Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T00:17:46.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New insights into the early evolution of horizontal spiral trace fossils and the age of the Brioverian series (Ediacaran–Cambrian) in Brittany, NW France

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 January 2021

Romain Gougeon Open the ORCID record for Romain Gougeon [Opens in a new window] ,
Didier Néraudeau ,
Alfredo Loi  and
Marc Poujol Open the ORCID record for Marc Poujol [Opens in a new window]
Romain Gougeon*
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5E2, Canada Université de Rennes, CNRS, Géosciences Rennes - UMR 6118, F-35000 Rennes, France
Didier Néraudeau
Affiliation:
Université de Rennes, CNRS, Géosciences Rennes - UMR 6118, F-35000 Rennes, France
Alfredo Loi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e Geologiche, Università di Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria, 09042 Monserrato, Italy
Marc Poujol
Affiliation:
Université de Rennes, CNRS, Géosciences Rennes - UMR 6118, F-35000 Rennes, France
*
Author for correspondence: Romain Gougeon, Email: gougeon.romain@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In northwestern France, the Brioverian series is a thick siliciclastic succession deposited during the Cadomian cycle (c. 750–540 Ma). In the uppermost Brioverian beds, previous studies unravelled an assemblage dominated by simple horizontal trace fossils associated with microbially stabilized surfaces. Here, we report Spirodesmos trace fossils – one-way, irregular and regular horizontal spirals – from Crozon (Finistère, Brittany), Montfort-sur-Meu and St-Gonlay (Ille-et-Vilaine, Brittany). After reviewing the literature on horizontal spiral trace fossils, an Ediacaran–Fortunian Spirodesmos pool is identified from marginal-marine to shelf settings, while an Ordovician–Recent trend formed in the deep-marine realm. These results suggest that an onshore–offshore migration in Spirodesmos took place during Ediacaran–Fortunian to Ordovician time, similar to what happened in graphoglyptids. In addition, the age of the uppermost Brioverian beds (Ediacaran or early Cambrian) is still a pending question. Here, we report two new U–Pb detrital zircon datings from sandstone samples in St-Gonlay, giving maximum deposition ages of 551 ± 7 Ma and 540 ± 5 Ma. Although these results do not discard an Ediacaran age for the uppermost Brioverian beds, a Fortunian age is envisioned because the new dating corroborates previous dating from Brittany, Mayenne and Normandy. However, the intervals of error of the radiometric dating, and the dominance of non-penetrative trace fossils associated with matgrounds (an ecology more typical of the Ediacaran Period), do not allow definitive conclusions on the age of the uppermost Brioverian beds.

Keywords

Ediacaran–FortunianichnologyplanispiralSpirodesmosU–Pb dating

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 159 , Special Issue 7: THEMATIC ISSUE: The Ediacaran System and the Ediacaran-Cambrian Transition , July 2022 , pp. 1284 - 1294
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

1. Introduction

The potential of ichnology to decipher macro-evolutionary trends in animal behaviour has a long history. Compilation of ichnological data was a major part of the work of A. Seilacher and P. Crimes. Seilacher (Reference Seilacher1974, Reference Seilacher, Crimes and Harper1977, Reference Seilacher, Kitchell and Nitecki1986) focused on the variety of graphoglyptid trace fossils from the deep sea (i.e. patterned trace fossils forming nets, regular meanders and spirals), aiming to understand their environmental adaptation through time (e.g. size changes, functional optimization). Seilacher (Reference Seilacher1956) was the first to recognize the potential of trace fossils to delineate the Precambrian–Cambrian boundary; Crimes (Reference Crimes1987, Reference Crimes1992a, Reference Crimes and Donovan1994) extended this idea by reviewing worldwide literature, and developed an ichnostratigraphic scheme that helped to define the Cambrian GSSP (Narbonne et al. Reference Narbonne, Myrow, Landing and Anderson1987; Brasier et al. Reference Brasier, Cowie and Taylor1994). In Crimes’ comprehensive work, horizontal spiral trace fossils (as defined in this contribution) were consistently absent from the Ediacaran and the Cambrian systems (Crimes, Reference Crimes1987, Reference Crimes1992a, b, Reference Crimes and Donovan1994), only appearing in the Ordovician System in the deep-marine realm (Crimes et al. Reference Crimes, Marcos and Perez-Estaun1974, Reference Crimes, Garcia Hidalgo and Poire1992). Crimes suspected that most deep-marine graphoglyptids originated in shallow-marine environments during the Cambrian Period (Crimes, Reference Crimes1987; Crimes & Anderson, Reference Crimes and Anderson1985; Crimes & Fedonkin, Reference Crimes and Fedonkin1994), but the absence of regular planispiral trace fossils in the Cambrian System was then problematic (Crimes et al. Reference Crimes, Garcia Hidalgo and Poire1992).

The Ediacaran–Cambrian transition (c. 539 Ma) was a time of striking changes in Earth ecosystems. Ediacaran seafloors were dominated by microbially stabilized surfaces on which epifaunal and very shallow infaunal grazers thrived (Seilacher & Pflüger, Reference Seilacher, Pflüger, Krumbein, Paterson and Stal1994; Gehling, Reference Gehling1999). Macroscopic animals of the earliest Cambrian Period started to disrupt the sediment at depth, affecting the substrate ventilation (e.g. Mángano & Buatois, Reference Mángano and Buatois2014; Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Mángano, Buatois, Narbonne and Laing2018a), trophic webs (e.g. Bottjer et al. Reference Bottjer, Hagadorn and Dornbos2000; Meysman et al. Reference Meysman, Middelburg and Heip2006) and geochemical cycles (e.g. Logan et al. Reference Logan, Hayes, Hieshima and Summons1995; Canfield & Farquhar, Reference Canfield and Farquhar2009; Boyle et al. Reference Boyle, Dahl, Bjerrum and Canfield2018). In northwestern France, the Brioverian series of central Brittany is a thick siliciclastic succession that was deposited during the Cadomian cycle (c. 750–540 Ma). Despite the report of fossils since the 19th century, the age of its uppermost beds (Ediacaran or early Cambrian) is a long-standing conundrum. Recently, new investigations unravelled a unique assemblage of trace and body fossils in the vicinity of Rennes (Néraudeau et al. Reference Néraudeau, Gougeon, Dabard and Poujol2016, Reference Néraudeau, Dabard, El Albani, Gougeon, Mazurier, Pierson-Wickmann, Poujol, Saint Martin and Saint Martin2019; Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b, Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Poujol and Loi2019). Trace fossils are dominantly simple, horizontal and associated with microbially stabilized surfaces; of these, planispirals represent a surprising discovery.

The aim of this study is threefold: (1) to describe a new assemblage of planispiral trace fossils from the Brioverian series of northwestern France; (2) to place this assemblage within a macro-evolutionary framework and to interpret its significance; and (3) to provide new radiometric dating in order to discuss the age of the uppermost Brioverian deposits.

