Book contents
-
Frontmatter
-
Contents
-
Contributors
-
Preface
-
Acknowledgements
- Part I
The Crato Formation Konservat Lagerstätte
- Part II
The invertebrate fauna
- Part III
The vertebrate fauna
- Part IV
The flora
- 19
The macrophyte flora of the Crato Formation
- 20
Spores and pollen from the Crato Formation: biostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental implications
- Part V
Miscellanea
-
Appendix: species list for the Crato Formation
-
Systematic index
-
Plate section
- References
19 - The macrophyte flora of the Crato Formation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 August 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Part I The Crato Formation Konservat Lagerstätte
- Part II The invertebrate fauna
- Part III The vertebrate fauna
- Part IV The flora
- 19 The macrophyte flora of the Crato Formation
- 20 Spores and pollen from the Crato Formation: biostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental implications
- Part V Miscellanea
- Appendix: species list for the Crato Formation
- Systematic index
- Plate section
- References
Summary
Introduction
Plant fossils from the Crato Formation are not only remarkable because of their beauty, but equally because of their scientific value, being on the cusp of the gymnosperm decline and the angiosperm radiation. Many of these fossils are preserved more or less entire, often with roots, stems, leaves, sporangia and flowering structures attached; there is also palaeosoil present in some specimens (Figure 19.1). The more or less complete fossils are not only attractive, but are of immense importance to the palaeobotanist, who often has to deal with dispersed organs, of which the natural connection remains unknown, until a more complete specimen is found.
The original organic material of the Crato plant fossils is generally covered or replaced by goethite, a hydrated iron oxide, which causes the rusty, conspicuous colouring of the weathered fossils. Often, they are very weathered, poorly preserved and can only be seen as reddish brown impressions on the light yellowish slabs. In rare cases, mainly in specimens coming from layers at the base of the section, black organic material with cellular structures can be preserved. Then, fine details, even of reproductive organs – the most indicative parts concerning the taxonomic evaluation of a plant – may be observed three-dimensionally with scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
The palaeoflora is known to be relatively diverse, but has not been fully described. It is now being investigated by an international team of researchers from various Brazilian and European institutions (FAPESP/Fundaçao de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
-
The Crato Fossil Beds of BrazilWindow into an Ancient World, pp. 537 - 565Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
1982. Cheirolepidiaceae: biology, structure and palecology. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 37: 71–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arai, M., Coimbra, J. C. and Silva-Telles, Jr, A. C. 2001. Síntese bioestratigráfica da bacia do Araripe (nordeste do Brasil), pp. 109–117, 122–124. In, and (eds), Atas do II Simpósio sobre a bacia do Araripe e bacias interiores do Nordeste. Comunicações (Coleção Chapada do Araripe number 1). Crato, Ceará State, Brazil:Universidade Regional do Cariri (URCA).Google Scholar
1963. A new Mesozoic flora from Ticó. Santa Cruz Province. Argentina. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology 8: 45–92.Google Scholar
1966. New gymnosperms from the Ticó Flora, Santa Cruz Province, Argentina. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology 13: 259–295.Google Scholar
1968. On the genus Tomaxellia (Coniferae) from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia (Argentina) and its male and female cones. Journal of the Linnean Society London, Botany 61: 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and 2000. Early Cretaceous monocarpelar fruit of the Crato Member, Santana Formation, Araripe Basin, Northeastern Brazil. Geosciencias 5: 121–124.Google Scholar
, and 1993. Folhas de Araucariaceae da Formaçao Santana, Cretáceo do Nordeste do Brasil. Anais Academia Brasileira de Ciencias 65: 329–330.Google Scholar
, and 1984. Entomophily in the dioecious gymnosperm Ephedra aphylla Forsk., with some notes on E. campylopoda C. A. Mey. Proceedings of Koninkliijke Nederland Akademic van Wetenschapen C 87: 1–24.Google Scholar
, and 2000. Phylogeny of seed plants based on all three genomic compartments: Extant gymnosperms are monophyletic and Gnetales' closest relatives are conifers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 97: 4092–4097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
., , and 1998. Discovery of fossil monocotyledons from Yixian Formation, western Liaoning. Chinese Science Bulletin 43: 230–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and 2000. Seed plant phylogeny inferred from all three plant genomes: monophyly of extant gymnosperms and origin of Gnetales and conifers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 97: 4086–4091.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crane, P. R. 1991. Fossil plants, pp. 414–421. In (ed.), Santana Fossils: an Illustrated Atlas. Neptune City, NJ: T.F.H. Publications.Google Scholar
— 1996. The fossil history of the Gnerales. International Journal Plant Science 157 (suppl. 6): S50–S57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
— and 1987. Drewria potomacensis gen. et sp. nov., an Early Cretaceous member of Gnetales from the Potomac Group of Virginia. American Journal of Botany 74: 1722–1736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and Hult, C. M. 1988. The Gnetales: botanical remnants from the age of the dinosaurs. Field Museum Botanical59: 21–29.
