You are on page 1of 31
CAMPANIAN TRACHYSCAPHITES SPINIGER AMMONITE FAUNA IN NORTH-EAST TEXAS by W. A, COBBAN and W. J. KENNEDY [Assrascr. A horizon 46:m above the bese of the Ozan Formation inthe North Sulphur River north-west of LCadonia in Fannin County, Texas, yielded fauna of Packyaicus (Pachdscas) pausont (Young, 1963), Eupachvaseusgrosounre’ (Rossa, 1898), Placentceras Sp Monabites (Delaware delewarensis (Norton, 1840), sD. danet (Young, 1963. M.D) vamesema (Morton, 1880), M.(D.) sp Glproxocera sp. Baculites Sp. woup of aqleensic Resede, 127, Seaphiter (Seaphies) sp. group Ol hippocepis (DeKay, 1828) Trachywcophites spiniger spnger Gchiter, 172}, and. densieastas sp.nov. together ih the bivalve Incceranat(Endsotiea) bates Bb, 1909. The presence o 7. spniser pier. prenovsly known only from Western Europe andthe USSR dates the asemtlage as early but aot earls le Campanian ina north-west Furopvan seme, while stratigraphic rationships to oiher Gulf Coast Campanian faunas suggest i 19 be Younger than the early Campanian rone of ScaphtesKippocrepis Il and older than the middle Campanian Zone of Bacultes metear of the US Weslern Interion The Westen Interior lower-middle Campanian foundary and the European lower-upper Campanian boundary ae approximately coincident; tis evel ean be dated at 80 Ma epprenimately on the basis of radiometric dates fom Western Interior Bennie, Scarmires srixicen Schliter, 1872 is a large, ornately ribbed, tubereulate seaphite, fist escrbed from the Mueranaten Kreide" of north Germany, and subsequently recognized as an jmportant marker fossil for the upper Campanian in France, Germany, Sweden, The Netherlands, Poland, European Russi, and Soviet Armenia, Recent works by Schmid and Ernst (1975) and Blasckiewice (1980) have clarified its range and value in correlation. ‘Adkins (1929) described, as Scuphites porchi and 5. aricki, two new species of multituberculate scaphites from the “upper Taylor Torination’ of Navarro County, Texas. He compared them to “eanthoscaphites”spiniger bul dismissed any close relationship, stressing the very compressed shell fof “A” spiniger as one of several distinguishing features, being unaware that Schliter's figured Specimens were crushed. Cobban and Scott (1968) studied multituberculate scaphites from the Campanian of the United States Western Interior, and introduced the genus Trachyscaphies with 7. redbirdensis Cobban and Scott 1968 (p. ET. pl. 1, figs 1-7; textilg. 3 as type specis). They recognized. spiniger as a farther member of the genus and divided it into two subspecies, the hhominate ove and 7: spiniger porchi Adkins, 1929. The latter was described from both the Gulf ‘Coast and Western Interior, and provided an important link between the cosmopolitan faunas of the former and endemic ones ofthe latter. It vas not possible fo correlate Old and New World 7: “piniger because it was not known if the subspecies recognized were geographical or chronological in nature. It is therefore of some significance that we have recognized abundant specimens of Trachyscaphites spinige spiniger in the Ozan Formation of north-east Texas (Text-figs -2)and can show it to precede T. spiniger porchi; they are thus chronological subspecies. Furthermore, 7. Spintgcr spiniger occurs with abundant texanitid ammonites that have previously been regarded as WWord-wide markers for the upper lower and middle Campanian (depending on whether & 1wo- or three-fold division of the Campanian is used; there is no general agreement), leading toa review of ‘Campanian ammonite zonation in both the US Gulf Coast and western Europe. (Peta, Ya Pa 1 9 The Pata Anaton o PALAEONTOLOGY, VOLUMES