2. General background

2.a. Geological setting and previous work

The Brioverian series (c. 660–540 Ma; Le Corre et al. Reference Le Corre, Auvray, Ballèvre and Robardet1991; Guerrot et al. Reference Guerrot, Peucat and Dupret1989, Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992) is the informally named thick sedimentary succession deposited during the Cadomian cycle (c. 750–540 Ma) in northwestern France (Fig. 1a, b; Chantraine et al. Reference Chantraine, Egal, Thiéblemont, Le Goff, Guerrot, Ballèvre and Guennoc2001; Ballèvre et al. Reference Ballèvre, Bosse, Dabard, Ducassou, Fourcade, Paquette, Peucat and Pitra2013). In the Rennes area (Fig. 1b), only the uppermost Brioverian beds are exposed, with a thickness evaluated at c. 1300 m (Trautmann et al. Reference Trautmann, Paris and Carn1999). The Brioverian series of Brittany lies unconformably on an Icartian basement (c. 2200–1800 Ma) and is unconformably overlain either by the Ordovician Red Bed Series (‘Séries Rouges Initiales’) or by the Ordovician Armorican Sandstone (‘Grès Armoricain’; Cogné, Reference Cogné1959; D’Lemos et al. Reference D’Lemos, Strachan, Topley, D’Lemos, Strachan and Topley1990; Le Corre et al. Reference Le Corre, Auvray, Ballèvre and Robardet1991). The terrigenous siliciclastic sediments of the Brioverian series resulted from the erosion of the Cadomian belt in northern Brittany and accumulated in a marginal, intra-plate basin in central Brittany (Denis, Reference Denis1988; Dissler et al. Reference Dissler, Doré, Dupret, Gresselin and Le Gall1988; Rabu et al. Reference Rabu, Chantraine, Chauvel, Denis, Balé, Bardy, D’Lemos, Strachan and Topley1990; Dabard et al. Reference Dabard, Loi and Peucat1996). Locally, carbonaceous cherts (‘phtanites’), limestones and igneous intrusions have also been reported (Denis & Dabard, Reference Denis and Dabard1988; Dabard, Reference Dabard1990, Reference Dabard2000; Chantraine et al. Reference Chantraine, Egal, Thiéblemont, Le Goff, Guerrot, Ballèvre and Guennoc2001). On a regional scale, the correlation of the Brioverian sedimentary deposits is hindered by the discontinuous cropping out, facies changes, the absence of biostratigraphic markers and the metamorphic overprint from the Devonian–Carboniferous Variscan orogeny (Denis & Dabard, Reference Denis and Dabard1988; D’Lemos et al. Reference D’Lemos, Strachan, Topley, D’Lemos, Strachan and Topley1990; Le Corre et al. Reference Le Corre, Auvray, Ballèvre and Robardet1991; Ballèvre et al. Reference Ballèvre, Bosse, Dabard, Ducassou, Fourcade, Paquette, Peucat and Pitra2013). While traditionally interpreted as deeper-marine turbiditic deposits (Dangeard et al. Reference Dangeard, Doré and Juignet1961; Denis, Reference Denis1988; Trautmann et al. Reference Trautmann, Paris and Carn1999), the Brioverian sedimentary beds also show evidence of shallow-marine storm-influenced (Dabard & Loi, Reference Dabard and Loi1998; Dabard & Simon, Reference Dabard and Simon2011) and marginal-marine tidally influenced conditions (Graindor, Reference Graindor1957; Dabard, Reference Dabard1990, Reference Dabard2000; Néraudeau et al. Reference Néraudeau, Dabard, El Albani, Gougeon, Mazurier, Pierson-Wickmann, Poujol, Saint Martin and Saint Martin2019).

Fig. 1.

Geological map of northwestern France, and new U–Pb dating. (a) Location of the Brioverian deposits in northwestern France. (b) Close-up showing the Brioverian deposits, and the three localities with planispiral trace fossils. NASZ – North Armorican Shear Zone; SASZ – South Armorican Shear Zone. (c) Kernel density estimation diagrams for La Lammerais and Le Lorinou samples.

Fossils recovered from the Brioverian series are algal or bacterial organic-walled microfossils in cherts and limestones (Cayeux, Reference Cayeux1894; Deflandre, Reference Deflandre1955; Chauvel & Schopf, Reference Chauvel and Schopf1978; Chauvel & Mansuy, Reference Chauvel and Mansuy1981; Mansuy & Vidal, Reference Mansuy and Vidal1983), macroscopic body fossils of unknown origin (Néraudeau et al. Reference Néraudeau, Dabard, El Albani, Gougeon, Mazurier, Pierson-Wickmann, Poujol, Saint Martin and Saint Martin2019) and trace fossils. Ichnofossils were first discovered in the late 19th century (Lebesconte, Reference Lebesconte1886), but did not draw the attention of the scientific community for a long time. Recently, new investigations in the vicinity of Rennes (Fig. 1b) have unravelled an assemblage dominated by simple horizontal grazing trails (Circulichnis, Gordia, Helminthoidichnites, Helminthopsis), passively filled horizontal burrows (Palaeophycus) and horizontal spiral trace fossils (Spirodesmos; Néraudeau et al. Reference Néraudeau, Gougeon, Dabard and Poujol2016; Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b, Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Poujol and Loi2019). In addition, microbially textured surfaces (MISS of Noffke et al. Reference Noffke, Gerdes, Klenke and Krumbein2001) are common both in fossiliferous and azoic intervals (Lebesconte, Reference Lebesconte1886; Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b).

The age of the uppermost Brioverian sedimentary beds in Brittany, Normandy and Mayenne has been highly debated (Fig. 1b). In Brittany, the overlying Red Bed Series gave an age of 472 ± 5 Ma (Rb–Sr dating from volcanic rocks; Auvray et al. Reference Auvray, Mace, Vidal and Van der Voo1980), 465 ± 1 Ma (U–Pb dating from volcanic rocks; Bonjour et al. Reference Bonjour, Peucat, Chauvel, Paris and Cornichet1988; Bonjour & Odin, Reference Bonjour and Odin1989) and 486 ± 28 Ma (Pb–Pb dating from volcanic rocks; Guerrot et al. Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992), placing these beds within the Ordovician Period (contra McMahon et al. Reference McMahon, Davies and Went2017; Went, Reference Went2017). In the westernmost part of Brittany (Crozon area; Fig. 1b), Guerrot et al. (Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992) obtained an age of 543 ± 18 Ma (Pb–Pb dating) for a tuff intercalated within Brioverian beds, whereas a maximum deposition age of 546 ± 2 Ma (U–Pb dating) has been obtained by Ballouard et al. (Reference Ballouard, Poujol and Zeh2018) from detrital zircon grains extracted from a sandstone (see also Dabard et al. Reference Dabard, Loi, Pavanetto, Meloni, Hauser, Matteini and Funedda2021). In the vicinity of Rennes (Fig. 1b), detrital zircon grains gave a maximum deposition age of c. 550 Ma (U–Pb dating from sandstone and siltstone; Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b); however, five zircon grains dated at 532.1 ± 3.9 Ma were problematic to interpret (Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b). In Normandy, Brioverian sediments were deposited in a different palaeogeographic domain than in central Brittany, as they are separated by the North Armorican Shear Zone (Fig. 1b; Chantraine et al. Reference Chantraine, Chauvel, Dupret, Gatinot, Icart, Le Corre, Rabu, Sauvan and Villey1982; Guerrot et al. Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992). In this domain, granitoid intrusions within Brioverian sediments have been dated at 540 ± 10 Ma (U–Pb dating on monazite; Pasteels & Doré, Reference Pasteels, Doré and Odin1982). In Mayenne, where the Brioverian series is in continuity with its equivalent of central Brittany (Fig. 1b), radiometric dating on zircon grains yielded an age of 540 ± 17 Ma (tuff and detrital horizons; Guerrot et al. Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992).

2.b. Outcrops under study and depositional environments

The outcrop at La Lammerais village nearby St-Gonlay (Fig. 1b) yields slates with trace fossils, stacked in a pile c. 2 m high and 50 m long (outcrops for this contribution are located on private properties, which do not allow details on their exact locations). These slates were extracted from a pit that was exploited by locals to build houses and pathways decades ago; unfortunately, the pit is now covered with vegetation and therefore impossible to sample in situ. Slates are made of siltstone and rare very-fine- to fine-grained sandstone. One loose sandstone sample was collected for U–Pb dating, coming from a nearby agricultural field. At La Lammerais outcrop, sedimentary structures are parallel-lamination organized in siltstone–sandstone bundles (i.e. rhythmite-like; Néraudeau et al. Reference Néraudeau, Dabard, El Albani, Gougeon, Mazurier, Pierson-Wickmann, Poujol, Saint Martin and Saint Martin2019, fig. 3), current-ripples (Néraudeau et al. Reference Néraudeau, Dabard, El Albani, Gougeon, Mazurier, Pierson-Wickmann, Poujol, Saint Martin and Saint Martin2019, fig. 2), tool-marks/spindle-shaped flute-marks, possible load-casts, and pustular and wrinkled microbially textured surfaces (Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b, figs 4, 7).

