Famille des Conocoryphidae (Angelin, 1854) |
Crozo
Inner Circle

Registration Date: 23.02.2012
Posts: 235
Herkunft: Française
 |
|
|
05.03.2012 08:27 |
|
|
Crozo
Inner Circle

Registration Date: 23.02.2012
Posts: 235
Herkunft: Française
Thread Starter
 |
|
|
05.03.2012 08:28 |
|
|
Jens
Moderator
Registration Date: 18.03.2007
Posts: 2,167
Herkunft: HGW, momentan Jura, Schweiz
 |
|
Hi Croto,
again stunning specimens.
I can give you additional information concerning the swedish material. Please change that Brantevik (in Skane) is somehhow associated with Gotland. Thats not true, the Isle of Gotland is situated some 100 km to the north in the Baltic Sea. The mentioned locality is at the beach near Brantevik. By the way, the people there did not like that fossil hunters collect there. Therefore try not to smash stones there, we spoke with the people there and they were really unhappy that after geological excursions the beach is littered with stone fragments.
http://www.trilobita.de/wbb2/attachment....tachmentid=4185
Since some years the deteriminatiton of Ctenocephalus exulans ist changed to Hartella exsulans (Linnarsson, 1879), a close related genus, but without genal spines.
regards,
Jens
|
|
05.03.2012 10:04 |
|
|
Crozo
Inner Circle

Registration Date: 23.02.2012
Posts: 235
Herkunft: Française
Thread Starter
 |
|
OK, Jens. thank you for the location(localization) of Brantevik, you are right, she is not situated on Gotland, I réctifie that. On the other hand concerning the Kind(Genre) Hartella, I have just found a PDF on this trilobite, and Mr COTTON ( 2001 ), clarifies that the kind(genre) " Ctenocephalus " is always valid, but also he is followed by a sub-kind(sub-genre) " Hartella ", thus I summarize for this specimen, normally his(her,its) name is " Ctenocephalus ( hartella ) exsulans. of whom think of it you?. Thanks to bientot also how to change or kill(abolish) a photo for the modifications which I want to bring?.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.11...-4983.00176/pdf
This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by Crozo: 05.03.2012 11:21.
|
|
05.03.2012 11:21 |
|
|
Jens
Moderator
Registration Date: 18.03.2007
Posts: 2,167
Herkunft: HGW, momentan Jura, Schweiz
 |
|
Hi Crozo,
we follow the bible of the german collectors of Middle Cambrian erratic boulders. Frank Rudolph did a good job (dissertation) in revising the taxonomy of many species found in erratic boulders (with baltic origin) in Northern Germany.
He proposed the use of the genus Hartella, but unfortunately I have his book not at hand, I own it, but its still in another flat and therefor not available;-)
here may be a possibility to get it for cheap:
http://www.amazon.de/Die-Trilobiten-mitt...e/dp/3929671042
its in german, but for taxonomic reasons very important, you should try to get hand on it.
Thanks for the link to the Cotton paper, its also important, and I didn't recognized that paper before;-)
Cotton ignored the work of Rudolph 1994, so I'm not sure, if he is trustworthy when he did not know the relevant references.
regards,
Jens
|
|
05.03.2012 11:38 |
|
|
Crozo
Inner Circle

Registration Date: 23.02.2012
Posts: 235
Herkunft: Française
Thread Starter
 |
|
OK, thank you for this comment, not easy to give him(her) a name correct then, Ctenocephalus (Kind(Genre) or not?) Hartella (sub-kind(sub-genre) or Kind(Genre))? I am going to ask the question to a friend knowing well the subject. Thank you Jens and to soon
by
|
|
05.03.2012 16:49 |
|
|
Jens
Moderator
Registration Date: 18.03.2007
Posts: 2,167
Herkunft: HGW, momentan Jura, Schweiz
 |
|
Hi Crozo,
its not a big difference, when you use Ctenocephalus (Hartella) or Hartella as a separate genus. Probably its better, because Hartella is a female genus and a combination of a male genus and female subgenus is somewhat strange. I'm pretty sure, that the use of Hartella as a own genus is supportable. Ctenocephalus has some differences and at least after the work of Adrian & Jell, who discussed all own trilobite genera and used all subgenera as genera, yeah, after that work, you can probably do as you want, when naming your genus;-) I prefer Hartella and when you google that name, you will find papers doing so and others using the traditional form as a subgenus;-)
regards,
Jens
|
|
05.03.2012 17:15 |
|
|
pavel2
Inner Circle
Registration Date: 29.01.2007
Posts: 689
 |
|
| RE: Famille des Conocoryphidae (Angelin, 1854) |
 |
Hi,
the image of Conocoryphe gerlinda shows C. cirina from Rejkovice. I suppose, the reason for that wrong ID is the fraudulant behavior of a Czech dealer - he offered C. gerlinda in a pub in the villige Skryje. C. gerlinda (Skryje) is much rarer than C. cirina (Rejkovice). Cirinas were transported to the pub in Skryje and offered there as C. gerlinda as a rare conocoryphid from Skryje. This wrong ID was used by some seller on ebay too.
Sorry for my bad Englisch
Pavel
|
|
08.04.2012 03:06 |
|
|
Crozo
Inner Circle

Registration Date: 23.02.2012
Posts: 235
Herkunft: Française
Thread Starter
 |
|
| RE: Famille des Conocoryphidae (Angelin, 1854) |
 |
Also if I indeed understand, I have to change my index card of conocoryphe gerlinda it conocoryphe cirina, it is good that?.
Thank you
|
|
11.04.2012 19:08 |
|
|
pavel2
Inner Circle
Registration Date: 29.01.2007
Posts: 689
 |
|
| RE: Famille des Conocoryphidae (Angelin, 1854) |
 |
yes, cirina is correct
|
|
13.04.2012 15:56 |
|
|
Crozo
Inner Circle

Registration Date: 23.02.2012
Posts: 235
Herkunft: Française
Thread Starter
 |
|
| RE: Famille des Conocoryphidae (Angelin, 1854) |
 |
OK, thnak you so much, i change that soon.
thank pavel
bye
|
|
14.04.2012 02:40 |
|
|
|
Privacy policy
|