Reticulofenestra asanoi

Reticulofenestra asanoi Sato and Takayama, 1992.

Description: Coccoliths >6.5μm, sub-circular or broadly elliptical.

Remarks: Probably derived from P. lacunosa, from which it is distinguished by the absence of slits in the distal shield.

Geological Time Data
Geological Time Periods: 
Biblio Reference: 
Young, JR.  1998.  Neogene. Calcareous nannofossil biostratigraphy. :225-265.
Notes on occurrence information: 

Short interval within NN19

Comments

Jeremy Young's picture

I must admit I have had

I must admit I have had problems with this too. I tried arguing a long time ago (Young 1991) that we ought to get rid of Pseudoemiliania since it intergrades with Reticulofenestra, and the existence of R. asanoi makes it even worse. The best study I know of the group is still Matsuoka and Okada (1989) they used TEM to measure and count specimens, which is a good way to reliably spot the slits and give detailed data on morphotypes in the group in the mid Quatnary from a piston core in subtropical N.W. Pacific.
They defined a Reticulofenestra sp. A , >5µm with no slits and showed that the >6µm examples of this morphotype had a limited range around the Jaramilo magnetochron (C1r.1n), which is the same as R. asanoi sensu e.g. Raffi et al. (2006). Their data also shows that large P. ovata specimens increase in abundance during this interval. So, yes R. asanai will intergrade with smaller oval Reticulofenestra species and with P. ovata specimens with a few slits, but it is still useful to distinguish it.

Matsuoka, H. & Okada, H. 1989. Quantitative Analysis of Quaternary Nanoplankton in the Subtropical Northwestern Pacific Ocean. Marine Micropaleontology 14, 97- 118.

Raffi, I., Backman, J., Fornaciari, E., Palike, H., Rio, D., Lourens, L. J. & Hilgen, F. J. 2006. A review of calcareous nannofossil astrobiochronology encompassing the past 25 million years. Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 3113-3137.

Young, J. R. 1990. Size variation of Neogene Reticulofenestra coccoliths from Indian Ocean DSDP cores. Journal of Micropalaeontology 9, 71-86.

mstyzen's picture

Clarification needed

I've never been able to really embrace this species as I need some definite criteria for distinguishing it absolutely from Pseudoemiliania ovata on the one hand and any number of medium sized nondescript Reticulofenestras on the other. I've been told that R. asanoi may not be totaly devoid of slits on the distal shield, it may have a few. If this is the case what makes it different from just a big P. ovata? Is there a cutoff size? Other features to watch for?

Scratchpads developed and conceived by: Vince Smith, Simon Rycroft, Dave Roberts, Ben Scott...