Dicranophyllum gallicum Grand'Eury is described by means of a morphometric analysis of eighty two samples from various old and new localities in western and central Europe. Stem, leaf cushions, leaf scars, leaves, axillary structures and potential seeds are described in detail, and discussed in comparison to earlier studies. The encountered variability in size and structure is shown to be higher than what was described earlier. The organisation of the leaf cushion and scar density vary gradually with the stem width, while stratigraphic position and ecology do not relate to it. It is concluded that the described variability represents an ontogenetic feature rather than a phylogenetic or ecologic one. The juvenile plants are characterised by small stems, a high leaf scar density and elongated leaf cushions with a dominant apical field, while mature specimens are characterized by a wide stem, a relatively low leaf scar density and relatively wide leaf cushions with a pronounced basal field. Axillary shoots and potential seeds of D. gallicum are described and illustrated in detail for the first time. A reconstruction based on the studied material is presented.
Dicranophyllum gallicum Grand'Eury is described by means of a morphometric analysis of eighty two samples from various old and new localities in western and central Europe. Stem, leaf cushions, leaf scars, leaves, axillary structures and potential seeds are described in detail, and discussed in comparison to earlier studies. The encountered variability in size and structure is shown to be higher than what was described earlier. The organisation of the leaf cushion and scar density vary gradually with the stem width, while stratigraphic position and ecology do not relate to it. It is concluded that the described variability represents an ontogenetic feature rather than a phylogenetic or ecologic one. The juvenile plants are characterised by small stems, a high leaf scar density and elongated leaf cushions with a dominant apical field, while mature specimens are characterized by a wide stem, a relatively low leaf scar density and relatively wide leaf cushions with a pronounced basal field. Axillary shoots and potential seeds of D. gallicum are described and illustrated in detail for the first time. A reconstruction based on the studied material is presented.
Grand’Eury (1877) is a characteristic species of the
late Mississippian to early Permian of Euramerica (Wagner
2005). The genus is typified by bifurcating leaves, inserted on the stem in helical
arrangement, forming rhomboidal leaf cushions (Grand’Eury
1877). It has characters reminiscent of several higher taxonomic
PageBreakgroups. The needle-like leaves may be associated to conifers, their
bifurcations are reminiscent of ginkgophytes and the leaf cushions are found in lycophytes.
Grand’Eury, the type species
of the genus, is characterized by short, tough leaves bifurcating twice, with a central vein
and two lateral stomatiferous furrows (Barthel 1977,
Meyen and Smoller 1986).
variatio
was described by Renault and Zeiller (1888) to have a double row of small
conical seeds attached to the unbifurcated base of the leaf (Renault and Zeiller 1888).Given the divergent set of properties and the paucity of fertile specimens, taxonomic
placement is difficult. Indeed, the genus is presented as a ginkgophyte in Taylor et al. (2009), while Anderson et al. (2007), following Cleal
(1993), presented it as a member of the
within the conifers. In the past, Grand’Eury (1877) compared
to
, but considered it as
representing a new Paleozoic group of conifers. In the absence of insight in the internal
organisation of the seeds, positioning within the cordaites, the cycads or the conifers was
considered impossible to establish, but the conifers were preferred because of the position
of the seeds (Renault and Zeiller 1888). Neuburg (1948) placed the species within the
. Němejc
(1959) put and
together
in the new class , considering them to be
intermediate between ginkgophytes and conifers, while having descended from the
pteridosperms. Meyen and Smoller (1986) partly
adopted this suggestion by assigning and
to the
order of the , which was placed within the
. Meyen (1987) stressed that the microdenticulate leaf margin observed in
was absent in
, which pointed towards an affiliation
with the and the
. Archangelsky and Cúneo (1990) described , which shows similarities to
both and
.
They created two separate families and
within the
. Considering it difficult to relate the
to either the
or the
, they interpreted them as an order
of primitive gymnosperms. A phylogenetic analysis has indicated that
is represented by a branch basal
to all earliest conifers, the (Rothwell
et al. 2005)The present contribution provides a detailed description of
specimens from French, German
and new Czech collections. Potential fertile organs are documented in detail for the first
time and strong variability within the species is shown to relate to the plants ontogeny
rather than its phylogeny or ecology.
Materials and methods
A total of 82 samples holding are described in this study
(Suppl. material 1). These samples
were assembled from the collections of the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle Jacques de la Comble
in Autun, the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle in Paris, the collection at the Naturhistorisches
Museum Schloss Bertholdsburg, Schleusingen, the collections at the Naturkundemuseum in
Berlin, the PaläontologiPageBreak Museum in Munich, the collections at the National
Museum of Natural History in Prague (where the Lubná samples came from a new collection),
the Czech Geological Survey in Prague and the Faculty of Geosciences of the Utrecht
University in the Netherlands. The samples came from Ronchamp, Mont Pelé, Saint Etienne,
Commentry and Lodève in France, Kladno, Knoviz and the new locality Lubná in Czeck Republic,
and Zwickau, Sperbersbach, Kammerberg, Oelsnitz, Oberhof, Winnweiler and Rotterode in
Germany (Table 1).
