Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Elsevier, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, (425), p. 1-13, 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2015.02.025

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Testing ethological hypotheses of the trace fossil Zoophycos based on Quaternary material from the Greenland and Norwegian Seas

Journal article published in 2015 by Ludvig Löwemark ORCID
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Despite the fact that the trace fossil Zoophycos has been found in rocks from most of the Phanerozoic, little consensus has been reached on how and why this intricate burrow was constructed. The Cenozoic morphotypes of Zoophycos typically include a helically coiled spreite arranged around a vertical shaft connected to the sediment surface.Morphological details and environmental preferences of the Zoophycos producer were studied using 156 cores from the Norwegian and Greenland Seas in order to test the different ethological hypothesis proposed for this trace fossil. The spreiten were constructed during interglacial or interstadial intervals and consist of a repeated alternation of lamellae consisting of fine-grained pelleted material, and coarse-grained unpelleted material, respectively. Spreiten were encountered in vigorously bioturbated sediment, in turbidite layers, and in layers dominated by coarse ice-rafted debris. This indifference to the composition of the substrate effectively rules out ethological models based on different forms of deposit-feeding, and the large size and wide spacing of the whorls of the spreiten also make the cesspit model unlikely. Rather, the observed features best agree with a cache behaviour, where the main purpose of the deep penetration was to store food and to prevent access by other burrowers, likely combined with some gardening of microbes. However, no indubitable evidence of a reworking of the cached material could be found, and probably the answer to how the cache was accessed by the producer is to be found in the marginal tube. The difference in diameter between marginal tube and spreiten lamellae, together with the presence of both open and filled marginal tubes indicate that the marginal tube is the result of a far more complex behaviour than simply a lateral shift through the sediment.