RE: Ichnotaxa (was RE: dino tracks near Syracuse?)

["Emma C. Rainforth" <emmar@ldeo.columbia.edu>]

Randall wrote:

> My understanding is that even
> Seilacher kept the binomial, which was based on morphology.  its just the
> suprageneric taxonomy that is based on behavior.  I was just asking (not
> stating) whether this would be benificial at all to footpints (IE how do
> footprints change with environment).

Probably not helpful, because it STILL requires interpretation in 
order to create the system! Footprint shape does vary with substrate 
- can be seen really well in cases where a critter goes from 
mudcracked surface into a puddle in a single trackway. If you dont 
see a transition then its easy enough to give diff. names to tracks 
made by a single critter simply b/c the morphology varies so much w/ 
substrate. Also if a critter changes its behaviour, say its walking 
along and then sits, you could go from a tridactyl print of a biped 
to a tetradactyl quadruped (eg Anomoepus, Early Jurassic). In this 
case we SEE the transition often enough but originally (Edward 
Hitchcock) these tracks were given diff. names!

BTW a lot of what Seilacher says regarding "single ichnotaxon made by 
multiple body taxa" and "multiple ichnotaxa made by single body taxon 
(i.e. depending on BEHAVIOUR)',  do not apply to verts. ALthough as 
you point out that is often the higher-level taxa.

--

Emma C. Rainforth
Geosciences Rm. 206E
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
61 Rt. 9W
Palisades
NY 10964-8000
tel. (845) 365-8621
fax (801) 838-4126
emmar@ldeo.columbia.edu
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~emmar/research/indexr.html