Cited by 19Paleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyEvolution and Paleontology Studies

Cambrothyra ampulliformis, an unusual coeloscleritophoran from the Lower Cambrian of Shaanxi Province, China

Moore, John L., Porter, Susannah M., Steiner, Michael, Li, Guoxiang·2010·Journal of Paleontology

Abstract

Cambrothyra ampulliformis Qian and Zhang, 1983, is a jar- or vase-shaped fossil known from the Lower Cambrian of Shaanxi and Hubei provinces, China. It has been interpreted as a protistan test or cyst or a metazoan sclerite. A large collection of specimens from the Xihaoping Member of the Dengying Formation in southern Shaanxi Province permits its detailed redescription. These fossils are highly variable in shape but this variation is continuous and does not support the current recognition of multiple species for this material. They were originally hollow with a restricted basal foramen and a calcareous wall probably composed of fibrous aragonite. All of these features support the identification of Cambrothyra as sclerites of a coeloscleritophoran, a problematic group of Cambrian scleritome-bearing metazoans. Furthermore, the walls of Cambrothyra sclerites contain numerous pores, a feature shared with other coeloscleritophorans.Cambrothyra resembles chancelloriids in particular due to the shared presence of a verruculose texture around the foramen and the absence of mirror-image pairs of asymmetric sclerites. However, unlike chancelloriids, which have rosette-like compound sclerites, the scleritome of Cambrothyra was dominated by isolated sclerites, with only a few pairs and clusters of sclerites and twin sclerites. Consequently, we hypothesize that Cambrothyra forms a clade with other chancelloriids, but represents a basal lineage that plesiomorphically retained isolated sclerites. The morphology of Cambrothyra sclerites, which shares features with both chancelloriids and halkieriids, thus supports the hypothesis that all coeloscleritophorans form a natural group.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1666/09-091.1

Cites

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?

  • Cambrothyra is treated as closely related to, but outside the Chancelloridae sensu stricto.

    “This organism is treated as closely related to, but outside the Chancelloridae sensu stricto”

    From Chronology of early Cambrian biomineralization (2012) · cites this paper as Moore et al . 2010

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 95 · Cited by 19

Authors
Moore, J. L., Porter, S. M., Steiner, M., & Li, G.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
  • Nanjing Institute of Geology and Paleontology (CN)
Venue
Journal of Paleontology
Published
2010-11
Volume
84
Issue
6
Pages
1040-1060
ISSN
  • 0022-3360 (ISSN-L)
  • 1937-2337
OpenAlex
W2111206565
Cited by
19
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Paleontology (publishedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of California, Santa Barbara
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, sclerites, chancelloriids, Dengying Formation, aragonite, phylogenetic hypothesis

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