Nearby St-Gonlay, another outcrop has been investigated at Le Lorinou locality, situated 1.4 km to the east of La Lammerais. This outcrop is very poor in trace fossils (no spiral trace fossils were found there), but beds are preserved in situ and a sandstone sample was collected for U–Pb zircon dating.

The outcrop of Le Bois-du-Buisson is located at the entrance of a small forest in Montfort-sur-Meu (Fig. 1b). It consists of a small quarry of c. 3 m high and 10 m long, with vegetation extensively covering the sedimentary beds. However, a few siltstone beds are accessible and reveal fresh surfaces with trace fossils. Sedimentary structures are parallel-lamination organized in siltstone–sandstone bundles (i.e. rhythmite-like, similar to what is found at La Lammerais), and pustular and wrinkled microbially stabilized surfaces.

In addition, Montfort-sur-Meu is the host of Les Grippeaux quarry, where P. Lebesconte recovered fossils for the first time in the late 19th century (Lebesconte, Reference Lebesconte1886; Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b). Nowadays, the quarry is secured by a fence preventing any access. Many samples were collected in the late 19th and early 20th century by P. Lebesconte, F. Kerforne and other geologists; they are housed at the Geological Institute of the University of Rennes 1 and at the Museum of Natural History of Nantes, and are available for study. Sedimentary structures are pustular microbially stabilized surfaces.

The outcrop in Crozon (Fig. 1b) is located on the coastal cliff at La Plage-du-Goulien. This outcrop has not been visited by the authors, and the only trace fossil discovered was reported by E. Hanson in 2014 (pers. comm.). The sedimentology of the Brioverian series from the Bay of Douarnenez and the Cove of Dinan (both in the vicinity of Crozon) has been studied in two doctoral theses (J.R. Darboux, unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, University of Brest, 1973; Denis, Reference Denis1988). The succession displays parallel-laminated/bedded sandstone and siltstone with flute-casts, load-casts, tool-marks, rip-up clasts, carbonate concretions, normal and reverse grading, convolute bedding, flame structures, and current, wave and climbing ripples. Both authors interpreted the succession as deposited by turbidites, located either below the limit of the storm wave-base action, or deeper in an abyssal plain. However, Denis (Reference Denis1988) noted the presence of oscillatory flow structures, lenticular bedding (Facies 3 of Denis, Reference Denis1988) and mud-drapes, which are more typical of shallower environments.

In Montfort-sur-Meu and St-Gonlay, the dominance of siltstone intercalated with laminated very-fine-grained sandstone, and the record of rhythmite-like bundles and current ripples, suggest a marginal-marine, tidally influenced depositional environment (cf. Nio & Yang, Reference Nio, Yang, Smith, Reinson, Zaitlin and Rahmani1991; Tessier et al. Reference Tessier, Archer, Lanier, Feldman, Flemming and Bartholomä1995; Dalrymple, Reference Dalrymple, James and Dalrymple2010). This conclusion is strengthened by observations in Chanteloup and Nouvoitou (both in the vicinity of Rennes), where a sandstone facies displays mudstone drapes within fine-grained sandstone samples (i.e. flaser lamination; see online Supplementary Fig. S1); these areas could represent the seaward, sandier part of the intertidal system. Sedimentary structures made by oscillatory flows (e.g. wave ripples, hummocky cross-stratification) have not been observed in the area so far. These conclusions are preliminary and await further support, notably from Brioverian outcrops revealing bedding architecture, and from more sampling of sedimentary structures.

3. Materials and methods

3.a. Terminology of planispiral trace fossils

This contribution focuses only on spirals formed on a horizontal plane (i.e. planispirals). Three-dimensional, vertically (e.g. Gyrolithes, Lapispira) or horizontally (e.g. Avetoichnus, Helicodromites, Helicolithus) oriented spirals are not comparable with the Brioverian material. In order to describe spiral morphologies, the following terms will be used: a regular spiral maintains a constant distance between whorls (Fig. 2b, c); an irregular spiral has a variable distance between whorls (Fig. 2a, d); a one-way spiral is a simple spiral with no central turnaround (Fig. 2a, b, d; Seilacher, Reference Seilacher, Crimes and Harper1977; Crimes & McCall, Reference Crimes and McCall1995); a two-way spiral is a double spiral with a central turnaround (Fig. 2c; Seilacher, Reference Seilacher, Crimes and Harper1977; Crimes & McCall, Reference Crimes and McCall1995); and a bounded spiral is an irregular, one-way spiral that decreases the distance between whorls outward (Fig. 2d).

Fig. 2.

Terminology of planispirals: (a) an irregular one-way spiral; (b) a regular one-way spiral; (c) a regular two-way spiral; and (d) a bounded spiral. See text for further explanations.

3.b. U–Pb dating method

A classic mineral separation procedure has been applied to concentrate zircon grains for U–Pb dating. Rocks were crushed and only the powder fraction with a diameter < 250 µm was kept. Heavy minerals were successively concentrated by Wilfley table, heavy liquids and an isodynamic Frantz separator. Zircon grains were then handpicked under a binocular microscope to produce the most representative sampling, with the aim of avoiding any intentional bias (see Malusà et al. Reference Malusà, Carter, Limoncelli, Villa and Garzanti2013). Selected grains were then embedded in epoxy mounts, grounded and polished. Zircon grains were imaged by cathodoluminescence (CL) using a Reliotron CL system equipped with a digital colour camera available at the GeOHeLiS analytical platform (University of Rennes 1).

U–Pb geochronology was conducted by in situ laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) at the GeOHeLiS analytical platform using an ESI NWR193UC Excimer laser coupled to a quadripole Agilent 7700× ICP-MS. Instrumental conditions are reported in online Supplementary Table S1, while the analytical protocol can be found in Manzotti et al. (Reference Manzotti, Poujol and Ballèvre2015). Kernel density diagrams for analyses that are 100 ± 10% concordant were generated using IsoplotR (Vermeesch, Reference Vermeesch2018). When dealing with detrital zircon geochronology, a minimum of three different ages obtained on three different zircon grains overlapping in age at 2σ has been demonstrated to produce a statistically robust maximum deposition age (Dickinson & Gehrels, Reference Dickinson and Gehrels2009). The second important criteria in order to determine this maximum deposition age is the degree of concordance of the individual analysis used to calculate this age. Most authors consider all analyses that are 90% concordant or more, while others only consider analyses that are at least 95% concordant. In this study, because of the complexity of one of the datasets (La Lammerais), only analyses that were at least 95% concordant were considered to calculate the maximum deposition age, in order to avoid using apparent ages that could be younger than the true age due to a non-negligible Pb loss.

3.c. Museum repository

From La Lammerais and Le Bois-du-Buisson, samples were collected and reposited at the Geological Institute of the University of Rennes 1 (collections Gougeon and Néraudeau). Historical specimens from Les Grippeaux are reposited at the Museum of Natural History of Nantes (collections Barrois and Lebesconte) and the Geological Institute of the University of Rennes 1 (collections Kerforne, Rolland and Rouault). The trace fossil from La Plage-du-Goulien has not been collected and was only photographed in the field by E. Hanson.

