首页> 外文期刊>Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology: An International Journal for the Geo-Sciences >Pitfalls, traps, and webs in ichnology: Traces and trace fossils of an understudied behavioral strategy
【24h】

Pitfalls, traps, and webs in ichnology: Traces and trace fossils of an understudied behavioral strategy

机译:鱼卵学中的陷阱,陷阱和网状物:行为策略研究不足的痕迹和化石

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The trapping of prey, where predators use external resources to help capture prey, is a specialized type of feeding behavior that is identified in the trace fossil record only rarely. Trapping traces that have been reported in the literature include spider webs, ant-lion burrows, scorpion pits, cerianthid tube anemone burrows, echiuran worm burrows, polychaete worm (Paraonis) burrows, and deep-sea graphoglyptids burrows. There is uncertainty, however, if all of these examples actually represent traps. Paraonis burrows, for example, have been represented as trapping traces, but there is a question if they actually represent this kind of behavioral strategy. Previous references and new field work indicate that Paraonis likely employs a selective deposit feeding strategy. In the fossil record, most of the known trapping traces are represented by spider webs, which are preserved in amber, and graphoglyptid burrows. Trace fossils that could represent trapping strategies may exhibit some basic morphological attributes, including (1) a conical depression composed of loose sediment; (2) an open pit; (3) a physical snare composed of a sticky substance; and/or (4) adequate spacing between the burrows, pits, or snare material without much overlapping. The interpretation that at least some graphoglyptids (e.g., Spirorhaphe) represent trapping was based on a trapping model for Paraonis, but since Paraonis does not trap prey, the question arises whether graphoglyptids should be considered trapping at all. The variety of graphoglyptid morphologies supports the idea that graphoglyptids were not all doing the same thing. Previously, the ethological category of agrichnia has been applied to graphoglyptids and has been used to denote both trapping and farming behaviors, although the two behaviors display distinctly different feeding strategies. Some graphoglyptids may represent farming traces, while others may represent trapping traces, but it is unlikely that an individual burrow represented both behaviors. The new behavioral category 'irretichnia' is proposed here to encompass trapping trace fossils, due to its unique behavioral significance and also to separate trapping from farming.
机译:捕食被捕食者利用外部资源来帮助捕获猎物的诱捕是一种特殊的摄食行为,在痕迹化石记录中很少被发现。文献中已经报道了诱捕痕迹,包括蜘蛛网,蚁穴,蝎坑,鲸蜡管海葵穴,白斑蠕虫穴,多毛et(Paraonis)穴和深海笔形虫穴。但是,如果所有这些示例实际上都代表陷阱,则存在不确定性。例如,帕拉尼乌斯洞穴被表示为诱捕痕迹,但存在一个疑问,即它们是否真的代表了这种行为策略。先前的参考资料和新的现场工作表明Paraonis可能采用了选择性沉积物进料策略。在化石记录中,大多数已知的诱捕痕迹都用蜘蛛网表示,蜘蛛网保存在琥珀色和石墨形洞穴中。可以代表捕获策略的痕迹化石可能具有一些基本的形态学特征,包括(1)由松散沉积物组成的圆锥形凹陷; (2)露天矿; (3)由黏性物质组成的物理圈套器;和/或(4)洞穴,矿坑或圈套器材料之间有足够的间距,而没有太多的重叠。至少某些石墨文字(例如Spirorhaphe)表示捕获的解释是基于对Paraonis的捕获模型,但是由于Paraonis不会捕获猎物,因此提出了一个问题,即是否应该将石墨文字完全视为捕获。多种多样的形态图支持了这样的观点,即形态图并非都在做同一件事。以前,非洲人种的伦理学类别已被应用于石墨象素,并已被用来表示诱捕和农作行为,尽管这两种行为表现出截然不同的进食策略。一些石墨文字可能代表耕作痕迹,而另一些可能代表诱捕痕迹,但单个洞穴不太可能代表两种行为。这里提出新的行为类别“ irretichnia”,因为它具有独特的行为意义,而且还包括捕获痕迹化石,并且将捕获与农业分开。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号