A river runs through an Oligocene sea: part II

This is the first post of the year and, hopefully, more will follow. Anyways, today I bring you a brief overview of fieldwork that I did back in January while I was in Puerto Rico. I had written in a previous occasion about this locality (you can read part I here) and unlike back then, I did find some vertebrate fossils.

The picture above shows one of the most productive outcrops along this locality. As you can see there are about four distinct units. I and III are paleosols (ancient soil horizons) whereas II seems to be shallow marine/brackish and IV shallow marine deposits. Unit II has yielded good fossils in the past, including a sirenian skull and associated axial skeleton, croc teeth, rodent teeth and some nurse shark teeth (gynglymostomatids) (update: you can read about newer discoveries at this site and other nearby ones here, here, here, here, and here). These beds are part of the San Sebastian Formation of early Oligocene age, which in the past have yielded other interesting fossils such as the sirenian Caribosiren turneri (Reinhart, 1959) and the gharial Aktiogavialis puertoricencis (Vélez-Juarbe et al. 2007), among others.

Like I mentioned in the intro, this time around I did find some cool stuff!

In the photo above you can see a closeup of unit II showing some of the fossils as I found them and before I started digging. The red circles are for turtle shell fragments while the green is a sirenian rib. Yes, I know, they are somewhat difficult to see but click on the picture and look carefully, you’ll see them.

The sirenian rib was isolated and easy to collect; it is fairly normal to find isolated sirenian ribs in the San Sebastian Fm and other Oligocene and Miocene localities in Puerto Rico. In contrast, while digging around the turtle shell fragments shown in the picture above, I kept stumbling upon more fragments, until it was apparent that this represented a partially disarticulated turtle shell. Not only that, but there was also an associated left pelvis (shown in the picture below), not bad!!

One of the first posts on this blog was an overview of what's known of the fossil side-neck turtles from Puerto Rico. In it I mentioned that some pelomedusid (a more technical name for side-necks) material from the San Sebastian Fm. had been described by Wood (1972) as an unknown taxon. In fact, Wood (1972) not only described an incomplete shell and plastron but also an associated pelvis. Maybe this material I collected represents additional specimens of that unknown taxon. However, comparison with the description as well as with other turtle fossils from the overlying Lares Limestone will have to wait until after the specimens are prepared (you can get a glimpse of the preparation process here). Below you can see the jackets with the specimens inside.

Preliminarily, I am quite certain that this San Sebastian turtle is a pelomedusoid just by the morphology of the pelvis. Also, there was one other fossil collected that day (is in the jacket in the far left), which was both interesting and frustrating, but I'll leave that for next time!

Recommended Literature

Reinhart, R. H. 1959. A review of the Sirenia and Desmostylia. University of California Publications in Geological Sciences 36(1):1-146.

Vélez-Juarbe, J., C. A. Brochu, and H. Santos. 2007. A gharial from the Oligocene of Puerto Rico: transoceanic dispersal in the history of a non-marine reptile. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 274:1245-1254.

Wood, R. C. 1972. A fossil pelomedusid turtle from Puerto Rico. Breviora 392:1-13.

This post was updated April 28, 2020

Nuevos sirénidos del Eoceno

Este año ha visto la publicación de dos artículos describiendo sirénidos del Eoceno (55.8-33.9 millones de años atrás [ma]). En adición a esos, otras dos especies más fueron descritos del Mioceno, los cuales mencioné en una entrada pasada. Creo que no está mal, cuatro nuevas especies de sirénidos fósiles en un año, especialmente para un grupo que hoy día solo cuenta con cuatro especies (tres de manatí y el dugong). El conocimiento sobre la diversidad de sirénidos en el pasado sigue aumentando a muy buen ritmo.

Durante el Eoceno existían al menos tres de las cuatro familias de sirénidos que se conocen, Prorastomidae (que incluyen los miembros más primitivos), Protosirenidae y Dugongidae. El registro fósil de los Trichechidae (la cuarta familia, que es la que incluye al manatí) es más escaso y hasta donde sabemos, estos se originaron durante el Oligoceno Tardío (28.4-23 ma). Los nuevos fósiles del Eoceno representan a los Prorastomidae y los Dugongidae.