Table 1.
Stratigraphy, age and lithology of the different localities.
Locality
Country
Stratigraphic unit
Lithology
Age
Kladno
Czech Republic
Radnice Member
tuff
Westphalian C (Roscher and
Schneider 2006)
Lubná, Filip II quarry
Czech Republic
Radnice Member
tuff
Westphalian C (Roscher and
Schneider 2006)
Zwickau
Germany
Zwickau Formation
volcanics
Westphalian D-Cantabrian (Schneider and Romer 2010)
Ronchamp
France
?
coaly mudstone, black coal
Stephanian (Aubouin
1965)
Mont-Pelé
France
? Mont-Pelé Formation
tuff
Stephanian (Doubinger
1970)
Saint-Etienne
France
? Assise des couches de St Etienne
shale
Stephanian (Becq Giraudon
et al. 1995)
Knoviz
Czech Republic
? Hredle Member
shale
Stephanian (Opluštil et
al. 2016)
Commentry
France
?
shale
Late Stephanian (Krings
and Kerp 1999)
Sperbersbach
Germany
Goldlauter Formation
tuff
Asselian (Schneider and
Romer 2010)
Kammerberg
Germany
Manebach Formation
grey facies of fluvial deposits
Asselian (Schneider and
Romer 2010)
Oelsnitz
Germany
Hartensdorf Formation
?
Asselian (Schneider and
Romer 2010)
Oberhof
Germany
Oberhof Formation
red and grey facies with up to 90 % of volcanics
Asselian/Sakmarian (Schneider and Romer 2010)
Winnweiler
Germany
Donnersberg Formation
tuff
Sakmarian/Artinskian (Schneider and Romer 2010)
Rotterode
Germany
Rotterode Formation
?
Sakmarian/Artinskian (Schneider and Romer 2010)
Stratigraphy, age and lithology of the different localities.Thirty-eight specimens from the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle Jacques de la Comble in Autun,
France, were borrowed by Naturalis Biodiversity Center in Leiden, the Netherlands, and
detailed measurements of these fossils were carried out by use of a Zeiss SteREO
Discovery.V20 microscope with a Zeiss AxioCam MRc 5 for photography, and the associated
program AxioVision. The other collections were visited by the authors. Measuring was
performed using the means available at each collection. Where PageBreakdigital
measuring equipment was not available measurements were carried out by hand (i.e., with a
binocular microscope and protractors). Photographs were made using a Lumix Panasonic DMC FZ
18 camera. Pictures of the fossils in the Prague collection were taken using the equipment
available at the Paleontology department; measurements on these pictures were carried out in
Leiden using AxioVision.Measured characters for the stem (Suppl. material 2) were stem width, total, basal and apical leaf cushion length, leaf scar
width and length (Fig. 1), and scar density. Measured
characters of the leaf (Suppl. material 3) were the length of the middle leaf segment only (as basal and top parts were
often missing), the width of each segment and its angle of bifurcation. Length and width of
axillary shoots were measured (Suppl. material 4), as well as the length and width of seeds found in close proximity to
the leaves, the size of their nucellus and the thickness of their integumentary coat (Suppl.
material 5). The compilation of this
primary data set was carried out using the paleontological statistics software package PAST
3.01 (Hammer et al. 2001).
Figure 1.
Schematic leaf cushion organisation: Total length and width leaf cushion, length apical
and basal field leaf cushion, height and width leaf scar.
Schematic leaf cushion organisation: Total length and width leaf cushion, length apical
and basal field leaf cushion, height and width leaf scar.
Results
Properties from the axis were recorded for 85 samples, properties from the leaves were
recorded for 96 samples, and 19 axillary shoots and 15 seeds were measured.
Stem
Stems are slender with a helical leaf arrangement. They are always fragmentary, but the
longest fragment is 360 mm. The leaves are inserted at a perpendicular angle or even at a
downward angle, after which the leaf departs at an acute angle thus commonly forming a
pouch (Fig. 2).
Figure 2.
Side view of leaf attachment: sample 191, Mt Pelé. (Arrow indicates leaf
attachment).
Side view of leaf attachment: sample 191, Mt Pelé. (Arrow indicates leaf
attachment).The 85 measurements of the stem width indicate a diameter of 2 to 36 mm (mean 11 mm).
Samples from the Mont Pelé are the smallest (on average 10 mm), while samples from Lubná,
Oelsnitz and Ronchamp have on average wider stems (mean respectively 13, 16 and 17
mm).