4. Results

4.a. Planispiral trace fossils from the Brioverian series

The Brioverian series of central Brittany contains a rich assemblage of simple horizontal trace fossils, with Helminthoidichnites and Helminthopsis being the most common forms. Originally, Lebesconte (Reference Lebesconte1886, pl. 34, fig. 7) figured a planispiral trace fossil from Montfort-sur-Meu without further discussion. Since then, spiral trace fossils have not been reported in the Brioverian series. Here, we describe two types of planispiral trace fossils: (1) irregular, one-way spiral trace fossils; and (2) regular, one-way spiral trace fossils.

Four irregular, one-way spiral trace fossils were recovered from La Lammerais, Le Bois-du-Buisson and Les Grippeaux (Fig. 3a). Specimens are 0.3–1 mm wide, have 1¼–1¾ whorls, and are preserved in positive and negative reliefs (preservation as epirelief or hyporelief is unknown because slates with trace fossils are not preserved in situ). One specimen (Fig. 3a) has a different infill than the host rock and a lining; this is potentially a burrow. Rarely, they are associated with Helminthoidichnites, small-scale branching trace fossils (cf. Pilichnus), and pits of uncertain affinity. They are commonly found on pustular microbially textured surfaces.

Fig. 3.

Spirodesmos isp. and Spirodesmos archimedeus from the uppermost Brioverian beds of Brittany. (a) Spirodesmos isp. (irregular one-way spiral trace fossil) from Le Bois-du-Buisson (IGR 2852). (b, c) Spirodesmos archimedeus (regular one-way spiral trace fossils) from (b) Les Grippeaux (IGR 112628) and (c) La Plage-du-Goulien. Scale bars are 1 cm across.

Two regular, one-way spiral trace fossils were recovered from La Plage-du-Goulien and Les Grippeaux (Fig. 3b, c). Specimens are 1–3 mm wide, have 2¼–2½ whorls, and are preserved in positive and negative reliefs. The distance between whorls remains constant until the last whorl, where the course detaches from the spiral system and progressively disappears. They are associated with Helminthopsis and pits of uncertain affinity. The surfaces they are found on are not textured.

Spirodesmos, Spirophycus and Spirorhaphe are the most common planispirals from the trace fossil record: however, their morphological boundaries are unclear. Spirodesmos is a regular to irregular, one-way spiral trace fossil (Geinitz, Reference Geinitz, Geinitz and Liebe1867; Andrée, Reference Andrée1920; Huckriede, Reference Huckriede1952; Xia et al. Reference Xia, Lu, Xiong, He and Hu1987). For Seilacher (Reference Seilacher, Crimes and Harper1977), Spirodesmos has a wide spacing between whorls; although this is clearly so in the type ichnospecies S. interruptus Andrée, Reference Andrée1920, S. archimedeus Huckriede, Reference Huckriede1952 has a narrower spacing between whorls. This issue becomes critical with Spirodesmos kaihuaensis Xia, He & Hu, Reference Xia, Lu, Xiong, He and Hu1987 and S. spiralis (Geinitz, Reference Geinitz, Geinitz and Liebe1867), both having irregular courses with variable distances between whorls. Spirophycus is a regular to irregular, one-way spiral trace fossil that commonly grades into meanders (Heer, Reference Heer1876; Häntzschel, Reference Häntzschel1975). Seilacher (Reference Seilacher, Crimes and Harper1977) argued that Spirophycus has wide strings with a tubercular surface and backfilled laminae (see also Książkiewicz, Reference Książkiewicz1977; but see Uchman, Reference Uchman1998). The spiral portion of Spirophycus (e.g. Heer, Reference Heer1876, pl. 66, fig. b; Sacco, Reference Sacco1888, pl. 2, fig. 14), with regular whorls distinctly spaced from each other, can however be very similar to Spirodesmos archimedeus. Spirorhaphe is a regular to irregular spiral trace fossil with either a one-way (S. azteca, S. graeca) or two-way (S. involuta) course (Seilacher, Reference Seilacher, Crimes and Harper1977; Crimes & McCall, Reference Crimes and McCall1995). The inclusion of one-way spirals in Spirorhaphe is overlapping with Spirodesmos and Spirophycus morphologies, which is problematic.

Despite these taxonomical issues (see also Crimes & Crossley, Reference Crimes and Crossley1991; Uchman, Reference Uchman1998; Minter & Braddy, Reference Minter and Braddy2009), planispirals from the Brioverian series are comparable to Spirodesmos. Brioverian irregular, one-way spiral trace fossils are reminiscent of Spirodesmos spiralis (cf. Geinitz, Reference Geinitz, Geinitz and Liebe1867; Stepanek & Geyer, Reference Stepanek and Geyer1989). However, because of its irregular course and the poor extent of its whorls, Spirodesmos spiralis needs to be re-evaluated taxonomically; in this study, Brioverian forms are referred to Spirodesmos isp. Conversely, Brioverian regular, one-way spiral trace fossils belong to Spirodesmos archimedeus (cf. Huckriede, Reference Huckriede1952; Zapletal & Pek, Reference Zapletal and Pek1971; Horn, Reference Horn1989). Spirodesmos ranges from the Ediacaran–Cambrian (this study) to the Holocene periods (e.g. Kitchell et al. Reference Kitchell, Kitchell, Johnson and Hunkins1978; Smith et al. Reference Smith, Holland and Ruhl2005).

4.b. U–Pb dating

For the sandstone sample from La Lammerais, 118 zircon grains were analysed, among which 107 analyses have a concordance of 100 ± 10%. Their U (49–1195 ppm) and Pb (6–493 ppm) contents, as well as their Th/U ratios (0.02–1), are highly variable (see online Supplementary Table S2). A first group of 12 analyses yields apparent ages between 2.8 and 1.06 Ga. The remaining analyses form two major peaks at 600 and 550 Ma, with minor peaks around 850 and 650 Ma (Fig. 1c). The 10 youngest analyses that are more than 95% concordant yield a weighted average 206Pb/238U date of 540 ± 5 Ma (mean square weighted deviation (MSWD), 1.2) that we consider as the maximum deposition age for this sandstone.

For the sandstone sample from Le Lorinou, 89 grains were analysed, out of which 68 are 100 ± 10% concordant (online Supplementary Table S2). They are characterized by variable U and Pb contents (21–726 ppm and 2–242 ppm, respectively), with Th/U ratios between 0.05 and 1.4. A first group of 22 zircon grains yields Neoarchean (2.9 Ga) to Palaeoproterozoic (1.8 Ga) ages, followed by a gap until the end of the Mesoproterozoic. The remaining grains present apparent ages around 1000, 900, 800 and 680 Ma, with a major peak around 600 Ma (Fig. 1c). The youngest three grains provide a weighted 206Pb/238U date of 551 ± 7 Ma (MSWD, 0.009) that we consider as the maximum deposition age for this sandstone.

5. Discussion

5.a. Radiometric age of the uppermost Brioverian beds with trace fossils

At Le Lorinou (St-Gonlay), zircon grains from a sandstone bed associated with trace fossils yielded a maximum deposition age of 551 ± 7 Ma, whereas zircon grains from a loose sandstone sample at La Lammerais (St-Gonlay) gave a maximum deposition age of 540 ± 5 Ma (this study). In Crozon, the youngest U–Pb dating on zircon grains from Brioverian tuff gave an age of 543 ± 18 Ma (Guerrot et al. Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992), whereas another U–Pb dating on zircon grains from a sandstone gave a maximum deposition age of 546 ± 2 Ma (Ballouard et al. Reference Ballouard, Poujol and Zeh2018). In Montfort-sur-Meu, no radiometric dating has been done so far.

