have been subject to compression. (4) Duripartic (hard part) preservation is characteristic of fossil skeletal remains, predominantly animal. Molds, pseudomorphs, or casts may form as bulk replacements following dissolution of the original fossil material, usually by leaching. Classification of the kinds of preservation in fossils will aid in identifying the processes responsible for modifying the fossil remains of both animals and plants.

Cllsworth Mountains: Position in West Antarctica ue to Sea-Floor Spreading

Similarities of middle anld upper Paleozoic deposits of the Ellsworth fountains with those of the Pensacola, Horlick, and other Transtarctic mountains indicate that all these ranges may have had a related geologic history. A native explanation is now suggested which involves sea-floor spreading atnd anslocationi of the Ellsworth crutstal block from its originilal location adjacent to the East Antarctic Shield. Accordingly, the islands of West Antarctica may differ it origin and the Transantarctic Mountains of East Antarctica may represent one margin of an ancient rift.

Morphologic interpretation of fertile structures in glossopterid gymnosperms

The problem of determining affinity among glossopterid gymnosperms is beset by deficiencies in preservation, natural dissociation of parts, and scarcity of features assuredly critical for morphologic comprarison. The glossopterids probably are not a very heterogeneous group of plants, but this is difficult to prove. The Gondwana glacial “hiatus” has resulted in the omission of a critical chapter glossopterid evolution. As a consequence, morphologic features and phyletic probabilities must be evaluated on a much more hypothetical basis than would otherwise be justified. Confusion has arisen from the lack of morphologic terms that permit clear discussion of a newly evolved type of reproductive structure in glossopterids. The structure, here designated a “fertiliger”, consists of a leafy bract, a partially adnate stalk, and a fertile head or capitulum. Seven types of fertile structures are discussed, all of which are bilaterally symmetrical and have different features on dorsiventral surfaces. I regard all fertiligers as ovulate but this interpretation may bot be acceptable to some workers; others may not accept dorsiventral organization of the capitulum as being fundamental. Among glossopterids, however, in spite of differences in preservation that may seem to support a variant interpretation, these ovulate fertiligers are the distinctive features that show general consistency. A single fertile bract bearing several capitula, as exemplified by Lidgettonia, is called a compound fertiliger. Staminate structures (microsporophylls) of glossopterids are separately classified as Eretmonia, Glossotheca, and possibly as other taxa. Only the manner of sporangial attachment is not entirely clear. It seems likely the staminate parts have previously been confused with scale leaves and are actually coextensive in distribution with the glossopterids. A tentative phyletic model suggests the distant derivation of glossopterids from middle Carboniferous cordaiteans. Many details must be speculative due to the lack of a pertinent fossil record, but this interpretation accounts for some features that have no counterpart in pteridosperms. Permineralized ovules from Antarctica provide general support for this working hypothesis, but specific evidence is lacking. Furthermore, it seems unlikely angiosperms originated from glossopterids; it is more reasonable to consider the glossopterids as possible distant ancestors of the Gnetales.

Petrified Peat from a Permian Coal Bed in Antarctica

Petrified plant remains that composed a Permian peat deposit occur at a coal horizon in a local area of Mount Augusta near the Beardmore Glacier in Antarctica. This discovery is the first in the entire Gondwana area that yields plant materials as exquisitely preserved as the materials of the well-known coal-ball localities of the Northern Hemisphere. A sampling of anatomical details is illustrated.

Germanium and uranium in coalified wood bom upper Devonian black shale

Abstract Microscopic study of black, vitreous, carbonaceous material occurring in the Chattanooga shale in Tennessee and in the Cleveland member of the Ohio shale in Ohio has revealed coalified woody plant tissue. Some samples have shown sufficient detail to be identified with the genus Cauixylon. Similar material has been reported in the literature as “bituminous” or “asphaltic” stringers. Spectrographic analyses of the ash from the coalified wood have shown unusually high percentages of germanium, uranium, vanadium, and nickel. The inverse relationship between uranium and germanium in the ash and the ash content of various samples shows an association of these elements with the organic constituents of the coal. On the basis of geochemical considerations, it seems most probable that the wood or coalified wood was germanium-bearing at the time logs or woody fragmenta were floated into the basins of deposition of the Chattanooga shale and the Cleveland member of the Ohio shale. Once within the marine environment, the material probably absorbed uranium with the formation of organo-uranium compounds such as exist in coals. It is suggested that a more systematic search for germaniferous coals in the vicinity of the Chattanooga shale and the Cleveland member of the Ohio shale might be rewarding.