Un protosirénido de India

En una entrada pasada mencioné que India es uno de los lugares más prolíficos en términos de hallazgos de fósiles de sirénidos. No debe sorprendernos que otra especie adicional ha sido descrita. Ashokia antiqua Bajpai et al. 2009 representa un nuevo género y especie de protosirénido del Eoceno Medio temprano (Lutetian: 48.6-40.4 ma). Esta nueva especie se distingue por una combinación de caracteres primitivos y derivados, morfológicamente se acerca más a otro protosirénido de Libya, aún sin describir (Bajpai et al., 2009). Ashokia se distingue de otros prorastómidos al tener una cresta sigmoidal prominente, la apertura auditiva externa más ancha, el puente zigomatico-orbital elevado, el borde del exoccipital más delgado y poseer un proceso zigomático del hueso temporal que disminuye en grosor gradualmente en dirección al rostro.

En la figura arriba Ashokia antiqua en vista lateral (foto e ilustración hechas por mi).

Este no es el primer prorastómido que se conoce de India. Bajpai et al. (2006) refirieron un cráneo incompleto al género Protosiren sp., este, al igual que Ashokia, provienen de la Formación Harudi. Otros sirénido del Eoceno indio son Eotheroides babiae y Eosiren sp. también de la misma formación, estos sin embargo son dugónguidos (Bajpai et al. 2006). Los protosirénidos se distinguen de todas otras especies conocidas de sirénidos por ciertas características craneales y por tener las epífisis* cartilaginosas, incluso en los adultos (Sickenberg, 1934; Zalmout et al., 2003; Bajpai et al. 2006). Aún no se han reportado protosirénidos en rocas del Oligoceno, por lo que parece que este grupo fue uno exclusivo del Eoceno.

*Los extremos de los huesos.

Un dugónguido de Madagascar

Poco se conoce de los animales que habitaron Madagascar en el pasado. No fue hasta en años recientes que se comenzó a descubrir fósiles de los antiguos pobladores de esta isla, especialmente durante el Mesozoico y Cenozoico. Uno de los descubrimientos más recientes es el cráneo de un dugóngido proveniente de estratas del Eoceno Medio. Estos han sido descritos por Samonds et al. (2009) quienes han identificado el fósil como una especie nueva del género Eotheroides. E. lambondrano Samonds et al. 2009 pertenece a un género de dugónguidos que están se han encontrado en rocas del Eoceno de Egipto e India (Domning, 1996; Bajpai et al., 2006), esta nueva especie es la única dentro de ese género que posee el rostro completo, permitiéndonos conocer su morfología en mayor detalle. Único entre otras especies de Eotheroides por la morfología distinta de los huesos nasales, tener procesos supraorbitales bien desarrollados y el puente zigomatico-orbital de la maxilla corto, también se distingue de otras especies de dugonguidos al poseer una fórmula dental primitiva.

En la figura arriba Eotheroides lambondrano en vista lateral, escala = 4 cm (compuesto de fig. 3A y 4A de Samonds et al., 2009).

El largo del cráneo de E. lambondrano es de 270 mm (~10 pulg.), haciendo de este uno de los dugones de menor dimensión que se conocen. Posiblemente se acercaba en tamaño a las especies de dugónguino Nanosiren los cuales tenian dimensiones similares y cual largo total de cuerpo se estima en alrededor de 2 metros (~6’6”) (Domning & Aguilera, 2008), lo cual es considerado pequeño para un sirénido adulto. Asi que según se ha escrito en otros lugares (como en este artículo de National Geographic) puede que la nueva especie de Madagascar sea el dugónguido más pequeño que conocemos.