The radiometric age for the base of the Cambrian is given by U–Pb dating on zircon grains from tuff in southern Oman, dated at 541.0 ± 0.13 Ma (Bowring et al. Reference Bowring, Grotzinger, Condon, Ramezani, Newall and Allen2007). However, recent U–Pb dating on zircon grains from tuff in southern Namibia constrained the age of the basal Cambrian within a 538.6–538.8 Ma interval (Linnemann et al. Reference Linnemann, Ovtcharova, Schaltegger, Gärtner, Hautmann, Geyer, Vickers-Rich, Rich, Plessen, Hofmann, Zieger, Krause, Kriesfeld and Smith2019). If we consider a radiometric age of c. 539 Ma for the base of the Cambrian System, the Brioverian beds of Crozon could either be Ediacaran (c. 635–539 Ma) in age or younger, while the Brioverian of St-Gonlay could be Ediacaran but is suspected to be Fortunian (c. 539–529 Ma) in age or younger. Indeed, the new results of this study agree with earlier dating elsewhere (maximum deposition age of c. 550 Ma in Néant-sur-Yvel, Brittany, with five zircons grains dated at 532.1 ± 3.9 Ma; 540 ± 10 Ma in Normandy; and 540 ± 17 Ma in Mayenne; Pasteels & Doré, Reference Pasteels, Doré and Odin1982; Guerrot et al. Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992; Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b) and suggest an early Cambrian age for the uppermost Brioverian beds, from a radiometric standpoint (see also Guerrot et al. Reference Guerrot, Peucat and Dupret1989, Reference Guerrot, Calvez, Bonjour, Chantaine, Chauvel, Dupret and Rabu1992; Dabard et al. Reference Dabard, Loi, Pavanetto, Meloni, Hauser, Matteini and Funedda2021). In terms of trace fossil biostratigraphy, the matground ecology of the Brioverian series is more typical of late Ediacaran assemblages (Gougeon et al. Reference Gougeon, Néraudeau, Dabard, Pierson-Wickmann, Polette, Poujol and Saint-Martin2018b). Because of the differences provided by these two proxies (radiometric dating and ichnostratigraphy), definitive conclusions on the age of the uppermost Brioverian beds with trace fossils are not possible at this point.

5.b. Critical review on Ediacaran and Cambrian planispiral trace fossils

Several trace fossils inaccurately described or suggested to be planispirals, have been reported from the Ediacaran and the Cambrian systems. Fedonkin (Reference Fedonkin, Sokolov and Ivanovskiy1985, Reference Fedonkin, Sokolov and Iwanoski1990) erected Planispiralichnus Fedonkin, Reference Fedonkin, Sokolov and Ivanovskiy1985 and Protospiralichnus Fedonkin, Reference Fedonkin, Sokolov and Ivanovskiy1985 from the Fortunian Kessyuse Formation of northern Russia. Planispiralichnus is made of dense, overlapping loops (Fedonkin, Reference Fedonkin, Sokolov and Iwanoski1990; Marusin & Kuper, Reference Marusin and Kuper2020), whereas Protospiralichnus starts as a bounded spiral until it scribbles abundantly (Fedonkin, Reference Fedonkin, Sokolov and Iwanoski1990); because of their scribbling patterns, neither of them represent spirals (Buatois et al. Reference Buatois, Wisshak, Wilson and Mángano2017). Jenkins (Reference Jenkins1995, pl. 2, fig. E) reported cf. Protospiralichnus from the Ediacaran Rawnsley Quartzite of southern Australia; the development of a full circle and/or a loop affiliates this trace fossil to Circulichnis or Gordia instead (see also Buatois & Mángano, Reference Buatois, Mángano, Mángano and Buatois2016, fig. 2.8e). Multilaqueichnus Yang & Yin (in Yang et al. Reference Yang, Yin and He1982) from the Cambrian Stage 3 Jiulaodong Formation of central China has overlapping loops (Yang et al. Reference Yang, Yin and He1982, pl. 2, fig. 1); these trace fossils distinctly scribble and are not spirals either (contra Mángano & Buatois, Reference Mángano, Buatois, Mángano and Buatois2016, Reference Mángano and Buatois2020). Finally, a trace fossil from the Fortunian part of the Chapel Island Formation of eastern Canada was considered a spiral by Crimes & Fedonkin (Reference Crimes and Fedonkin1994, fig. 2i). This trace fossil has been observed in the field by one of the authors (R.G.) and represents the scribbling burrow of a large infaunal deposit-feeder.

In addition, non-ichnological structures from the Ediacaran and the Cambrian have been mistaken for planispiral trace fossils. An important debate arose with the report of Precambrian spiral fossils from the Lower Vindhyan Limestone of northeastern India (Beer, Reference Beer1919) and from the Belt Series of northwestern USA (Walcott, Reference Walcott1899). Both authors suggested a trace fossil origin, an opinion followed by Seilacher (Reference Seilacher1956). However, Cloud (Reference Cloud and Drake1968) suspected an algal origin, and re-evaluation of both materials confirmed that view (Walter et al. Reference Walter, Oehler and Oehler1976; Runnegar, Reference Runnegar1991). Arenicolites spiralis Billings, Reference Billings1872 and Helminthoidichnites sangshuanensis Du (in Du et al. Reference Du, Tian and Li1986; Yan & Liu, Reference Yan and Liu1998) are certainly of similar algal affinity (Hofmann, Reference Hofmann1971; Walter et al. Reference Walter, Du and Horodyski1990; Shaowu, Reference Shaowu1998). Furthermore, Aceñolaza (Reference Aceñolaza2005) reported circular structures from the Cambrian Mesón Group of northwestern Argentina, and erected the new ichnospecies Spirodesmos milanai; Minter et al. (Reference Minter, Buatois, Lucas, Braddy and Smith2006) argued these structures were formed by shrinkage cracks in matgrounds instead (cf. Pflüger, Reference Pflüger1999; Buatois et al. Reference Buatois, Netto, Mángano and Carmona2013; Sedorko et al. Reference Sedorko, Netto and Horodyski2019).

Finally, rare horizontal spiral trace fossils have been reported from the Ediacaran and the Cambrian systems. Planispiralichnus rarus Menasova, Reference Menasova2003 is a one-way spiral trace fossil discovered in the Fortunian Khmelnitsky Formation of western Ukraine. The holotype is made of three whorls with angular intervals along the course; the first two whorls are continuous, while the last one is made of unconnected segments (Ivantsov et al. Reference Ivantsov, Gritsenko, Paliy, Velikanov, Konstantinenko, Menasova, Fedonkin, Zakrevskaya and Serezhnikova2015, pl. 7, fig. 4a, b). This specimen possesses the key features of a spiral trace fossil and should not be affiliated to Planispiralichnus as described by Fedonkin (Reference Fedonkin, Sokolov and Iwanoski1990). Jensen & Palacios (Reference Jensen and Palacios2016, fig. 4b) reported one-way spiral trace fossils from the Ediacaran–Fortunian Cíjara Formation of central Spain. The photographed specimen is a continuous to discontinuous trail, with 2½ whorls and an irregular course. Carbone & Narbonne (Reference Carbone and Narbonne2014, fig. 4.5) also figured an irregular one-way spiral with 1¾ whorls and a continuous course from the Fortunian part of the Ingta Formation of northwestern Canada. Finally, Runnegar (Reference Runnegar and Schopf1992, fig. 3.9) figured an irregular two-way spiral transitional with a meandering trace fossil from the Ediacaran Rawnsley Quartzite of southern Australia. Jensen (Reference Jensen2003) considered this trace fossil to represent Helminthorhaphe grading into Spirorhaphe.

