Cited by 47Paleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyEvolution and Paleontology Studies

The lower cambrian fossil anabaritids: Affinities, occurrences and systematics

Kouchinsky, Artem, Bengtson, Stephan, Feng, Weimin, Kutygin, Ruslan, Val'kov, Anatolij·2009·Journal of Systematic Palaeontology

Abstract

Synopsis Anabaritids, or angustiochreids, are extinct organisms with mineralised tubular and mostly triradially symmetrical exoskeletons known from Lower Cambrian beds worldwide. They are particularly abundant and diverse on the Siberian Platform, from where their first representatives have been formally described. About 70% of the published species names and all valid genera are known from Siberia, which makes this region particularly important for revision of the group. A few species of anabaritids are also reported from such crustal units as Western Mongolia, Kazakhstan, South and North China, Eastern and Western Gondwana, Avalonia, Laurentia and Baltica. This study is mainly based on the extensive collections available from the Siberian Platform, including material illustrated in publications, and it provides a systematic review of the diversity of the group. The evaluation of taxonomically important features by different authors is assessed in order to find a balance between taxonomic oversplitting of anabaritids, which has resulted in 72 species being named to date, and unsubstantiated lumping. Of the 19 published genera we place 14 in synonymy, on the basis of our analysis of the type material. The genera Anbarites, Cambrotubulus,Selindeochrea,Aculeochrea and Mariochrea may be retained. We are inclined to regard anabaritids as diploblastic‐grade metazoans similar to, or located within, the Cnidaria. There is, however, no firm evidence for that and they are, therefore, collectively referred to herein as a group incertae sedis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1477201909002715

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Anabaritids are a problematic early Cambrian group with originally calcareous, probably aragonitic, skeletons that typically had triradiate symmetry.

    “Anabaritids are a problematic early Cambrian group with originally calcareous, probably aragonitic, skeletons that typically had triradiate symmetry”

    From Chronology of early Cambrian biomineralization (2012) · cites this paper as Kouchinsky et al . 2009

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kouchinsky, A., Bengtson, S., Feng, W., Kutygin, R., & Val'kov, A.
Affiliations
  • Swedish Museum of Natural History (SE)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • Russian Academy of Sciences (RU)
Venue
Journal of Systematic Palaeontology
Published
2009-09
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
241-298
ISSN
  • 1477-2019 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-0941
OpenAlex
W2127500041
Cited by
47
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Systematic Palaeontology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
Keywords
Lower Cambrian, fossil arthropods, Siberian Platform, taxonomic revision, synonymy, biogeography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review