La importancia de estos nuevos fósiles resta en que demuestran cuan diverso eran los sirénidos durante el Eoceno. El nuevo protosirénido añade otra especie a un interesante grupo de sirénidos, que incluso se ha postulado como el grupo que dio origen a los Trichechidae. El hallazgo de Eotheroides lambondrano en Madagascar nos muestra cuán amplia era la distribución de este género y de los dugónguidos durante el Eoceno; en adición nos puede ayudar a entender la evolución de estos en la región del Tethys. Y por supuesto, aquellos de nosotros que están al tanto de lo que ocurren en el mundo de la paleosirenología saben que aún quedan más por ser descritos, asi que pendientes!

Otras entradas sobre sirénidos

Prep work: update II and a note on sirenian periotics

Prep work: update

Sirenian diversity in the past

De la tierra al agua (English version here)

Domningia and other Indian sirenians

What’s wrong with the hands of Steller’s sea cow

Bajpai, S., D. P. Domning, D. P. Das & V. P. Mishra. 2009. A new middle Eocene sirenian (Mammalia, Protosirenidae) from India. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie Abhandlungen 252/3:257-267.

Bajpai, S., J. G. M. Thewissen, V. V. Kapur, B. N. Tewari & A. Sahni. 2006. Eocene and Oligocene sirenians (Mammalia) from Kachchh, India. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 26(2):400-410.

Domning, D. P. 1996. Bibliography and index of the Sirenia and Desmostylia. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology 80:1-611.

Domning, D. P. & O. A. Aguilera. 2008. Fossil Sirenia of the West Atlantic and Caribbean region. VIII. Nanosiren garciae, gen. et sp. nov. and Nanosiren sanchezi, sp. nov. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 28(2):479-500.

Samonds, K. E., I. S. Zalmout, M. Irwin, D. W. Krause, R. R. Rogers & L. L. Raharivony. 2009. Eotheroides lambondrano, new Middle Eocene seacow (Mammalia, Sirenia) from the Mahajanga basin, northwestern Madagascar. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 29(4):1233-1243.

Prep work: update II and a note on sirenian periotics

This has been a long hiatus! I’ve been really busy doing some more prep work on the Puerto Rican Dioplotherium and the Yucatán skull (another new species of dugongine). On top of that I’ve been preparing a couple of manuscripts describing some sirenian remains from PR, which I hope to submit sometime next year.

The subject of this post is to show you more of the Puerto Rican Dioplotherium, which was featured on the previous post. I have done additional prep work on the left squamosal, which was detached from the skull.

The composite picture above shows the skull as it was back in 2006 (top picture) and an outline of the enlarged area below. All that was visible of the sqamosal were the zygomatic arch, post-tympanic process and the mastoid part of the periotic (bottom picture). It was exciting knowing that part of the ear bones were preserved, even if it was only the periotic. Fortunately I got more than I bargained for.

In this figure we see the squamosal, now free of matrix, in lateral (A) and medial (B) views. Notice that the tympanic bone was preserved as well as the periotic. And there is more!

Additional removal of matrix revealed the three auditory ossicles, in articulation! The picture below shows a posteroventral view into the middle ear (anterior is to the right, medial towards the top of the picture). This is really neat as these bones are easily lost in most fossils (they are, apparently, missing on the right side of the skull).

A little on sirenian periotics

The periotic can be divided into three parts tegmen tympani, pars mastoidea and pars petrosa. The latter can be subdivided into pars canalicularis and pars cochlearis (see picture above) (Robineau, 1969). In the pars cochlearis, the structure labeled perilymphatic foramen, is uniquely found in (most) sirenians, (most) proboscideans and Arsinoitherium (hinting at their tethytherian affinity?). The homologous structure in other mammals consists of two openings known as the fenestra cochleae (rotunda) and aqueductus cochleae (Court, 1994).

The occurrence of a perilymphatic foramen in some tethytheres (I’m not sure what is the condition in desmostylians) seems to indicate that it might be a unique derived character of the group. Nonetheless, when we look at the fossil record, primitive proboscideans (Phosphatherium escuilliei) and sirenians (Prorastomus sirenoides) do have fenestra cochleae and aqueductus cochleae (Gheerbrant et al., 2005; Court, 1990; Savage et al., 1994). Meaning that this condition is homoplasic in tethytheres (Court, 1994, Gheerbrant et al. 2005). Whether resulting from multiple origins or multiple reversals, I still think it is an interesting characteristic that is found in at least some tethytheres.