5.c. Macro-evolutionary profile and onshore–offshore migration

Our detailed literature review (Section 5.b above and online Supplementary Material) unravelled the environmental and temporal distribution of Spirodesmos (Fig. 4). The Ediacaran System and the Fortunian Stage are then marked by the appearance of a Spirodesmos pool, composed of irregular and regular forms colonizing marginal-marine to shelf environments. The Brioverian assemblage represents a key component of that pool, holding the oldest regular one-way planispirals (Spirodesmos archimedeus) both in marginal-marine and open-shelf settings (in Montfort-sur-Meu and Crozon, respectively). During the Ediacaran and the Cambrian periods, deposit-feeding was the dominant feeding strategy (MacNaughton & Narbonne, Reference MacNaughton and Narbonne1999; Carbone & Narbonne, Reference Carbone and Narbonne2014), and early Spirodesmos were arguably made by epifaunal detritus-feeders and shallow-infaunal deposit-feeders. Indeed, ‘surplus stretches’ as observed in Spirorhaphe and inferring open-burrow systems (Seilacher, Reference Seilacher and Hediger1967a, b, Reference Seilacher, Crimes and Harper1977) have not been observed in Ediacaran–Fortunian material. Moreover, Ediacaran–Fortunian Spirodesmos are often preserved on microbially stabilized surfaces, which could represent the nutritive resource of their tracemaker (Carbone & Narbonne, Reference Carbone and Narbonne2014). Possible producers are enteropneusts and nematodes, both suspected to first appear during the Cambrian Period or before (Knoll & Carroll, Reference Knoll and Carroll1999; Budd & Jensen, Reference Budd and Jensen2000; Maletz, Reference Maletz2014; Cunningham et al. Reference Cunningham, Liu, Bengtson and Donoghue2017). Enteropneusts produce regular horizontal spirals on the modern deep-sea floor on areas of greater nutritional values, using tactile sensory systems in their head (Lemche et al. Reference Lemche, Hansen, Madsen, Tendal and Wolff1976; Smith et al. Reference Smith, Holland and Ruhl2005; Jones et al. Reference Jones, Alt, Priede, Reid, Wigham, Billett, Gebruk, Rogacheva and Gooday2013). Nematodes spiral by contracting all the muscles of one side of their body (Wharton, Reference Wharton, Gaugler and Bilgrami2004). However, spiralling in nematodes has been suggested for other purposes than feeding (e.g. responses to increasing temperature, osmotic stress, desiccation and for reproduction; Huettel, Reference Huettel, Gaugler and Bilgrami2004; Wharton, Reference Wharton, Gaugler and Bilgrami2004).

Fig. 4.

Macro-evolutionary profile of Spirodesmos comparable to the Brioverian material, with emphasis on the Ediacaran and the Cambrian systems (coloured diagrams). Positions suggested for the Brioverian material are emphasized by diagrams with dashed lines. Brioverian Spirodesmos belonged to an Ediacaran–Fortunian, marginal-marine to shelf pool. A Spirodesmos onshore–offshore migration is suggested, during Ediacaran–Fortunian to Ordovician time. See text for further explanations.

Although deep-marine deposits with trace fossils have been reported both from the Ediacaran (e.g. Narbonne & Hofmann, Reference Narbonne and Hofmann1987; Liu et al. Reference Liu, McIlroy and Brasier2010) and the Cambrian (e.g. Hofmann et al. Reference Hofmann, Cecile and Lane1994; Seilacher et al. Reference Seilacher, Buatois and Mángano2005) systems, planispirals are consistently absent. However, planispirals are common through the rest of the Phanerozoic Eonothem in the deep-sea, and Spirodesmos forms a conspicuous Ordovician–Recent deep-marine trend (Fig. 4; online Supplementary Material). Deep-marine seafloors are characterized by an absence of light, high hydrostatic pressure, oxygen and temperature fluctuations, and low nutrient content (Sanders & Hessler, Reference Sanders and Hessler1969; Gage & Tyler, Reference Gage and Tyler1991, pp. 9–29; Rex & Etter, Reference Rex and Etter2010, pp. 1–49). These stressful conditions play an important role on animal fitness and their physiology (e.g. Childress & Thuesen, Reference Childress, Thuesen, Rowe and Pariente1992; Yancey et al. Reference Yancey, Rhea, Kemp and Bailey2004; van der Grient & Rogers, Reference Van der Grient, Rogers and Curry2015). However, with the increased competition for space and food on early Cambrian shelves (Orr, Reference Orr2001), planispiral tracemakers may have adapted their metabolisms to the deep-sea. An onshore–offshore migration in Spirodesmos is then suggested during Ediacaran–Fortunian to Ordovician time, similarly to the migration observed in graphoglyptids (Crimes & Anderson, Reference Crimes and Anderson1985; Crimes et al. Reference Crimes, Garcia Hidalgo and Poire1992; Crimes & Fedonkin, Reference Crimes and Fedonkin1994; Orr, Reference Orr2001; Uchman, Reference Uchman2003). The existence of an onshore–offshore migration is also reinforced by the presence of an important gap (c. 230 Ma) between the Ediacaran–Fortunian Spirodesmos pool and the next shallow-marine Spirodesmos report from the Permian Vryheid Formation of eastern South Africa (Mason et al. Reference Mason, Stanistreet and Tavener-Smith1983; Fig. 4).

6. Conclusion

The age of the uppermost Brioverian deposits of central Brittany, northwestern France, is a long-standing question. Here, two U–Pb detrital zircon grain datings on sandstone samples collected in St-Gonlay gave maximum depositional ages of 551 ± 7 Ma and 540 ± 5 Ma. Although an Ediacaran age for the uppermost Brioverian beds cannot be discarded, a Fortunian age is suggested in this study, following previous dating in Brittany, Normandy and Mayenne. However, the intervals of error of the radiometric dating and trace fossil biostratigraphy do not allow definitive conclusions.

A unique assemblage of irregular and regular, one-way planispiral trace fossils of Spirodesmos affinity has been recovered from the uppermost Brioverian beds in Crozon, Montfort-sur-Meu and St-Gonlay. Planispiral trace fossils are unusual in the Ediacaran and the Cambrian systems, and an in-depth literature review revealed that the Brioverian assemblage belonged to an Ediacaran–Fortunian, marginal-marine to shelf Spirodesmos pool. Ediacaran–Fortunian Spirodesmos were arguably made by detritus- or deposit-feeders, possibly related to enteropneusts or nematodes. However, by the Ordovician Period, Spirodesmos became conspicuous mostly in the deep-marine realm, underscoring an onshore–offshore migration similar to what has been reported in graphoglyptids.

Acknowledgements

This manuscript is a follow-up to a poster presented at the International Meeting on the Ediacaran System and the Ediacaran–Cambrian Transition (IMECT) that took place in Guadalupe, Spain in October 2019. Discussions and feedback from L. Buatois, P. Crimes, G. Mángano, V. Marusin and M. Paz are kindly acknowledged. We also thank M. Ferguson for help with language proofing; D. Gendry and S. Regnault for granting access to the museum of the Geological Institute of the University of Rennes 1 and the Museum of Natural History of Nantes, respectively; N. Hallot for the rock crushing; E. Hanson for sharing her photographs of the trace fossil from Crozon; X. Le Coz for the rock sawing and preparation of thin sections; Y. Lepagnot for mineral separations; F. Polette and L. Guillois for their assistance with U–Pb dating; and the owners of the outcrops for granting access to their private properties. The manuscript benefited from insightful reviews by A. Uchman and an anonymous reviewer, as well as editor S. Jensen. The work of A.L. has been partially supported by the ‘Fondazione Banco di Sardegna’ and by the ‘Regione Autonoma della Sardegna’ (grant numbers F74I19000960007, J81G17000110002). This publication is a contribution to the VIBRIO project of the INSU InterrVie program, and benefitted from financial support from the Observatoire des Sciences de l’Univers de Rennes (OSUR). We are grateful to have had the chance to work with our colleague M.-P. Dabard, who passed away too soon.