Leaf cushions
Leaf cushion length varies between 3 and 22 mm (mean 7 mm). Samples from Oelsnitz,
Ronchamp and Lubná display longer leaf cushions (mean respectively 8, 9 and 12 mm). Leaf
cushions are between 1.3 and 6.7 times longer than wide (mean 3.5, indicating an average
width of 2 mm). The Oelsnitz samples have relatively broad leaf cushions (on average only
2.3 × longer than wide).The scar position in the present data determines the length of the basal and apical leaf
cushion field (Fig. 1). On average the 20 % of the
total leaf cushion length represented PageBreakPageBreakby the leaf scar is
in the lower half of the leaf cushion, thus leaving 35% for the basal leaf cushion and 45%
for the apical one. In plotting the size of the basal field relative to the total leaf
cushion length against the relative size of the apical field to the total leaf cushion
length (Fig. 3), it becomes apparent that the Lubná
and two Ronchamp samples have a relatively large basal leaf cushion field (Fig. 4A), while the Mt Pelé, Oelsnitz and Kladno specimens
have a small basal field and a relatively large apical field (Fig. 4B).
Figure 3.
Diagram of the relative dominance of the basal over the apical leaf cushion field.
Legend: Horizontal axis: Length apical leaf cushion field/ total length leaf cushion,
vertical axis length basal leaf cushion field/ total length leaf cushion. Pink square:
Lubná red cross: Mt Pelé, light green diamond: Ronchamp, dark green cross: Oelsnitz,
dark blue star: St Etienne, purper circle: Kladno.
Figure 4.
Variations in leaf cushion organisation: A Leaf cushion organisation in
a specimen with a relatively dominant basal leaf cushion field, Sample E 06944, Lubná
B Leaf cushion organisation in a specimen with relatively dominant
apical leaf cushion field, Specimen 223, Mt Pelé.
Diagram of the relative dominance of the basal over the apical leaf cushion field.
Legend: Horizontal axis: Length apical leaf cushion field/ total length leaf cushion,
vertical axis length basal leaf cushion field/ total length leaf cushion. Pink square:
Lubná red cross: Mt Pelé, light green diamond: Ronchamp, dark green cross: Oelsnitz,
dark blue star: St Etienne, purper circle: Kladno.Variations in leaf cushion organisation: A Leaf cushion organisation in
a specimen with a relatively dominant basal leaf cushion field, Sample E 06944, Lubná
B Leaf cushion organisation in a specimen with relatively dominant
apical leaf cushion field, Specimen 223, Mt Pelé.
Leaf scars
Leaf scars are broader than height. The leaf scar is apically rhombic acute, basally
rhombic obtuse, with a height of 1-3 (mean 1.5) mm and a width of 1–3.5 (mean 2) mm.The average leaf scar density varies strongly between 1 and 34/cm2 (mean
9/cm2). Scar density in the Mont Pelé material is highest
(10/cm2), and is lower for the Lubná, Ronchamp and Oelsnitz samples (mean
respectively 3, 3 and 7/cm 2). Furthermore, as can be inferred from the scar
density plotted against stem width, these properties are correlated (Fig. 5A). The scar density decreases with the increase of the
stem width. At the same time leaf cushion length and width increase with stem width (Fig.
5B,C).
Figure 5.
Changing properties with changing stem width: A Diagram of the scar
density (in n/cm2) to the stem width (in mm) B Diagram of leaf
cushion length (in mm) to stem width (in mm) C Diagram of leaf cushion
width (in mm) to stem width (in mm).
Changing properties with changing stem width: A Diagram of the scar
density (in n/cm2) to the stem width (in mm) B Diagram of leaf
cushion length (in mm) to stem width (in mm) C Diagram of leaf cushion
width (in mm) to stem width (in mm).
Leaves
The angle of bifurcation in leaf specimens ranged from 2 to 41 degrees for the first
bifurcation, and 18 to 68 degrees for the second. The second angle is generally larger
than the first (Fig. 6A).
Figure 6.
Leaf structures: A Leaf displaying two consecutive bifurcation angles,
the second angle is larger than the first, sample 30, Ronchamp B Stomatal
furrows as pronounced protrusions on the adaxial side of the leaf surface, note
several thin striae between the furrows, sample 220 Mt Pelé C Stomatal
furrows as pronounced depressions on the abaxial side of the leaf surface, note the
midvein depression, sample 225 Mt Pelé D Venation in a
leaf, note the
trajectory of the midvein from the inner edge of the second leaf segment, gradually
back to the centre position before the second bifurcation, sample 157, Mt Pelé.
Leaf structures: A Leaf displaying two consecutive bifurcation angles,
the second angle is larger than the first, sample 30, Ronchamp B Stomatal
furrows as pronounced protrusions on the adaxial side of the leaf surface, note
several thin striae between the furrows, sample 220 Mt Pelé C Stomatal
furrows as pronounced depressions on the abaxial side of the leaf surface, note the
midvein depression, sample 225 Mt Pelé D Venation in a
leaf, note the
trajectory of the midvein from the inner edge of the second leaf segment, gradually
back to the centre position before the second bifurcation, sample 157, Mt Pelé.As most leaves were incomplete, only the length of the middle segment could be measured.