Previous post about sirenians:

Prep work: update

Sirenian diversity in the past

De la tierra al agua (English version here)

Domningia and other Indian sirenians

What's wrong with the hands of Steller's sea cow

Court, N. 1990. Perotic anatomy of Arsinoitherium (Mammalia, Embrithopoda) and its phylogenetic implications. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 10(2):170-182.

Court, N. 1994. The periotic of Moeritherium (Mammalia, Proboscidea): homology or homoplasy in the ear region of Tethytheria McKenna, 1975? Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 112:13-28.

Gheerbrant, E., J. Sudre, P. Tassy, M. Amaghzaz, B. Bouya and M. Iarochène. 2005. Nouvelles données sur Phosphatherium escuilliei (Mammalia, Proboscidea) de ‘Éocène inférieur du Maroc, apports à la phylogénie des Proboscidea et des ongulés lophodontes. Geodiversitas 27(2):239-333.

Robineau, D. 1969. Morphologie externe du complexe osseux temporal chez les sireniens. Mémoires du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Série A, Zoologie 60(1)-1-32.

Savage, R. J. G., D. P. Domning and J. G. M. Thewissen. 1994. Fossil Sirenia of the west Atlantic and Caribbean region. V. The most primitive known sirenian, Prorastomus sirenoides Owen, 1855. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 14(3):427-449.

Prep Work: Update

Wow! It’s been a while since I posted something. Working with some of the material collected back in August when I went to Puerto Rico to do fieldwork with my advisor has kept me busy. In addition, I had no computer for a while, just after posting the previous post, my computer’s hard drive died! Luckily, not much was lost.

Back in June I wrote about some prep work I had been doing on a sirenian skull from Puerto Rico. Well I am glad to say that four years after I collected said skull (in 2005), it is nearly done! So, here are some pictures, from the time it was collected until now.

In the picture above (from 2005) I am in the outcrop with my hand next to where the fossil is. This is a Late Oligocene limestone unit from northern Puerto Rico.

Here is a dorsal and right lateral view of how the fossil looked around 2006 (and actually it looked like that for the last 2 years). You might notice that on the top picture there is a bone floating in the matrix next to the braincase, this is the left squamosal, which is disarticulated.

Here is how the fossil looks like now (2009), with most of the matrix gone and the left squamosal removed. Beautiful, don't you think?!

If you know something about sirenians, you might have noticed that this is a dugongine (large tusks [broken, unfortunately], thickened supraorbital process of frontal, etc.). It is actually quite similar to Dioplotherium manigaulti from the Early Miocene of South Carolina and Florida (Cope, 1883; Domning, 1989). Nonetheless, the Puerto Rican skull is older, Late Oligocene, and it also has some primitive characters that sets it apart from D. manigaulti. This skull along with another one from the same locality make up an important part of my thesis. Fortunately, some postcranial material that was collected this summer, from the same outcrop and same unit, is referable to this taxon. This material also displays differences from other known sirenian postcrania. Pretty cool stuff!!

Previous post about sirenians:

Sirenian diversity in the past

De la tierra al agua (English version here)

Domningia and other Indian sirenians

What's wrong with the hands of Steller's sea cow

Cope, E. D. 1883. On a new extinct genus of Sirenia from South Carolina. Proceedings, Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 1883:52-54.

Domning, D. P. 1989. Fossil Sirenia of the West Atlantic and Caribbean region. II. Dioplotherium manigualti Cope, 1883. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 9:415-428.

Sirenian diversity in the past

Its been quiet here for a while as I’ve been busy working on the preparation of two sirenians skull, as well as getting ready for the upcoming field season.

It’s also been a while since I wrote something about sirenians so, here it goes.