WOLFE CITY SAND: TAYLOR GROUP (part) UST GROUF fA TEXT-NG. I, Lithostratigraphic divisions of the upper part ofthe Austin Group andthe Taylor Group in noc "ust Texas, STRATIGRAPHIC AND LOCALITY DETAILS. ‘Texcfigure 1 shows the ldhstratigraphic divisions of the upper part ofthe Austin Group and the Taylor Group in north-east Texas, modified ater Thompson etal (197) and others The fowl described here come fom the middle parc of the Ozan Formation, some 4m above the base. The term Oran was introduced By Dane (aecording to Dane 1929, p. $8, fotnote 72) on 10 September 1926, in what an otherwise anonymous {US Department of Interior Memorandum forthe Pres, No. 823, The (pe locity is near Ozan in Hempstead County, Arkansis, and Arkansas outerops and Tosi evurrences are describes in tall by Dane (1953) In northeast Texas, beds at this lve that are equivalent to the Ozan Formation were tented “unnamed marl? ‘of the Taylor Group by authors up to and including Adkins (1933), but the lerm Oran Formation is ow applied to beds above ihe Gober Chalk and below the Pecan Gap abd Annona Chalks (e@, Geologic Atlas fof Texas, Texarkana Shel, 1965 The sequence i a¢ mich as 130m thick ‘weathering lush-aey, caleareous clas with chalky beds tnd some fine sand ut ‘as coleted ty the late James P. Conlin (Fort Worth, Teas), W. A. Cobban, RE, Burkholder snd others tor close to USGS Mesozoie locality DIOISt outcrop in the Norh Suiphur Ree 41-50 km north-west of the centre of Ladonia in Fannin County (Teat-hg. 2. Ths eorrexponds t locality 18 of Paulson (196, p12) who gives presse detail 8 how to reach the outrop ( g0 03 mi. west of square at Ladonis, Fannin County {um nord 20:m, 1o North Sulphur River Bridge: walk 12 mi. west tothe junction of Davis Creek) The COBBAN AND KENNEDY: CAMPANIAN AMMONITES « *wolte city 0 Outerop of (Ozan Formation Hott 0 kilometres 8 1Hxr-rG, 2, Locality map for part of north-east Teas showing the source of specimens desribed in the txt. fossils come fom a istnciv slauconitie unit at most af tens of centimetres thick chat overs marked ‘omission surface that can be ttced widely in the subsurface (Paulson 1960, p. 22) and is here 46 m above the topo the Gober Chalk The basal uit above the emission surface i ared-weathering, green, glauconite mat, Fich in bioelats, The bed is crowded with black phosphate nodules many of which are Wora moulds of ‘Boeuis with rarer Placontcerar, although bvases,gustopods and vertebrate debris are the commonest faunal element They show many ofthe complex tapbononsc features described in the very sar unit athe ‘Austin- Taylor contact ax desoribd by Forsch, Kennedy and Palmer (198). In contrast, te fauna deseribed here is am indigenous one, commonly crushed and with orginal araponitic shell reserve. AGE AND CORRELATION OF THE FAUNA “The indigenous ammonite fas from the Oran Formation north-west of Ladonia is as follows: Pachlicus (Packydscus) pangons (Young, 1953) Urequent,Eypachydsour grastousres (Kessnat, 1998) (cae), Thacentieras sp ete), Menahites (Delaware) delawarenst (Morton, ISM) (rare), M. (D) dant (Young. 1963) tiny fequent), A. (D) wamasemi (Morton, 1830) (ar), M. (D.) sp. (tre). Ghpronocera =p. (frequent, Bacules 9, group of aguilaensis Reeide, 1927, abundant), Seaphites (Seaphies) sp. group ef Iippoeepis(DeKay, 1838) (rare), Trachyscaphites vpinigerspiugr (Sete, 1872) requend),Trachyscaphites dnuicostars op nov: (ar). Also present ithe ditnctive inocerarid valve Inocramns Endacostea) balou Bm, 1909 (PL 7, igs 6,10). No aoation has been developed forthe higher Campanian in the Gulf Coast region wo date, but Young (1963) proposed the fllowing petal scheme: