HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by NESBITT, E. A. Articles by CAMPBELL, K. A. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

The Paleoenvironmental Significance of Psilonichnus

¹ Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, University of Washington, Box 353010, Seattle, WA 98195-3010; lnesbitt{at}u.washington.edu
² Department of Geology, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand

The ichnogenus Psilonichnus and its named ichnospecies are evaluated for their utility in paleoenvironmental reconstructions. A combined ichnological-sedimentological model for shoreface-estuarine-fluvial settings is presented herein to show distributions of the ichnospecies of Psilonichnus in an ichnofacies framework. High-resolution differentiation of coastal paleoenvironments may be achieved in strata containing Psilonichnus only if the trace fossils are identified to ichnospecies level, and if they are assessed as sedimentary structures within a depositional context. The simple Y-, J-, and I-shaped, vertical to inclined burrows referred to as Psilonichnus include three distinct ichnospecies–P. tubiformis, P. upsilon, and P. lutimuratus. Each can be attributed to either of two decapod crustacean progenitors, thalassinoid mud shrimp, or ocypodid ghost crabs. The ichnogenus occurs in association with the Psilonichnus, Glossifungites, and Skolithos ichnofacies in estuary/bay to backshore/dune sedimentary settings. Psilonichnus has proved to be an effective paleoenvironmental indicator, especially in studies of sequence stratigraphy. To date, however, inconsistencies in both ichnotaxonomic and ichnofacies assignments for Psilonichnus, and confusion regarding probable tracemakers, have diminished its usefulness to sedimentary geology. To avoid such problems, each new field occurrence of a potential Psilonichnus trace must be evaluated thoroughly within its biological, ecological, and physical context.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. F.-J. Wroblewski Paleoenvironmental Significance of Cretaceous and Paleocene Psilonichnus in Southern Wyoming Palaios, June 1, 2008; 23(6): 370 - 379. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Dieni, F. Massari, and J. Medus Age, depositional environment and stratigraphic value of the Cuccuru 'e Flores Conglomerate: insight into the Palaeogene to Early Miocene geodynamic evolution of Sardinia Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de France, January 1, 2008; 179(1): 51 - 72. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Hovikoski, M. Gingras, M. Rasanen, L. A. Rebata, J. Guerrero, A. Ranzi, J. Melo, L. Romero, H. N. del Prado, F. Jaimes, et al. The nature of Miocene Amazonian epicontinental embayment: High-frequency shifts of the low-gradient coastline Geological Society of America Bulletin, November 1, 2007; 119(11-12): 1506 - 1520. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]