The length of the middle leaf segment varied between 1.4 and 87.0 mm (mean 18.2). The Mont
Pelé samples had the smallest middle segment (mean of 8.4 mm), while Ronchamp, Lubná and
Sperberbach second leaf fragments were larger (mean respectively 15.7, 19.7 and 19.9
mm).The width of all three leaf fragments could be measured varying between 1.0 and 4.6 mm
(mean 2.3 mm). While the width of the first non-bifurcated segment of Mt Pelé samples was
relatively small (mean 1.9 mm), those of Ronchamp, Lubná and Sperberbach was relatively
large (mean respectively 2.1, 2.9 and 2.9 mm). The width of the second segment varied
between 0.6 and 2.5 mm (mean 1.4 mm) while, again, the width of the second segment of Mt
Pelé samples was relatively small (mean 1 mm), and that of Ronchamp, Sperberbach and Lubná
samples was relatively large (mean respectively 1.3, 1.8 and 2.0 mm). Finally the same was
the case for the width of the third segment that varied between 0 and 2.1 mm (mean 0.5
mm). While the width of the third segment of the Mt Pelé samples was smallest (mean 0.2
mm), that of Ronchamp, Sperberbach and Lubná samples was relatively large (mean
respectively 0.5, 0.9 and 1.4 mm).
Leaf structure
Two rather distinct cuticular patterns on leaves can be observed on
the different sides of the leaf. In a few specimens, two furrows were very clearly
pronounced as protrusions on the impressed surface and no midvein was apparent (Fig. 6B); instead, we observed several thin striae between the
furrows. As the furrows are documented to be located on the abaxial side of the leaf
(Barthel 1977, Meyen
PageBreakPageBreakand Smoller 1986), these leaves are identified as
impressions of the abaxial side of the leaf. Impressions of the adaxial side of the leaf
form the second leaf pattern that consists of a narrow midvein intrusion and two wide
depressions which indicate the location of the underlying furrows pushing the adaxial leaf
surface upwards (Fig. 6C). The furrows are between
0.3 and 0.4 mm (mean 0.35 mm). After its first bifurcation the midvein was observed to
follow a distinct trajectory into the second leaf segment (Fig. 6D). It splits some distance before the actual bifurcation of the leaf
and then follows the inner edge of the second segment while gradually returning to the
centre position in the leaf sheet. Simultaneously, a new furrow appears alongside it.Based on present observations of the adaxial and abaxial sides of the leaves of
(Fig. 6B, C), it was possible to reconstruct the cross section of the leaf
(Fig. 7A, B). As the furrows are visible on both
sides of the leaf, the leaf of is expected to have been
rather thin. The furrows on the underside of the leaf push the upper leaf surface upwards,
causing the depressions in impressions of the adaxial leaf surface.
Figure 7.
Diagram of leaf structure: A Reconstruction of the adaxial leaf side of
, note the path of the
midvein in the second segment of the leaf B Reconstruction of the abaxial
leaf side of , note the prominent
furrows and the absence of a clear midvein.
Diagram of leaf structure: A Reconstruction of the adaxial leaf side of
, note the path of the
midvein in the second segment of the leaf B Reconstruction of the abaxial
leaf side of , note the prominent
furrows and the absence of a clear midvein.On some compression fossils marginal microdenticulation is preserved (Fig. 8A).
Figure 8.
Leaf details: A Marginal microdenticulation, sample 34, Ronchamp (arrows indicate
microdenticulation). B. Basal part of the leaf showing that the two stomatal furrows
do not run all the way down in the leaf base, sample 1529, Mt Pelé (arrow indicates
origin of furrow).
Leaf details: A Marginal microdenticulation, sample 34, Ronchamp (arrows indicate
microdenticulation). B. Basal part of the leaf showing that the two stomatal furrows
do not run all the way down in the leaf base, sample 1529, Mt Pelé (arrow indicates
origin of furrow).
Attachment of the leaves to the stem
Reconstructing the attachment of leaves to the stem is difficult, as these two organs are
commonly found separated from each other. Several specimens of
do show a stem fragment with
remnants of attached leaves, in which the leaf follows a specific curve as it escapes from
the stem. There is little information on how this trajectory appears on leaf remains, as
most leaves with clear venation are broken off and left their basal portion behind. An
exception was found on specimen 1529 of Mt Pelé (Fig. 8B): this is an impression of the abaxial side of a leaf. The basal part of the
leaf shows that the two furrows do not run all the way down in the leaf base, but find
their origin more centrally to the leaf scar. Extrapolation of the orientation of the two
furrows relative to the midvein indicates an origin for the two furrows near the basal
portion of the leaf scar.
Axillary shoots
Well-preserved axillary shoots were found in the collections of the Museum of Natural
History in Prague. Various shoots are attached to the stem of
specimens from the Lubná
locality (Fig. 9A-D). They are composed of elongated
scales of 6 mm in length and 2 mm in width and are commonly positioned in the leaf axil.
Although they have a general conical shape, their apical end is often widened (Fig. 9A). Their length varies between 4.0 and 14.0 mm (mean
8.0 mm), and their width varies between 2.5 and 7.0 mm (mean 4.0 mm) (Suppl. material
4). A cross
PageBreakPageBreaksection of one of these structures (Fig. 9D) could also be observed. It clearly displays the
helical arrangement of the scales forming it. Some specimens from the Mont-Pelé locality
also show axillary shoots.
Figure 9.
Axillary shoots: A Axillary shoot with apical widening (indicated by
arrow), E 06946, Lubná B Axillary shoot with subtending leaf (indicated
by arrow), sample E 06946, Lubná C Axillary shoot without broad apical
widening, sample E 06950, Lubná D Cross section of axillary shoot, sample
E 06946, Lubná.
Axillary shoots: A Axillary shoot with apical widening (indicated by
arrow), E 06946, Lubná B Axillary shoot with subtending leaf (indicated
by arrow), sample E 06946, Lubná C Axillary shoot without broad apical
widening, sample E 06950, Lubná D Cross section of axillary shoot, sample
E 06946, Lubná.
Seeds
A total of 15 seeds was observed on the specimens in our study (Supplementary File 5).
They were found dispersed on specimens from the Mont-Pelé locality, with one exception
from the Ronchamp locality (specimen 1362). Seeds have a conical to ovate shape, 2.6-3.8
mm long (mean 3.4 mm) and 2.8-3.8 mm wide (mean 3.1 mm), usually longer than wide. A
nucellus can often be observed and is 1.0-1.5 mm long (mean 1.2 mm) and 0.7-1.2 mm wide
(mean 1.0 mm). The seed base is rounded, the chalaza part is flatPageBreaktened to
notched or cordate (Fig. 10A). The seed surface is
striate (Fig. 10B). The apex is notched with what
appears to be a (sometimes wide) micropyle (Fig. 10C). In a single seed (Fig. 10B) a
triangular cavity which could be interpreted as a pollen chamber is seen in the seed. The
integumentary coat is thick (200 µm), apically slightly thicker than basally. Two seeds
are positioned next to a leaf, one of which shows an
organic bridge between the leaf and the seed, but the bridge is interrupted (see Fig.
10D).
Figure 10.
Seeds: A Seed with notched chalaza, sample 1529, Mt Pelé B
Striate seed with visible pollen chamber, sample 75, Mt Pelé C Seed with
visible micropyle, sample 75, Mt Pelé D Seed possibly on first leaf
segment, sample 1362, Ronchamp (arrow indicates interrupted organic bridge).
Seeds: A Seed with notched chalaza, sample 1529, Mt Pelé B
Striate seed with visible pollen chamber, sample 75, Mt Pelé C Seed with
visible micropyle, sample 75, Mt Pelé D Seed possibly on first leaf
segment, sample 1362, Ronchamp (arrow indicates interrupted organic bridge).
Discussion
The stem diameter recorded in the literature hovers around the mean values of 11 mm
recorded here such as 9.0 mm for (Renault and Zeiller
PageBreak1888), 10 mm for the German described by Barthel (1977) and 8 to 14 mm for the 7 samples from La
Magdalena (Castro Martínez, 2005). Samples from Lubná, Oelsnitz and Ronchamp are wider,
sample 10472 from Ronchamp being 36 mm wide. This indicates that the variability in the
present European stem selection is much higher than what was recorded until now.
Leaf persistence and growth patterns
Leaves were found attached to stems of various sizes, implying that the plant had leaves
covering most of the stem. Nonetheless, stem 221 in our study material shows a transition
from large, well-developed leaf cushions to small, poorly defined leaf cushions. This
transition gives an indication that the more apical part of these stems was still
developing, while the more basal part was mature. Periodic growth patterns have not been
observed on any stems, not even on the longest stem fragments of
. This suggests that stem
growth in never halted, that is, it
was more or less continuous.Many stem fragments are gently curved. Although we have not analysed this character in
detail, it makes sense to expect that thicker stems are more resistant to bending, while
slender stems are more flexible (also being younger). The majority of stems in the
material is slender and
curved to some extent, indicating that during its life the plant was probably
flexible.Grand’Eury (1877), Renault and Zeiller (1888) and Barthel
(1977) considered the leaves to be persistent. The density of attached leaves
appears to have been the largest in the apical regions, where establishing the details of
the leaf morphology was often difficult as the leaves were preserved on top of each other.
In the present material specimens with thick stems still had leaves attached (e.g.
specimen 223), while other stems were completely devoid of leaves, suggesting leaf
persistence related to an ecological factor.
Leaf cushion
Leaf cushion length and width from literature, respectively 4-7 mm and 2-3 mm (Zeiller 1880, Renault
and Zeiller 1888, Castro Martínez 2005), is shorter than the mean values found in
the data set described here (respectively 7 to 2 mm). However, it has been said to vary
considerably (Renault and Zeiller 1888, Barthel 1977).The dominant leaf cushion organisation with a large apical field is in contrast with the
leaf cushion organisation given in Grand’Eury
(1877). He described the leaf scar as positioned in the upper third of the leaf
cushion, thus resulting in a very small apical field. Renault and Zeiller (1888) even placed the leaf scar in the upper quarter of the
leaf cushion. Scrutiny of the illustrations of Grand’Eury
(1877, plate XIV, fig 10, in particular) confirms a position of the leaf scar in
the upper half of the leaf cushion, yet in Zeiller
(1880, plate CLXXVI, fig 1) it cannot be established. In Renault and Zeiller (1888, plate LXX, fig 8 and plate LXXI, fig. 5), on
the contrary, the scar is illustrated as PageBreakeither positioned basally or
centrally in a similar way as for the bulk of the collections described herein.As only the Lubná and the two Ronchamp samples have a well-developed basal leaf cushion
field, these specimens are best comparable to the figured paratype of Grand’Eury (1877, plate XIV, fig 10). This is in
contrast with the samples from Mt Pelé where, inversely, the apical field dominates over
the basal field.