Living sirenians can be divided into two families, Trichechidae (manatees) and Dugongidae (dugongs). Most people are probably more familiar with the manatees, after all, there are three species, West Indian, Amazonian and African, whereas there is only one species of dugong. The geographic distribution of extant sirenians is such that there is mostly no overlap between the different species. As the only living herbivorous marine mammals, it might be that by living in separate regions it reduced the chances of competing for the same resources (i.e. seagrasses). But what about in the past, what does the fossil record of sirenian tells us about their paleoecology.

When we look at the fossil record, sirenians were much more speciose, including multispecies communities in some regions (Domning, 2001). Now lets look at one good example.

The Late Oligocene of Florida

The Late Oligocene sirenian fauna of Florida includes at least three species of dugongids*. The dugongines, Crenatosiren olseni and Dioplotherium manigaulti, and the halitheriine Metaxytherium sp. (Domning, 1989, 1997, 2001). (See illustration below).

*The family Dugongidae includes three subfamilies: Dugonginae, Halitheriinae & Hydrodamalinae.

Illustration of known Late Oligocene sirenians from Florida (all at the same scale). Top, Crenatosiren olseni (modified from Domning, 1997); middle, Dioplotherium manigaulti (from Domning, 1989); bottom, Metaxytherium sp. (this last drawing based on a very similar skull from Puerto Rico, tusks not preserved, but presumed to be small as in the Fl specimen). The numbers in the circles are the degrees of rostral deflection. Mandibles absent in the middle and bottom specimens.

These three species, as you can see, differ in size, and to a lesser degree in rostral deflection. Also different from each other is the size of their tusks, increasing in size from Metaxytherium - C. olseni - Dioplotherium manigaulti. Taken as a whole, these differences (specially tusks size) could be indicators of different feeding habits, with small-tusked sirenians feeding of small rhizomes* and large-tusked sirenians feeding on larger ones (Domning, 2001; Domning & Beatty, 2007). Dugongids most likely used their tusks as a tool to dig out the rhizomes, with the most extreme specialization observed in the dugongines, including very large blade-like tusks as well as cranial adaptations that seemed to have help withstand the forces exerted when digging (Domning & Beatty, 2007).

*Rhizomes = the nutrient-rich, underground stems of seagrasses.

Other examples of sirenian multispecies communities are found in the Early Oligocene of Puerto Rico and the Early Miocene of India, among others (more on this sometime in the future). In addition, in the Pacific, sirenians were not the only herbivorous marine mammals. In the northern Pacific region, sirenians seem to have shared their resources with the desmostylians (see picture below), an interesting (and bizarre) group of mammals that lived from the Oligocene to the Miocene and were presumably feeding and spending time in the marine realm (Domning et al., 1986; Inuzuka et al., 1994). Whereas, in the southeastern Pacific, fossils of aquatic sloths (Thalassocnus spp.) have been found in the same formations as sirenians (Muizon & McDonald, 1995; Canto et al., 2008; Muizon & Domning, 1985; Bianucci et al., 2006; Domning & Aguilera, 2008).

Mounted cast of Palaeoparadoxia tabatai taken at the AMNH.

So, why is it so different in modern times, why do we see such a reduced diversity of sirenians and/or lack of any other herbivorous marine mammals? There has been, apparently, little change in the marine seagrass communities since the Eocene, so what happened? The answers for these and other questions could be answered with more fossils and more research. For now, we can certainly say that, like their close relatives, the proboscideans (elephants), sirenians are the last remnants of a once much more diverse group of animals.

References

Bianucci, G., S. Sorbi, M. E. Suárez & W. Landini. 2006. The southernmost sirenian record in the eastern Pacific Ocean, from the Late Miocene of Chile. Comptes Rendus Palevol 5:945-952.

Canto, J., R. Salas-Gismondi, M. Cozzuol & J. Yáñez. 2008. The aquatic sloth Thalassocnus (Mammalia, Xenarthra) from the Late Miocene of north-central Chile: biogeographic and ecological implications. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 28(3):918-922.

Domning, D. P. 1989. Fossil Sirenia of the West Atlantic and Caribbean region. II. Dioplotherium manigaulti Cope, 1883. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 9:415-428.

