Paleontological Society

Synorichthys sp. (Palaeonisciformes) and the Chinle-Dockum and Newark (Upper Triassic) Fish Faunas Author(s): Bobb Schaeffer and Marlyn Mangus Source: Journal of Paleontology, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Jan., 1970), pp. 17-22 Published by: SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1302494 Accessed: 14/01/2009 17:43
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sepm. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Paleontological Society and SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Paleontology.

http://www.jstor.org

OF V. JOURNAL PALEONTOLOGY,44, NO. 1, P.

17-22,PLS. 5-6, 2 TEXT-FIGS., JANUARY1970

SYNORICHTHYS SP. (PALAEONISCIFORMES) AND THE CHINLEDOCKUM AND NEWARK (UPPER TRIASSIC) FISH FAUNAS
BOBB SCHAEFFER AND MARLYN MANGUS The American Museum of Natural History, New York City ABSTRABT-The genus Synorichthys Schaeffer (1967), previously reported from the Chinle Formation (Colorado-Utah) and the ?Dockum Group (Texas), has recently been found in Lockatong Formation of the Newark Group at North Bergen, New Jersey. This discovery has further emphasized the resemblance between the Upper Triassic fish faunas in the eastern and western United States. The compositionof the two faunas is compared. a recent paper on the fishes from the Chinle Formation and the Dockum Group, three new genera belonging to the subholostean family Redfieldiidae were described (Schaeffer, 1967). One of these, Cionichthys, is closely related to Redfieldius (Catopterus of Redfield, 1837) from the Newark Group. Neither of the other two genera, Lasalichthys and Synorichthys, which show close affinity to each other, has until now been reported from the Newark, although Schaeffer (1967) did note certain similarities between them and the Newark Dictyopyge. Material recently acquired from the Lockatong Formation of the Newark Group includes two specimens that can be assigned to Synorichthys sp. The discovery of this genus in the eastern Triassic has further emphasized the resemblance of the Newark assemblage to that of the Chinle-Dockum. It has suggested a more detailed comparison between the eastern and western North American Upper Triassic fish faunas, along with some brief comments on the occurrence of the genera and families in other parts of the world. We wish to thank Alfred Siefker for his generosity in donating one of the specimens of Synorichthys sp. (AMNH 3983) to The American Museum of Natural History.
IN
SYSTEMATIC DESCRIPTION

Class OSTEICHTHYES Subclass ACTINOPTERYGII

Order PALAEONISCIFORMES
Suborder REDFIELDOIDEI Family REDFIELDIIDAE

SYNORICHTHYS sp. Pls. 5, 6; text-fig. 1A Two specimens from the Lockatong Formation, Newark Group, at Granton Quarry, North Bergen, New Jersey (see Colbert, 1965 for a discussion of the stratigraphy) belong to this genus. One (AMNH No. 3983) is nearly complete, with the paired fins, the anal and the caudal fins imperfectly preserved; the other 17

(AMNH 3984) lacks the anterior part of the skull and the posterior part of the body. The dermal skull pattern and ornamentation of the Newark Synorichthys specimens show only minor differences from these characters in S. stewarti from the Chinle (pl. 5; text-fig. 1). In the skull of the Newark specimen it is evident that the suborbital and dermohyal bones are in contact with each other above the preopercular. The relationship among these elements is somewhat obscure in the available Chinle specimens, and it is possible that the interpretation in the restoration (text-fig. 1B) should be modified to more closely resemble the Newark specimen. In addition the dermosphenotic of the Newark Synorichthvs is relatively narrower and has a more arcuate lateral border than the Chinle Synorichthys. Apparent differences in maxilla shape will require further study. The number of vertical shale rows (38-40) between the posterior border of the cleithrum and the first fulcral scale on the ventral lobe of the caudal fin appears to be the same in both the Newark and Chinle specimens. The position and number of rays (?20) in the dorsal fin also seem to be in agreement. Unfortunately the paired fins, the anal and the caudal are not well enough preserved in either Newark specimen to compare ray counts with S. stewarti. S. stewarti and the Newark Synorichthys may be conspecific, but until more completely preserved examples of both are available, we would prefer to designate the latter as Synorichthys sp. Synorichthys is distinguished from Lasalichthys and from all other redfieldiids by the absence of a postrostral bone (there is no evidence in either genus that the nasals have overlapped and partially or completely cover the postrostral) and by the contact of the nasals along their medial border. In Lasalichthys the postrostral is present, but it is relatively smaller than in Cionichthys and Redfieldius, and the nasals meet for a short distance anterior to it. In addition to their distinctive rostral characters, Synorichthys

18

BOBB SCHAEFFER AND AIARLYN MAlNGUS

UPPER TRIASSIC FISH FAUNAS

and Lasalichthys have triangular parietal bones traversed by supraorbital canals that join the extrascapular commissure. Both the supraorbital and the infraorbital canals have double rows of pores except in the nasal, rostral, and possibly, in the infraorbital bones. Finally, the belly scales of Synorichthys are decidedly more narrow than those on the dorsal part of the body. In Cionichthys and Redfieldius scale size is more or less uniform over the entire body (the squamation of Lasalichthys is incompletely known).
FAUNISTIC CONSIDERATIONS

19

(0

._
=.