and 1989. Paleolatitudinal gradients and temporal trends in Cretaceous floristic diversity. Science 246: 675–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1992. Phylogeny and biogeography of Ruffordia, Mohria and Anemia (Schizeaceae) and Ceratopteris (Pteridaceae): evidence from in situ and dispersed spores. Alcheringa 16: 269–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2005a. Welwitschiaceae from the Lower Cretaceous of northeastern Brazil. American Journal of Botany 92: 1294–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996. Seed plant phylogeny and the relationships of Gnetales. International Journal of Plant Science 157: 3–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. Phylogeny of vascular plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29: 567–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. The oldest Gnetophyte – a tricarpous female reproductive fossil from western Liaoning Province, NE China. Science China 41: 14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1985. Vegetais fósseis da Chapada do Araripe, Brasil. Coletânea de Trabalhos Paleontológicos do VIII Congresso Brasileiro de Paleontologia 1983, Série Geologia 27, Seçäo Paleontologia e Estatigrafia 2, Brasilia: 557–563.Google Scholar
1993. Restos de Araucariaceas da Formação Santana – Membro Crato (Aptiano), NE do Brasil. Anais Academia Brasileira, Ciencias 65: 357–362.Google Scholar
1980. A taxonomical monograph of Anemia subgenus Anemiorrhiza (Filicinae). Feddes Repertorium 91: 69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2004. Four additional specimens of the fossil camel spider Cratosolpuga wunderlichi Selden 1996 (Arachnida: Solifugae) from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation of Brazil. Review Iberica Aracnologia 9: 143–156.Google Scholar
Endress, P. K. 1993. Eupomatiaceae, pp. 296–298. In (ed.), The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants, vol. II. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Endress, P. K. 1996. Structure and function of female and bisexual organ complexes in Gnetales. International Journal of Plant Science157 (suppl. 6): S113–S125.
