Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921
| ID | 11129 |
|---|---|
| Fossil group | Bioerosional trace fossils |
| CAD | Clavate-shaped borings |
| Type | Macroboring |
| Substrate | Calcareous substrate |
| Taxon | Palaeosabella |
| Author | Clarke, 1921 |
| Reference | Clarke, 1921 |
| Parent taxon | Gastrochaenolitidae |
| Is valid | Yes |
| FAD | Tremadocian |
| LAD | Recent |
Includes:
| Species | Reference | Valid? |
|---|---|---|
| Palaeosabella arrogarum | Plewes, 1996 | No |
| Palaeosabella prisca | Sedgwick & McCoy, 1855 | Yes |
Synonymy
| Year | Synonym | Author | Pages | Figs | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | fossilized spionid-like borings | Nanglu, Waskom, Losso & Ortega-Hernández | 1 | Nanglu et al., 2025 | |
| 2021 | Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921 | Villas, Mayoral, Santos, Colmenar & Gutiérrez-Marco | 3 | Villas et al., 2021 | |
| 2008 | Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921 | Beuck, Wisshak, Munnecke & Freiwald | 153 | 4C | Beuck et al., 2008a |
| 2007 | Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921 | Wyse Jackson & Key | 247 | Wyse Jackson & Key, 2007 | |
| 2006 | Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921 | Wilson & Palmer | 109 | 3 | Wilson & Palmer, 2006 |
| 2004 | Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921 | Bromley | 461 | Bromley, 2004a | |
| 2004 | Trypanites | Vinn | 262 | 5 | Vinn, 2004a |
| 2003 | Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921 | Taylor & Wilson | 11 | 3B | Taylor & Wilson, 2003 |
| 1983 | Palaeosabella | Hecker | Hecker, 1983 | ||
| 1976 | Vermiforichnus | Pickerill | 1 | Pickerill, 1976 | |
| 1969 | Vermiforichnus- spionid worm borings | Cameron | 694 | 1 | Cameron, 1969b |
| 1952 | Specus | Stephenson | Stephenson & Stenzel, 1952 | ||
| 1921 | Palaeosabella | Clarke | 92 | 77, 79, 81, 83 | Clarke, 1921 |
Descriptions and remarks
Palaeosabella is a clavate boring with length-to-width ratio of < 10:1, and although morphologically different from Trypanites, the two ichnogenera have often been confused.
Palaeosabella Clarke, 1921 is an elongated cylindrical boring with a swollen distal end formed in carbonate substrates. It is similar to Trypanites except for the clavate expansion at its termination. Palaeosabella has a complicated ichnotaxonomic history. It was considered nomen dubium by Teichert (1945), resurrected by Plewes (1996), Bromley (2004) and Wilson (2007), and erroneously considered a junior synonym of the later established Clionoides Fenton and Fenton, 1932 by Furlong and McRoberts (2014). We are here considering Palaeosabella a valid ichnotaxon because it does not branch like Clionoides.
Remark: Unbranched, cylindro-clavate borings.
Unbranched, cylindrical.
Category of architectural design: 2.66. Clavate-shaped borings.
Occurrences
Specimens with images (19)