Declaration of interest

None.

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756820001430

References

Aceñolaza, GF (2005) Spirodesmos milanai n. isp.: a shallow-water spiral trace fossil from the Cambrian of the eastern Cordillera, northwest Argentina. Ichnos 12, 59–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrée, K (1920) Über einige fossile Problematika. I. Ein Problematikum aus dem Paläozoikum von Battenberg an der Eder und des dasselbe beherbergende Gestein. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie 1, 55–88.Google Scholar
Auvray, B, Mace, J, Vidal, P and Van der Voo, R (1980) Rb-Sr dating of the Plouézec volcanics, N Brittany: implications for the age of red beds (‘Séries rouges’) in the northern Armorican Massif. Journal of the Geological Society 137, 207–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballèvre, M, Bosse, V, Dabard, M-P, Ducassou, C, Fourcade, S, Paquette, J-L, Peucat, J-J and Pitra, P (2013) Histoire géologique du Massif Armoricain: actualité de la recherche. Bulletin de la Société Géologique et Minéralogique de Bretagne 10–11, 5–96.Google Scholar
Ballouard, C, Poujol, M and Zeh, A (2018) Multiple crust reworking in the French Armorican Variscan belt: implication for the genesis of uranium-fertile leucogranites. International Journal of Earth Sciences 107, 2317–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beer, EJ (1919) Note on a spiral impression on Lower Vindhyan Limestone. Records of the Geological Survey of India 50, 139.Google Scholar
Billings, E (1872) On some fossils from the primordial rocks of Newfoundland. Canadian Naturalist and Quarterly Journal of Science 6, 465–79.Google Scholar
Bonjour, JL and Odin, GS (1989) Recherche sur les volcanoclastites des Séries Rouges Initiales en presqu’île de Crozon: premier âge radiométrique de l’Arénig. Géologie de la France 4, 3–7.Google Scholar
Bonjour, JL, Peucat, JJ, Chauvel, JJ, Paris, F and Cornichet, J (1988) U-Pb zircon dating of the early Paleozoic (Arenigian) transgression in Western Brittany (France): a new constraint for the lower Paleozoic time-scale. Chemical Geology (Isotope Geoscience section) 72, 329–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bottjer, DJ, Hagadorn, JW and Dornbos, SQ (2000) The Cambrian substrate revolution. GSA Today 10, 1–7.Google Scholar
Bowring, SA, Grotzinger, JP, Condon, DJ, Ramezani, J, Newall, MJ and Allen, PA (2007) Geochronologic constraints on the chronostratigraphic framework of the Neoproterozoic Huqf Supergroup, Sultanate of Oman. American Journal of Science 307, 1097–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, RA, Dahl, TW, Bjerrum, CJ and Canfield, DE (2018) Bioturbation and directionality in Earth’s carbon isotope record across the Neoproterozoic–Cambrian transition. Geobiology 16, 252–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brasier, M, Cowie, J and Taylor, M (1994) Decision on the Precambrian-Cambrian boundary stratotype. Episodes 17, 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buatois, LA and Mángano, MG (2016) Ediacaran ecosystems and the dawn of animals. In The Trace-Fossil Record of Major Evolutionary Events, Volume 1: Precambrian and Paleozoic (eds Mángano, MG and Buatois, LA), pp. 27–72. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buatois, LA, Netto, RG, Mángano, MG and Carmona, NB (2013) Global deglaciation and the re-appearance of microbial matground-dominated ecosystems in the late Paleozoic of Gondwana. Geobiology 11, 307–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buatois, LA, Wisshak, M, Wilson, MA and Mángano, MG (2017) Categories of architectural designs in trace fossils: a measure of ichnodisparity. Earth-Science Reviews 164, 102–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budd, GE and Jensen, S (2000) A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian phyla. Biological Reviews 75, 253–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Canfield, DE and Farquhar, J (2009) Animal evolution, bioturbation, and the sulfate concentration of the oceans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106, 8123–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carbone, C and Narbonne, GM (2014) When life got smart: the evolution of behavioral complexity through the Ediacaran and Early Cambrian of NW Canada. Journal of Paleontology 88, 309–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cayeux, L (1894) Sur la présence de restes de Foraminifères dans les terrains précambriens de Bretagne. Annales de la Société Géologique du Nord 22, 116–9.Google Scholar
Chantraine, J, Chauvel, J-J, Dupret, L, Gatinot, F, Icart, J-C, Le Corre, C, Rabu, D, Sauvan, P and Villey, M (1982) Inventaire lithologique et structural du Briovérien (Protérozoïque supérieur) de la Bretagne centrale et du Bocage normand. Bulletin du BRGM 1, 3–17.Google Scholar
Chantraine, J, Egal, E, Thiéblemont, D, Le Goff, E, Guerrot, C, Ballèvre, M and Guennoc, P (2001) The Cadomian active margin (North Armorican Massif, France): a segment of the North Atlantic Panafrican belt. Tectonophysics 331, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauvel, JJ and Mansuy, C (1981) Micropaléontologie du Protérozoïque du Massif Armoricain (France). Precambrian Research 15, 25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauvel, JJ and Schopf, JW (1978) Late Precambrian microfossils from Brioverian cherts and limestones of Brittany and Normandy, France. Nature 275, 640–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childress, JJ and Thuesen, EV (1992) Metabolic potential of deep-sea animals: regional and global scales. In Deep-Sea Food Chains and the Global Carbon Cycle (eds Rowe, GT and Pariente, V), pp. 217–36. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cloud, PE (1968) Pre-Metazoan evolution and the origins of the Metazoa. In Evolution and environment (ed. Drake, ET), pp. 1–72. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cogné, J (1959) Données nouvelles sur l’Antécambrien dans l’Ouest de la France: Pentévrien et Briovérien en baie de Saint-Brieuc (Côtes-du-Nord). Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France 7, 112–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP (1987) Trace fossils and correlation of late Precambrian and early Cambrian strata. Geological Magazine 124, 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP (1992a) Changes in the trace fossil biota across the Proterozoic-Phanerozoic boundary. Journal of the Geological Society, London 149, 637–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP (1992b) The record of trace fossils across the Proterozoic-Cambrian boundary. In Origin and Early Evolution of the Metazoa (eds Lipps, JH and Signor, PW), pp. 177–99. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP (1994) The period of early evolutionary failure and the dawn of evolutionary success: the record of biotic changes across the Precambrian-Cambrian boundary. In The Palaeobiology of Trace Fossils (ed. Donovan, SK), pp. 105–33. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Crimes, TP and Anderson, MM (1985) Trace fossils from Late Precambrian-Early Cambrian strata of southeastern Newfoundland (Canada): temporal and environmental implications. Journal of Paleontology 59, 310–43.Google Scholar
Crimes, TP and Crossley, JD (1991) A diverse ichnofauna from Silurian flysch of the Aberystwyth Grits Formation, Wales. Geological Journal 26, 27–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP and Fedonkin, MA (1994) Evolution and dispersal of deepsea traces. Palaios 9, 74–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP, Garcia Hidalgo, JG and Poire, DG (1992) Trace fossils from Arenig flysch sediments of Eire and their bearing on the early colonisation of the deep seas. Ichnos 2, 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP, Marcos, A and Perez-Estaun, A (1974) Upper Ordovician turbidites in western Asturias: a facies analysis with particular reference to vertical and lateral variations. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 15, 169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crimes, TP and McCall, GJH (1995) A diverse ichnofauna from Eocene–Miocene rocks of the Makran Range (SE Iran). Ichnos 3, 231–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, JA, Liu, AG, Bengtson, S and Donoghue, PC (2017) The origin of animals: can molecular clocks and the fossil record be reconciled? BioEssays 39, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