and 2003. Water lilies and scarabs: faithful partners for 100 million years?Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 80: 539–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2003. The ancestral ecology of angiosperms. Emerging perspectives from extant basal lineages. International Journal of Plant Science 164 (suppl. 3): S129–S142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and . , , and 2004. Dark and disturbed: a new image of early angiosperm ecology. Paleobiology 30: 82–107.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996. Introduction to biology and evolution of the Gnetales. International Journal of Plant Science 157 (suppl. 6): S1–S2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1988. Reproductive structures of Cretaceous Platanaceae. Biologiske Skrifter 31: 1–55.Google Scholar
, , and ., and . 2001. Fossil evidence of water lilies (Nymphaeales) in the Early Cretaceous. Nature 410: 357–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and 2004. Araceae from the Early Cretaceous of Portugal: evidence on the emergence of monocotyledons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 101: 16565–16570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gandolfo, M. A., Nixon, K. C. and Crepet, W. L. 2000. Monocotyledons: a review of their Early Cretaceous record, pp. 44–51. In and (eds), Monocots: Systematics and Evolution. Melbourne: CSIRO.Google Scholar
, , et al. 1996. Non-coding sequences from the slowly evolving chloroplast inverted repeat in addition to rbcL data do not support gnetalean affinities of angiosperms. Molecular Biology and Evolution 13: 383–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2000. Ephedrites from latest Jurassic Yixian Formation in Western Liaoning, Northeast China. Acta Palaeontogia Sinica 39: 89–91.Google Scholar
and 1974. The Yorkshire Jurassic Flora. IV. 2. Czekanowskiales. London: British Museum (Natural History).Google Scholar
1974. Die Konifere Brachyphyllum nepos Saporta aus den Solnhofener Plattenkalken (unteres Untertithon), ein Halophyt. Mitteilungen Bayerische Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und Historische Geologie 14: 49–58.Google Scholar
,, and 2003. New pollen morphotype from gut compression of a Cretaceous insect, and its bearing on palynomorphological evolution and palaeoecology. Cretaceous Research 24: 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2004. Gymnosperms from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation (Brazil). I. Araucariaceae and Lindleycladus (incertae sedis). Mitteilungen Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, Geowissenschaften 7: 155–174.Google Scholar
,, and 2006. Gymnosperms from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation (Brazil). II. Fossil Record 9(2): 213–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,, Mohr, B. A. R. and Bernardes-de-Oliveira, M. E. C. 2007. Novaolindia dubia gen. et sp. nov., an enigmatic seed plant from the Early Cretaceous of northern Gondwana. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology (in press).
Labandeira, C. C. 2002. The history of associations between plants and animals, pp. 26–74, 248–261. In and (eds), Plant-Animal Interactions: an Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
, , , , and 2005. Protananaceae, a new fossil monocot family from the Lower Cretaceous Santana Formation, northeastern Brazil. Botany 2005, Abstract: 666.Google Scholar
1978. Palinologia da Formação Santana (Cretaceo do Nordeste do Brasil). I. Introduçao geologica e descriçao sistematicados esporos da Subturma Azonotriletes. Ameghiniana 15: 333–365.Google Scholar
. 1979. Palinologia da Formação Santana (Cretaceo do Nordeste do Brasil). II. Descrição sistematica dos espores da Subturma Zonotriletes e Turma Monoletes, e dos polens das Turmas Saccites a Aletes. Ameghiniana 16: 27–63.Google Scholar
. 1980. Palinologia da Formação Santana (Cretáceo do Nordeste do Brasil). III. Descrição systematica dos polens da Turma Plicates (Subturma Costates). Ameghiniana 17: 15–47.Google Scholar
Lima, M. R. de. 1983. Paleoclimatic reconstruction of the Brazilian basin on palynological data. Brasileira de Geociencias13: 223–228.
. 1989. Palinologia da Formaçao Santana (Cretaceo do Nordeste do Brasil). IV. Descriçao systematica dos polens da Turma Plicates e Poroses, incertae sedis e Microplancton Marinho. Ameghiniana 26: 63–81.Google Scholar
and 2002. Relationship among seed plants inferred from highly conserved genes: sorting conflicting phylogenetic signals among ancient lineages. American Journal of Botany 89: 1991–2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 1993. Fossils of the Santana and Crato Formations, Brazil. Palaeontological Association Field Guides to Fossils Series 5. London: The Palaeontological Association.Google Scholar
,, and 2005. An unusual occurrence of amber in laminated limestones: the Crato Formation Lagerstätte (Early Cretaceous) of Brazil. Palaeontology 48: 1399–1408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2000. Early angiosperms from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation (Brazil), a preliminary report. International Journal of Plant Science 161: 155–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2002. Trifurcatia flabellata n. gen. n. sp., a putative monocotyledon angiosperm from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation (Brazil). Mitteilungen des Museums für Naturkunde Berlin, Geowissenschaftliche Reihe 5: 335–344.Google Scholar
and 2003. Araripia florifera, a magnoliid angiosperm from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation (Brazil). Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 126: 279–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2004. Endressinia brasiliana, a magnolialean angiosperm from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation (Brazil). International Journal of Plant Science 165: 1121–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2005. Diversity of putative nymphaealean waterplants in the Lower Cretaceous of the Araripe Basin, Brazil. 17th International Botany Congress, Vienna: 425.Google Scholar
,, and 2006. Palaeogeographic distribution and ecology of Klitzschophyllites, an Early Cretaceous angiosperm in southern Laurasia and northern Gondwana. Cretaceous Research 27: 464–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1991. Pteridophyte remains from the Lower Cretaceous, Santana Formation, Araripe Basin, Northeastern Brazil. 12° Congresso Brasileiro de Paleontologia (Sao Paulo), Boletim de Resumos: 491.Google Scholar
, and 1993. The ultrastructure of fossil ephedroid pollen with gnetalean affinities from the Lower Cretaceous of Brazil. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 77: 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pons, D., Oliveira-Babinski, M. E. C. and de Lima, M. R. 1992. Les Ephedrales de la Formation Santana, Cretacé Inférieur du Bassin d' Araripe (Brésil). Fourth International Organization of Palaeobotany Conference, Abstracts 1992: 125.