Domning, D. P. 1997. Fossil Sirenia of the West Atlantic and Caribbean region. VI. Crenatosiren olseni (Reinhart, 1976). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 17:397-412.

Domning, D. P. 2001. Sirenians, seagrasses, and Cenozoic ecological change in the Caribbean. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 166:27-50.

Domning, D. P. & O. A. Aguilera. 2008. Fossil Sirenia of the West Atlantic and Caribbean region. VIII. Nanosiren garciae, gen. et sp. nov. and Nanosiren sanchezi, sp. nov. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 28:479-500.

Domning, D. P. & B. L. Beatty. 2007. Use of tusks in feeding by dugongid sirenians: observations and tests of hypotheses. Anatomical Record 290:523-538.

Domning, D. P., C. E. Ray & M. C. Mckenna. 1986. Two new Oligocene desmostylians and a discussion of Tethytherian systematics. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology 59:1-56.

Inuzuka, N., D. P. Domning & C. E. Ray. 1994. Summary of taxa and morphological adaptations of the Desmostylia. Island Arc 3(4):522-537.

Muizon, C. de & D. P. Domning. 1985. The first records of fossil sirenians in the southeastern Pacific Ocean. Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle (Paris) (4)7, Sect. C, no. 3:189-213.

Muizon, C. de & H. G. McDonald. 1995. An aquatic sloth from the Pliocene of Perú. Nature 375:224-227.

A day in the field, Tertiary

This time our field area is in northern Puerto Rico. We decided to visits a couple of outcrops of the Late Oligocene Lares Limestone. If the name of the formation sounds familiar you either know about the geology of Puerto Rico or, have read about it on a previous post.

One of these localities (see picture below), I have visited at least since 2000, and up until very recently, we thought that the only formations present there were the Early Oligocene San Sebastián Formation and the overlying Lares Limestone. Now, thanks to new information regarding the stratigraphy of the Tertiary limestones of the north coast of Puerto Rico (Ortega Ariza, 2009), we know that in this locality, overlying the Lares Ls, there are also units of the Montebello Limestone. The age of the Lares Limestone and Montebello Limestone were designated as Late Oligocene – lower Early Miocene and upper Early Miocene, respectively (Seiglie & Moussa, 1984). New data, using strontium isotopes obtained from tubes of the pelecypod Kuphus incrassatus, seems to indicate, instead, that both formations span the Late Oligocene (Johnson et al., 2006; Ramírez et al., 2006; Ortega Ariza, 2009). If this is correct (more samples need to be run, hint, hint!!) I will like this outcrop even more (sorry, can't hide my love for the Oligocene)!!

Here's the one of my favorite outcrops, where the Lares and Montebello limestones are exposed. The arrow points to a sirenian fossil that is yet to be collected.

Of course, what I’ve been mostly searching in these localities are sirenian remains, but like I mentioned on that previous post, other vertebrates have also been collected. Interestingly, the best sirenian remains have been collected from the upper Lares Limestone, with a total (so far) of two skulls, and a set of nine articulated vertebrae (see picture below). There are more fossils but those will be collected in due time. As for the sirenian skulls, well, they are an important part of my thesis work and I will discuss them at some point in the future.

Some articulated sirenian vertebrae, these have already been collected. This is an earlier picture, there were three more vertebrae behind the one labeled Ca1, the ones anterior to L3 were collected earlier.

References

Johnson, C. C., W. R. Ramírez, L. R. Mark, S. Y. Hernandez, E. A. Barrow, M. Hegewald & J. Velez. 2006. Oligocene reef deposits linked to OPD site 999 with strontium isotope stratigraphy. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program 38:557.

Ortega Ariza, D. L. 2009. Establishing a high resolution sequence stratigraphy and sea-level curve for Tertiary limestones, Puerto Rico. M.S. thesis, University of Puerto Rico, Mayagüez, Puerto Rico, 132 pp.

Ramírez, W. R., C. C. Johnson, M. Martínez, M. C. Torres & V. Ortiz. 2006. Strontium isotope stratigraphy from Kuphus incrassatus, Cenozoic limestones, Puerto Rico. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program 38:90.