Leaf bifurcation angle
Renault and Zeiller (1888) described the angle of
leaf bifurcation as 30° for the first bifurcation and 40° for the second. Barthel (1977) reported angles between 6° and 30°. The
variation in angle size for the material described herein is much wider (2° to 68°) than
what is given in the literature, yet the first angle is, indeed, commonly smaller than the
second.
Leaf sizes
Earlier descriptions indicate that
the total leaf length varied between 33 and 60 mm, with on average 15-20 mm for the first
segment, 10-15 mm for the second and 8 to 10 mm for the third (Zeiller 1880, Renault and Zeiller
1888, Barthel 1977, Castro Martínez 2005).
Doubinger et al. (1995) considered that the
leaves can reach a length of 200 mm. The present material, based on our measurements of
the second segment (mean 18.2 mm), was slightly larger than what was described earlier.
Lubná, Sperberbach, Manebach and Ronchamp leaves were even larger (on average respectively
20, 17, 20 and 16 mm), while the Mt Pelé samples were, again, relatively small (8 mm).The leaf width from earlier studies varied between 1.5 and 2.0 mm (Renault and Zeiller 1888) or between 2.0 and 3.0 mm (Barthel 1977). In the present material the leaf width
varies between the same values.
Leaf structures
found in the Erzgebirge has
small abaxial stomatal furrows of 0.2 to 0.25 mm wide. The furrow width in the present
material was slightly larger (0.35 mm). Thin striae as found here between the two furrows
have also been described earlier as five strong lineations in
samples from the
Goldlauterer Schichten (Barthel 1977).The trajectory of the midvein presented above (Figs 6, 7) is one where the midvein approaches
the leaf margin at the leaf bifurcation, to later diverge from the leaf margin and to
again reach the central part of the leaf. This midvein pattern was not described earlier
and is depicted differently in Barthel (1977) as
splitting a few millimetres from the leaf margin in such a way that the two new veins
always remain central to the leaf.
Leaves development
Barthel (1977) describes a process of leaf
development as starting with simple unbifurcated leaves, after which the leaves produce a
first, terminal bifurcation and, finally, a second bifurcation. According to De Lima (1888) a leaf can bifurcate three times.Based on present material it is difficult to conceive such a leaf development, as no
clear simple leaves on any specimen was observed.
Incomplete leaves without bifurcations were observed, these could be associated to
based on venation
properties, that is, the clear presence of furrows, but it was not possible to make
statements about whether those leaves bifurcate or are, indeed, simple leaves. A few
leaves do display a size and shape that suggests an early stage of development (Fig. 11), but these already have two bifurcations.
Ultimately, our material provides too little evidence to make an assumption about how the
leaves developed.
Figure 11.
Possible juvenile leaf, sample 28, Mt Pelé.
Possible juvenile leaf, sample 28, Mt Pelé.Renault and Zeiller (1888), in describing a sample
from Puits Forêt, indicated a charcoalified body formed by scales of 5 to 6 mm long and 2
to 3 mm wide attached to the stem. These scales are comparable in size to the scales
described from the axillary shoots described above. Renault and Zeiller (1888) described the charcoalified body as seemingly forming
a bud that had contained microsporangia, while the whole shoot was reminiscent in shape
and size to cordaite male organs.also displays axillary shoots
and Barthel and Noll (1999) suggested that these
represent fertile cones (either male or female) while Noll
(2011) found a dispersed female cone of
. In
axillary shoots subtended by
a forked bract represent ovuliferous dwarf shoots (Rothwell et al. 2005). In Anderson et al.
