1961Journal of PaleontologyRequires access

Major divisions of the Cephalopoda

Rousseau H. Flower

Open publisher page 11 citations

Abstract

Division of the Cephalopoda into Tetrabranchiata and Dibranchiata involves implications as to the nature of unknown soft parts of fossil forms. Factual and theoretical evidence combine to suggest that many of the features of the Dibranchiata may have developed in their ancestors included in the Nautiloidea, and that many of the features of Nautilus are derived, or possibly connected with, crucial changes in mode of life now known to have occurred in its ancestry. Use of similar divisions to separate forms with external versus internal shells also involves inferences; recent work has shown this boundary to be one difficult to draw in relation to primitive belemnites and some supposed bactritids. It is urged that the tripartite divisions of the Cephalopoda into Nautiloidea, Coleoidea, and Ammonoidea is in closer accord with ascertainable facts and avoids attributing some 3,000 extinct genera to a group characterized by the 4 gills observable only in 1 genus, the living Nautilus.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Division of the Cephalopoda into Tetrabranchiata and Dibranchiata involves implications as to the nature of unknown soft parts of fossil forms. Factual and theoretical evidence combine to suggest that many of the features of the Dibranchiata may have developed in their ancestors included in the Nautiloidea, and that many of the features of Nautilus are derived, or possibly connected with, crucial changes in mode of life now known to have occurred in its ancestry. Use of similar divisions to separate forms with external versus internal shells also involves inferences; recent work has shown this boundary to be one difficult to draw in relation to primitive belemnites and some supposed bactritids. It is urged that the tripartite divisions of the Cephalopoda into Nautiloidea, Coleoidea, and Ammonoidea is in closer accord with ascertainable facts and avoids attributing some 3,000 extinct genera to a group characterized by the 4 gills observable only in 1 genus, the living Nautilus.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Division of the Cephalopoda into Tetrabranchiata and Dibranchiata involves implications as to the nature of unknown soft parts of fossil forms. Factual and theoretical evidence combine to suggest that many of the features of the Dibranchiata may have developed in their ancestors included in the Nautiloidea, and that many of the features of Nautilus are derived, or possibly connected with, crucial changes in mode of life now known to have occurred in its ancestry. Use of similar divisions to separate forms with external versus internal shells also involves inferences; recent work has shown this boundary to be one difficult to draw in relation to primitive belemnites and some supposed bactritids. It is urged that the tripartite divisions of the Cephalopoda into Nautiloidea, Coleoidea, and Ammonoidea is in closer accord with ascertainable facts and avoids attributing some 3,000 extinct genera to a group characterized by the 4 gills observable only in 1 genus, the living Nautilus.

Key concepts: Nautilus, Ammonoidea, Paleontology, Biology, Genus, Living fossil, Zoology, Evolutionary biology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Major divisions of the Cephalopoda — Research Paper | ScholarLens