Seiglie, G. A. & M. T. Moussa. 1984. Late Oligocene-Pliocene trangressive-regressive cycles of sedimentation in northwestern Puerto Rico. American Association of Petroleum Geologist Memoir 36:89-95.

A day in the field: Cretaceous

Cretaceous sedimentary rocks are found in Puerto Rico, especially in the southwest part of the island where several well-exposed limestone units are exposed. Our destination this time was a new outcrop of the Parguera Limestone. Located in the Southwest Igneous Province (Jolly et al., 1998; Schellekens, 1998), this formation, which ranges from Santonian to Campanian, has been divided into three units, the lower Bahia Fosforecente Member, the middle Punta Papayo Member and the upper Isla Magueyes Member (Almy, 1965). Like a lot of the Cretaceous limestone units in the Caribbean region, the age has been determined with the aid of the rudist bivalve assemblages, which have been divided into several biozones (Rojas et al., 1995).

A couple of rudist bivalves (red outline). During life the position of these was with the narrowest part semi-buried in the substratum (elevators). As we can see these are sideways.

There was some debate as to whether the outcrop we went to was part of the Bahia Fosforecente or Punta Papayo, the former which has been dated as Santonian whereas the latter as Campanian in age. Lithologically, this locality is most similar to the Bahia Fosforecente member. As we searched for fossils, we found several rudists (see picture above). These seem to have been transported, as these are elevators, but were found on their side. Although these were mostly complete, I must say I haven’t had the time to look in detail at their morphology, hence they remain nameless, for now.

One of the unknown rudist we collected (left); fragment of Macgillavryia nicholasi, notice the cell pattern (right).

Other rudists that were more fragmentary, were actually much more helpful for pinning down the age of the rocks here. Several fragments of the large* rudist Macgillavryia nicholasi were found and we were able to make an ID based on their diagnostic cell patterns (picture above) (Rojas et al., 1995). The occurrence of M. nicholasi indicates that these deposits are Campanian in age, as they are found in the Barrettia monilifera biozone of Rojas et al. (1995), meaning that these units are probably part of the Punta Papayo member.

*Some specimens reaching a diameter up to 1 meter!

In terms of the depositional environment, the Parguera limestone represents (mostly) slope to basin environments (Almy, 1965). This outcrop is different. The lithology here indicates that this was likely a nearshore deposit in a moderate/high-energy coast; sandy flat pebble conglomerates were the giveaway.

View of the outcrop of Parguera Limestone, rocks are dipping to the south (towards the left). To the far right, HSM & DLOA search for fossils.

Leaving what I think is most exiting for last; the whole reason for our visit to this outcrop was the search for fossils of tetrapods. One of us (DLOA) had found, on a previous visit, a non-fish vertebra*! We did not found anything else, but if we can get an id on what we have so far it would be a first! So, wish us luck!

*Update (Aug/2009): it most likely is an archosaur caudal vertebra!! Hat tip to MTC for the id!

Go here for a very good rudist database.

References

Almy, C. C., Jr. 1965. Parguera Limestone, Upper Cretaceous, Mayagüez Group, Southwestern Puerto Rico. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Rice University, Houston, 203p.

Jolly, W. T., E. G. Lidiak, J. H. Schellekens & H. Santos. 1998. Volcanism, tectonics, and stratigraphic correlations in Puerto Rico; pp. 1-34 in E. G. Lidiak & D. A. Larue (eds.), Tectonics and Geochemistry of the Northeastern Caribbean. Geological Society of America Special Paper 322.

Rojas, R., M. A. Iturralde-Vinent and P. W. Skelton. 1995. Stratigraphy, composition and age of Cuban rudist-bearing deposits. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas 12(2):272-291.

Schellekens, J. H. 1998. Geochemical evolution and tectonic history of Puerto Rico; pp. 35-66, in E. G. Lidiak & D. A. Larue (eds.), Tectonics and Geochemistry of the Northeastern Caribbean. Geological Society of America Special Paper 322.