Basic info Taxonomic history Classification Relationships
Morphology Ecology and taphonomy External Literature Search Age range and collections

Dinorthis anticostiensis

Rhynchonellata - Orthida - Plaesiomyidae

Orthis anticostiensis was named by Shaler (1865) [Four syntypes, MCZ147679–147682, are in Shal- er’s original collection from “Ellis Bay, west end of An- ticosti” (Shaler 1865, p. 66, and original label). Specimen MCZ147679, a complete shell with fine surface ornament preserved, is selected herein as the lectotype (Pl. 4, figs. 1–6). Paralectotype MCZ147680 is also well preserved (Pl. 4, figs. 7–13), but the other two were originally cut.]. Its type specimen is MCZ 147679-147682, a shell, and it is a 3D body fossil.

It was corrected as Orthis porcata by Billings (1862); it was recombined as Dinorthis anticostiensis by Twenhofel (1928); it was recombined as Plaesiomys anticostiensis by Schuchert and Cooper (1932), Bolton (1972), Jin and Zhan (2008) and Wright and Stigall (2013).

Synonymy list
YearName and author
1862Orthis porcata Billings p. 135 figs. fig. 111
1928Dinorthis anticostiensis Twenhofel p. 183 figs. pl. 18, figs. 15, 16.
1932Plaesiomys anticostiensis Schuchert and Cooper p. 94
1972Plaesiomys anticostiensis Bolton p. 28 figs. pl. 4, figs. 3, 20
2008Plaesiomys anticostiensis Jin and Zhan pp. 18 - 21 figs. Pl. 4, figs. 1–13; Pl. 5, figs. 1–23; Pl. 6, figs. 1–16; Pl. 7, figs. 1–15; Pl. 8, figs. 1–11; Figs.
2013Plaesiomys anticostiensis Wright and Stigall p. 1113

Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data

phylumBrachiopodaCuvier 1805
subphylumRhynchonelliformeaWilliams et al. 1996
classRhynchonellataWilliams et al. 1996
orderOrthidaSchuchert and Cooper 1932
suborderOrthidinaSchuchert and Cooper 1932
superfamilyOrthoideaWoodward 1852
familyPlaesiomyidaeSchuchert 1913
subfamilyPlaesiomyinaeSchuchert 1913
genusDinorthisHall and Clarke 1892
speciesanticostiensis(Shaler 1865)

If no rank is listed, the taxon is considered an unranked clade in modern classifications. Ranks may be repeated or presented in the wrong order because authors working on different parts of the classification may disagree about how to rank taxa.

No diagnoses are available