—, , and 1996. Palynologie des unités, Fundão Crato et Ipubi (Aptien supérieur à Albien inférieur –moyen, bassin d'Araripe, nord-est du Brésil): enseignements paléoécologiques, stratigraphiques et climatologiques. Géologie de l'Afrique et de l'Atlantique Sud: Actea Colloques Angers, 1994: 383–401.Google Scholar
Raven, P. H., Evert, R. F. and Eichhorn, S. E. 2001. Biologia Vegetal, 6th edn. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan S. A.
, and 2002. Seed plant relationships and the systematic position of Gnetales based on nuclear and chloroplast DNA: Conflicting data, rooting problems, and the monophyly of Conifers. International Journal of Plant Science 163: 197–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,, and 2003. Cratonia cotyledon gen. et sp. nov.: a unique Cretaceous seedling related to Welwitschia. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B (Supplement), Biology Letters 270: 1–4.Google ScholarPubMed
,, and 2004. On the evolutionary history of Ephedra; Cretaceous fossils and extant molecules. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 101: 16571–16576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
,, , and 2006. Former diversity of Ephedra (Gnetales): evidence from Early Cretaceous seeds from Portugal and North America. Annals of Botany (London) 98: 123–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(ed.) 2003. The Cretaceous World. Milton Keynes and Cambridge: The Open University and Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, , and 2005. Phylogeny and Evolution of Angiosperms. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
, , , and 2001. Early Angiosperms and Their Associated Plants from Western Liaoning, China. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific and Technological Education Publishing House.Google Scholar
, and 2000. New perspectives on the pollination biology of basal angiosperms. International Journal of Plant Science 161 (suppl. 6): S225–S235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trewin, N. H. 2001. The Rhynie chert, pp. 342–346. In and (eds), Palaeobiology II. Oxford: Blackwell Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1982. Ferns and Allied Plants with Special Reference to Tropical America. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984. Cuticular anatomy of angiosperm leaves from the Lower Cretaceous Potomac Group. 1. Zone I leaves. American Journal of Botany 71: 192–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000. Ruflorinia papillosa sp. nov. from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia, Argentina. Palaeontographica B 255: 79–85.Google Scholar
Van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, J. H. A. 1991. Diversification of spores in fossil and extant Schizaeaceae, pp. 103–118. In Blackmore, S. and Barnes, S. H. (eds), Pollen and Spores, Systematic Association, Special Volume 44, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
, , and 2002. Macrofloral remains from the Lower Cretaceous of the Leivia region (Colombia). Scripta Geologica 123: 1–39.Google Scholar
, and 2005. Teixeiraea lusitanica, a new fossil flower from the Early Cretaceous of Portugal with affinities to Ranunculales. Plant Systematics and Evolution 255: 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2003. Horizontal gene transfer from flowering plants to Gnetum. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 100: 10824–10829.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , and 2005. Morphology and affinities of an Early Cretaceous Ephedra (Ephedraceae) from China. American Journal of Botany 92: 231–241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
- 28
- Cited by