*_
x

It is evident that at the family level there is a high degree of resemblance between the
TABLE

Ct
0 J0 0

1-Distribution of fossil fish genera in the Upper Triassic freshwaterdeposits of the western and eastern United States ChinleDocklum r N Newark

E
z

Chondrichthyes Selachii Hybodontidae Carinacanthus cf. Palaeobates Osteichthyes Palaeonischiformes Palaeoniscidae Turseodus Ptycholepidae Ptycholepis Redfieldiidae Cionichthys Dictyopyge Lasalichthys Redfieldius Synorichthys Palaeonisciformes incert. sed. Tanaocrossus Semionotiformes Semionotidae Hemicalypterus Semionotus Crossopterygii Coelacanthidae Chinlea Diplurus Dipnoi Ceratodontidae Ceratodus

B A
x x

Family

Level

Generic Level
of Chinle-Dockum and

x x x x x x x x

x x
X X X

TEXT-FIG. 2-Comparison

Newark fossil fish assemblages at the family and generic levels. A, taxa present only in the Newark; B, taxa present only in the Chinle-Dockum; C, taxa present in both the Chinle-Dockumand Newark; C1,pairs of closely related taxa (CionichthysRedfieldius, Chinlea-Diplurus), one of which is present in the Chinle-Dockum, the other in the Newark, treated as a single taxon common to both depositionalareas.

Chinle-Dockum and Newark fossil fish assemblages (table 1; text-fig. 2). Of the seven families represented in the two faunas, five, or 71 percent, are common to both. The degree of similarity at the generic level is considerably lower, 20 percent, as only three out of 15 genera are common to both areas. But because Cionichthys and Redfieldius are more closely related to each other than either is to any other redfieldiid, they are treated as a single taxonomic unit in cate-

TEXT-FIG.

1-A, Synorichthys sp., AMNH 3983, from the Lockatong Formation, Newark Group, North Bergen, New Jersey. Skull elements in lateral aspect. B, Synorichthys stewarti, restoration of skull in lateral aspect (Schaeffer, 1967). Both ca. X4.2. Abbreviations: adn, adnasal; ant, antorbital; br, branchiostegal; cl, cleithrum; dent, dentary; dhy, dermohyal; dpt, dermopterotic;dsph, dermosphenotic;esc, extrascapular; fr, frontal; inf, infraorbital; mx, maxilla; na, nasal; op, opercular; pa, parietal; pcl, postcleithrum; po, postorbital; pop, preopercular; ros, rostral; sbo, suborbital; scap, suprascapular;scl, supracleithrum,sop, subopercular.

20

BOBB SCHAEFFER

AND MARLYN MANGUS palaeoniscoidaffinity (Aldinger, 1937), we presently favor including it in the Palaeoniscidae (see discussion, Schaeffer, 1967). The subholostean palaeonisciform Ptycholepis, which occurs in the Newark, is otherwise known from marine sedimentsof Middle Triassic through Liassic age in Europe and Great Britain. On the basis of skull, fin, and scale characters, the North American redfieldiids,which are well representedin both the eastern and western basins, can be divided into three groups: (1) Cionichthys-Redfieldius;(2) Synorichthys-Lasalichthys; and (3) Dictyopyge. The last named seems to have a dermal skull pattern resembling Redfieldius,but it has narrower belly scales and a characteristic lobate anal fin. None of these genera shows any particularlyclose resemblance to redfieldiidsfrom other parts of the world.

gory C1, of text-figure 2, as are Chinlea and Diplurus for the same reason. When viewed in this way, five out of 13 taxa, or 38 percent, are common to the Chinle-Dockum and Newark deposits. Cf. Palaeobates from the Dockum and Carinacanthus, which is restricted to the Newark, are the only hybodont sharks in the North American continental Upper Triassic. Palaeobates is well known from the Triassic of Europe, Spitzbergen and central Asia. Turseodus is represented by T. dolorensis in the Chinle and by T. acutus in the Newark. These freshwater forms are distinguished from the marine genera of the family Palaeoniscidae by the presence of ossified ring centra. On the basis of this character, Bock (1959) has favored placing Turseodus in a separate family. But because the remaining characters indicate

Synorichthys

New Jersey, matrix somewhatlightened,ca. X 1.4.

sp., AMNH

OF EXPLANATION PLATE5 3983, from the Lockatong Formation of the Newark Group, North Bergen,

JOURNAL OF PALEONTOLOGY, V.

44

PLATE 5

Bobb Schaeffer & MarlynMangus

;"

-71?
5.. F5;i

:" ??;?r; ';--?? 1, ??

.?e L* . i?-29F5V ? .r: ip 9I,r'i: 'C ;It :*tr ?. ,?, \*? ?,

..