(2007, fig. 2, p. 114), axillary shoots of
are described as male cones,
but in Meyen (1987) the axillary shoots, compared
to axillary buds in , are said to have been
misinterpreted as microstrobili. From the present material and from what was described
earlier, no unequivocal proof of the true nature of these axillary structures can be
deducted.Seeds were already mentioned by Grand’Eury (1877)
as very small, conical shapes positioned just above rather than at the leaf axil. Seeds
have been found attached to the first leaf segment for , and described to be 4 mm long and
3 mm wide (Renault and Zeiller 1888). These sizes
differ slightly from what is observed in present material (on average 3.4 long and 3.1
wide), but certainly are in the same order of magnitude. The nucellus described in the
results PageBreakabove is smaller (mean 1.2 long and 1.0 mm wide) than what is
described in Renault and Zeiller (1888) that is,
2.8 to 2.0 mm. The integumental coat, while being apically thicker in a similar way to
what was described earlier, does not reach the 1 mm indicated in Renault and Zeiller (1888). These differences in size can be
hypothesized to relate to the Mt Pelé material being generally smaller than was described
earlier. On the other hand, because seeds are propagules and conical seeds with a nucellus
and a pollen chamber are produced by numerous divergent taxa, the occurrence of these
seeds in both the Ronchamp and the Mt Pelé samples and their resemblance to the seeds
described by Grand’Eury (1877) and Renault and Zeiller (1888) have to be considered here
as probably coincidental and further advances on
will have to await new and
better finds.Obviously, finding and describing the original material of
Renault & Zeiller, 1888,
would give unequivocal proof of the nature and organisation of the female fertile
structures, but, in spite of a specific search for it, this sample cannot be located. Here
we only have the interrupted organic bridge between the leaf base and the seed (Fig. 10D). As was illustrated with its seeds
attached to the first, non-bifurcated segment of the leaf (Renault and Zeiller 1888, plate LXXI, fig. 5), it is tempting to consider this
seed to be attached to the leaf as well, given its proximity and orientation towards the
leaf. However, it is not possible to find stronger evidence for any further physical
connection between the leaf and seed.
Ontogenetic variability
As seen in the results, the Mt Pelé samples are relatively small in leaf and stem size,
have a normal leaf cushion length, have the highest leaf scar density and have a dominance
of the apical over the basal leaf cushion field. The Lubná, Ronchamp and Oelsnitz samples,
in contrast, relatively have a large stem and a short leaf cushion with a large basal leaf
field and low scar density.Such differences in features could indicate a phylogenetic differentiation, where the
large Lubná samples are ancestral to smaller specimens, Lubná is amongst
the oldest (from the Westphalian C, Table 1)
localities in the present series, yet the from Kladno originates from
the same Radnice Member as the Lubná samples do, yet ranges with its smaller dimensions
and leaf cushion organisation with the rest of the French and German
. It was demonstrated that
scar density was negatively correlated to stem width (Fig. 5A), while leaf cushion length and width correlates positively to stem width
(Fig. 5B, C). Lubná samples, have relatively large
stems, low scar density and long and wide leaf cushions and are considered to have
represented matured plants, having had the time to grow thicker stems, and longer and
wider leaf cushions, thus resulting in a reduced scar density. The relative dominance of
the basal over the apical leaf cushion field (Fig. 3), typifying the Luba specimens, consequently is hypothesized here to relate to
an ontogenetic development. The paratype (Grand’Eury
1877, plate VIV, fig. 10), the samples from Lubná and two samples from Ronchamp
are considered to have been more mature specimen, while the Mt Pelé samples, with thin
stems, relatively elongated leaf cushions and a high leaf scar density, are considered
juvenile forms. As there is no systematic relation between lithology (Table 1), considered here as a reflection of the
environmental setting, and specimen dimensions, ecology is not considered to play a part
in the variability described herein.
Reconstruction
For the reconstruction of the habit of using Niklas' (1994) method, only the diameter of the plant is required. By
using this method it has to be assumed that was a self-supporting plant,
as the method was shown to be inapplicable to liana species (Niklas 1994, p. 1237). Indeed,
shows no features like
climbing hooks (see, for example, Krings and Kerp
1999 or Krings et al. 2003a).In spite of Grand’Eury’s (1877) early suggestion
that a woody body formed underneath the leaf cushions and Barthel's (1977) description of as a woody plant, there is
some uncertainty as to the true woodiness of the stem. Assuming that
was, indeed, a woody plant
and taking the largest stem diameters of 36 mm, it is calculated to have reached a height
of at least 4.5 m (Table 2).
Reconstruction of stem height.This expected height could increase if were shown to have branched.
Grand’Eury showed a single specimen with a branching stem fragment (Grand’Eury 1877, plate XIV, fig. 8), and reconstructed the species
accordingly as a small tree (1877, tableau de vegetation D, bottom left). However, no
other fossils showing branching
have been found since and none of the specimens in our study showed branching; Grand’Eury (1877) figured specimen with a bifurcating
branch is the only one showing this feature. This indicates that branching is either a
rare occurrence in or the plant did not branch
at all, thus suggesting that the specimen from Grand’Eury
(1877) would be of a different species. For our reconstruction of
, we propose that the plant
had a simple, unbranched stem, which reached 4.5 meters in height (Fig. 12). This is comparable to the reconstruction of
by Barthel et al. (1998), in which a nearly complete, unbranched shoot of 2
m long is described. The stem widths of specimens we observed were
usually slightly greater than the measurements, indicating
that grew taller than
.
Figure 12.
Reconstruction of .
Reconstruction of .
Taxonomic affinity
Finding similarities between the pollination and fertilization process, and the presence
of the retained motile sperms in and the
, Thomas and Spicer (1987) suggested the existence of a group of primitive
pteridosperms for the common ancestor of the later. Such a group of primitive
pteridosperms holding supports the views of Archangelsky and Cúneo (1990) of the
representing an order of primitive
gymnosperms. Rothwell et al. (2005) in their study
of found
to be positioned between the
and the
at the base of the early conifers. Given that
Renault and Zeiller (1888) considered
to possibly have had male
axillary shoots reminiscent of the microstrobili in , such a
position for a member of the at the very
base of the early conifers would be corroborated by an interpretation of the present
axillary shoots as pollen cones, but in the absence of any unequivoval proof of them
representing pollen cones, the axillary shoots are considered here as vegetative buds. As
such this interpretation does not differ from the description given in
PageBreakRothwell and Mapes (2001). They
described as being represented by
female fertile structures only and they considered it challenging to give a systematic
assignment to early coniferophytes in general, e.g. the
sensu
Meyen (1987).
Environmental context
Marginal microdenticulationMarginal microdenticulation (Fig. 8B) may indicate
adaptation to a xeric environment, in which the teeth aid the plant in maintaining its
internal temperature or absorb nutrients, as found in some extant xerophilic species (e.g.
Benzing 1976, Benzing et al. 1976). However, marginal teeth are known to serve different
functions for plants such as defence against herbivory (Krings et al. 2003b) and storage of minerals (Broadhurst et al. 2004).Stomatal furrowAlthough it was not possible with the present material to perform a cuticular analysis on
the leaves of , Barthels' (1977) work shows that the stomata of this species occur in
the embedded abaxial furrows. Jordan et al. (2008)
showed that encryption of stomata in grooves (as found in
)
has evolved separately several times in a number of species of
that are known from arid to semi-arid
environments. Archangelsky et al. (1995) associated
the hypostomatic leaves of the Cretaceous cycad Archangelsky to the volcanic
environment in which it occurred. The hypostomatic nature of the leaves provides no
certainty about the vegetation density, which may be open as well as closed (Jordan et al. 2014). Moreover, Parkhurst (1978) explained that stomatal distribution is not primarily
caused by environmental factors, but can be seen as an indicator of leaf thickness (thick
leaves generally being amphistomatous).Other plant fossils found co-occurring on theInformation about associated plant species occurring beside
mainly comes from the
tuffaceous material of the Mont-Pelé locality. The specimens from this locality had
fragments of ,
,
,
,
,
,
, and the
seeds and
associated
with them. Also, on specimen E 06948 from the Lubná locality, a megasporangium of an
sp. was found. These genera are predominately known from the late Pennsylvanian tropical
forests of Euramerica and, as was maximally 4.5 m high, it
is suggested here that the plant stood in the shade of its taller associates.
is also 2-3 m in height
and has been interpreted as a plant able to rapidly colonize local habitats, preferring
peat and mixed peat-clastic swamps (Bek et al.
2015). , because of its comparable
size and co-occurrence, is suggested here to have occupied the same or similar
habitat.Sedimentis as often preserved in
tuffs as in shales (Table 1). Assuming the
specimens preserved in tuffs are (par-) autochtonous,
may have thrived in the
mesic-xeric areas from a volcanic slope with active volcanism. The specimens
PageBreakfound in shales are considered to have grown in wetter areas, as suggested
in Anderson et al. (2007) for
, in riparian or lake-side environments.
Yet the occurrence in tuffs supports a more ruderal behaviour that the association with an
sp. already suggests, thus indicating an opportunistic colonization strategy. According to
Wagner (2005) the paucity of
finds may have indicated that it had ecological requirements differed from those
prevailing in the 'coal measures' and rather belonged to extra basinal, well-drained
soils. Considering is found both in shales and
in tuff, an opportunistic colonization strategy as for
sp. is preferred here.
Conclusions
It appears that the variability of in stem size, leaf cushion
organisation, leaf size and bifurcation angle is much wider than what was presented in
earlier studies. The variability in leaf cushion organisation with either the dominance of
the apical or the basal leaf cushion field is newly described herein. Dominant apical leaf
cushion fields are generally found on specimens with small stems, relatively long leaf
cushions and a relatively high leaf scar density, while well-developed basal leaf cushion
fields commonly occur on specimens with a broad stem, relatively wide leaf cushions and
relatively low scar density. As scar density and stem width are gradually and negatively
correlated, while the two stem types have the same stratigraphic occurrence, but divergent
lithologies, the variability they represent is considered to point towards ontogenetic
rather than phylogenetic or ecologic variability. The smaller stems with higher scar density
and elongated leaf scar with a dominant apical field are considered juvenile while the
larger stems with lower scar density, relatively broad leaf scars with well-developed basal
field are considered mature specimens. The newly described Lubná samples chiefly represent
mature specimens.
Authors: Gregory J Jordan; Peter H Weston; Raymond J Carpenter; Rebecca A Dillon; Timothy J Brodribb Journal: Am J Bot Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 3.844
Authors: C Leigh Broadhurst; Rufus L Chaney; J Scott Angle; Timothy K Maugel; Eric F Erbe; Charles A Murphy Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 9.028