;. . .
. ? ,!: .4 . '.. -1. '

'- ':''m x
o.
;... '

.
' . i_

'.

? .'".. :,.'

I?-? :; ,_-;. ri' ;.'',...'

' ?

'..,

'sss,ge
? ' :.,

i.-.-.

. ?d . * ' ' :~?~? ol,l

A." .. joo

JOURNAL OF PALEONTOLOGY, V. 44

PLATE 6

Bobb Schaeffer& MarlynMangus

-'

kk
'i

1-.1

.^ ^

.4, -1 10

i** *. ^" -

;\ ''
I

V7/- . . . -,'

' '
I

-Ii'-,n ?'t.,.". 110 \Slw

g ' * 'iL

4 .

1 t?

v
I

-vs.' ?fXb .I j| 'i

i'> (.

,IC
IF

.I

f.

*.t .f _1X.i

0i 1i
r, cf:t

p;

,r

A -i

%^ IIEA

*.

UPPER TRIASSIC FISH FAUNAS The relationships of Tanaocrossus and several other unnamed palaeonisciforms from the Dockum (Schaeffer, 1967) are presently unknown, but these additional forms suggest that the fauna of the western Triassic was more diversifiedthan that of the Newark. The numerous Semionotus specimens from both Triassic lowlands range from fusiform to hypsisomatic.This range is unknownin the European representativesand is, in part, the basis for the large number of species previously recognized in the Newark (Eastman, 1905, 1911). Brough (1931) regarded this phenomenon as an indication of endemism. Hemicalypterus (Schaeffer, 1967), which apparentlyarose from a Semionotus-likeancestor, is not closely related to any of the other deep-bodied semionotids. Thus far it has been found only in the Chinle Formation.

21

The coelacanths Chinlea (from the Chinle and the Dockum) and Diplurus (from the Newark) both possess long ossified pleural ribs. This condition is unknown in other coelacanths. These two genera are also similar in the form of the basisphenoidand in fin characters. They are certainly more closely related to each other than either is to any other Triassic coelacanth, including Moenkopia (Schaeffer & Gregory, 1961) from the Lower Triassic of Arizona. Tooth plates assigned to Ceretodushave been found at a number of localities in both the Chinle and the Dockum,but not in the Newark. The apparent absence of this genus from the eastern Triassic is particularlystriking, as Ceratodus had a nearly world-wide distribution throughoutthe Triassic. The similarity between the Chinle-Dockum and Newark assemblagesis not surprisingif we

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 6

Synorichthyssp., AMNH 3983,showing details of skull, ca. X5.5.

22

BOBB SCHAEFFER

AND MIARLYN MAINGUS

BOCK,W., 1959, New eastern American Triassic fishes and Triassic correlations: Geol. Center Res. Ser., v. 1, p. 1-184. BROUGH, 1931, On fossil fishes from the Karroo J., System, and some general considerations on the bony fishes of the Triassic Period: Proc. Zool. Soc. London,pt. 1, p. 235-296.
E. COLBERT, H., 1965, A phytosaur from North BerEASTMAN, C. R., 1905, A brief general account of

assume a nearly equivalent age for these rock units and if we view the central interior of North America as offering no major geographic dispersal barriers during Triassic time. We may suppose, however, some sort of filter factors operating that might account for the absence of certain genera or higher groups in one or the other assemblage. The Chinle Formation, the Dockum Group, and the Newark Group are the only freshwater Upper Triassic deposits in North America that have yielded relatively abundant and diversified fish remains (a collection from the Moenave Formation has not yet been studied). Considered together, the fish assemblages from these three units are probably indicative of the general aspect of the North American freshwater fish fauna during the Late Triassic. To what extent they are representative of freshwater faunas in other parts of the world is also of interest and will form the subject of a longer subsequent paper.
REFERENCES

gen, New Jersey: Am. Mus. Novitates, no. 2230, p. 1-25.

fossil fishes. The Triassic fishes of New Jersey: Geol. Surv. New Jersey Ann. Rept., 1904, p. 29-102.

EASTMAN, C. R., 1911, Triassic fishes of ConnectiREDFIELD, J. H., 1837, Fossil fishes of Connecticut

cut: Bull. Conn. State Geol. and Nat. Hist. Surv., no. 18, p. 1-75. and Massachusetts,with a notice of an undescribed genus: Ann. Lyceum Nat. Hist., New York, v. 4, p. 35-40.

SCHAEFFER, B., 1967, Late Triassic fishes from the

western United States: Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., v. 135, art. 6, p. 285-342. SCHAEFFER, B., & GREGORY, J. T., 1961, Coelacantli fishes from the continentalTriassic of the western United States: Am. Mus. Novitates, no. 2036, p. 1-18.
MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED JANUARY 29, 1969

ALDINGER,H.,

Ostgr6nland: Meddel. Gronland, v. 102, no. 3, p. 1-392.

1937, Permische

Ganoidfische aus

The American Museum of Natural History coIntributed$600.00 toward the publicationof this paper.