D’Lemos, RS, Strachan, RA and Topley, CG (1990) The Cadomian orogeny in the North Armorican Massif: a brief review. In The Cadomian Orogeny (eds D’Lemos, RS, Strachan, R and Topley, CG), pp. 3–12. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 51.Google Scholar
Dabard, MP (1990) Lower Brioverian formations (Upper Proterozoic) of the Armorican Massif (France): geodynamic evolution of source areas revealed by sandstone petrography and geochemistry. Sedimentary Geology 69, 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabard, MP (2000) Petrogenesis of graphitic cherts in the Armorican segment of the Cadomian orogenic belt (NW France). Sedimentology 47, 787–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabard, MP and Loi, A (1998) Environnement de dépôt des formations à phtanites interstratifiés du Protérozoïque supérieur armoricain (France): conséquences sur la genèse des phtanites. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de Paris 326, 763–9.Google Scholar
Dabard, MP, Loi, A, Pavanetto, P, Meloni, MA, Hauser, N, Matteini, M and Funedda, A (2021) Provenance of Ediacaran-Ordovician sediments of the Medio Armorican Domain, Brittany, West France: constraints from U/Pb detrital zircon and Sm–Nd isotope data. Gondwana Research 90, 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabard, MP, Loi, A and Peucat, JJ (1996) Zircon typology combined with Sm-Nd whole-rock isotope analysis to study Brioverian sediments from the Armorican Massif. Sedimentary Geology 101, 243–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dabard, MP and Simon, B (2011) Discordance des Séries Rouges Initiales sur le socle briovérien: exemple de la carrière des Landes. Bulletin de la Société Géologique et Minéralogique de Bretagne 8, 33–44.Google Scholar
Dalrymple, RW (2010) Tidal depositional systems. In Facies Models 4 (eds James, NP and Dalrymple, RW), pp. 201–231. St John’s, Newfoundland: Geological Association of Canada.Google Scholar
Dangeard, L, Doré, F and Juignet, P (1961) Le Briovérien supérieur de Basse Normandie (étage de la Laize), série à turbidites, a tous les caractères d’un flysch. Revue de Géographie Physique et de Géologie Dynamique 4, 251–9.Google Scholar
Deflandre, G (1955) Paleocryptidium n. g. cayeuxi n. sp., microorganismes incertae sedis des phtanites briovériens bretons. Comptes Rendus Sommaires de la Société Géologique de France 9–10, 182–5.Google Scholar
Denis, E (1988) Les sédiments briovériens (Protérozoïque supérieur) de Bretagne septentrionale et occidentale: nature, mise en place et évolution. Mémoires et Documents du Centre Armoricain d’Etude Structurale des Socles 18, 263.Google Scholar
Denis, E and Dabard, MP (1988) Sandstone petrography and geochemistry of late Proterozoic sediments of the Armorican Massif (France) - a key to basin development during the Cadomian Orogeny. Precambrian Research 42, 189–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, WR and Gehrels, GE (2009) Use of U-Pb ages of detrital zircons to infer maximum depositional ages of strata: a test against a Colorado Plateau Mesozoic database. Earth Planetary Science Letters 288, 115–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dissler, E, Doré, F, Dupret, L, Gresselin, F and Le Gall, J (1988) L’évolution géodynamique cadomienne du Nord-Est du Massif armoricain. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France 4, 801–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, R, Tian, L and Li, H (1986) Discovery of megafossils in the Gaoyuzhuang Formation of the Changchengian System, Jixian. Acta Geologica Sinica 59, 115–20.Google Scholar
Fedonkin, MA (1985) Paleoichnology of Vendian metazoa. In The Vendian System 1: Historic-Geological and Palaeontological Basis (eds Sokolov, BS and Ivanovskiy, AB), pp. 112–6. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Fedonkin, MA (1990) Paleoichnology of Vendian metazoa. In The Vendian System 1: Paleontology (eds Sokolov, BS and Iwanoski, AB), pp. 132–341. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Gage, JD and Tyler, PA (1991) Deep-Sea Biology: A Natural History of Organisms at the Deep-Sea Floor. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 504 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehling, JG (1999) Microbial mats in terminal Proterozoic siliciclastics: Ediacaran death masks. Palaios 14, 40–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geinitz, HB (1867) Die organischen Ueberreste im Dachschiefer von Wurzbach bei Lobenstein. In Ueber ein Aequivalent der Takonischen Schiefer Nordamerika’s in Deutschland und dessen Geologische Stellung (eds Geinitz, HB and Liebe, KT), pp. 1–24. Dresden: Druck von E. Blochmann & Sohn.Google Scholar
Gougeon, RC, Mángano, MG, Buatois, LA, Narbonne, GM and Laing, BA (2018a) Early Cambrian origin of the shelf sediment mixed layer. Nature Communications 9, 1909.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gougeon, R, Néraudeau, D, Dabard, MP, Pierson-Wickmann, AC, Polette, F, Poujol, M and Saint-Martin, JP (2018b) Trace fossils from the Brioverian (Ediacaran–Fortunian) in Brittany (NW France). Ichnos 25, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gougeon, R, Néraudeau, D, Poujol, M and Loi, A (2019) Loops, circles, spirals and the appearance of guided behaviors from the Ediacaran-Cambrian of Brittany, NW France. Estudios Geológicos 75, p002, 11–3.Google Scholar
Graindor, M-J (1957) Le Briovérien dans le Nord-Est du Massif Armoricain. Mémoires pour servir à l’explication de la Carte Géologique détaillée de la France. Paris: Ministère de l’Industrie et du Commerce, 211 pp.Google Scholar
Guerrot, C, Calvez, JY, Bonjour, JL, Chantaine, J, Chauvel, JJ, Dupret, L and Rabu, D (1992) Le Briovérien de Bretagne centrale et occidentale: nouvelles données radiométriques. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de Paris 315, 1741–6.Google Scholar
Guerrot, C, Peucat, JJ and Dupret, L (1989) Données nouvelles sur l’âge du système briovérien (Protérozoïque supérieur) dans le Nord du Massif armoricain. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de Paris 308, 89–92.Google Scholar
Häntzschel, W (1975) Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part W, Miscellanea, supplement 1: Trace Fossils and Problematica. Boulder: The Geological Society of America and The University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Heer, O (1876) Flora Fossilis Helvetiae. Die Vorweltliche Flora der Schweiz. Zürich: Verlag von J. Wurster & Comp.Google Scholar
Hofmann, HJ (1971) Precambrian fossils, pseudofossils and problematica in Canada. Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 189, 1–146.Google Scholar
Hofmann, HJ, Cecile, MP and Lane, LS (1994) New occurrences of Oldhamia and other trace fossils in the Cambrian of the Yukon and Ellesmere Island, arctic Canada. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 31, 767–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, M (1989) Die Lebensspur Spirodesmos im Unterkarbon des Östlichen Rheinischen Schiefergebirges. Bulletin de la Société Belge de Géologie 98, 385–91.Google Scholar
Huckriede, R (1952) Eine spiralförmige Lebensspur aus dem Kulmkieselschiefer von Biedenkopf an der Lahn (Spirodesmos archimedeus n. sp.). Paläontologische Zeitschrift 26, 175–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huettel, RN (2004) Reproductive behaviour. In Nematode Behaviour (eds Gaugler, R and Bilgrami, AL), pp. 127–149. Wallingford: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivantsov, AY, Gritsenko, VP, Paliy, VM, Velikanov, VA, Konstantinenko, LI, Menasova, AS, Fedonkin, MA, Zakrevskaya, MA and Serezhnikova, EA (2015) Upper Vendian Macrofossils of Eastern Europe. Middle Dniester Area and Volhynia. Moscow: Borissiak Paleontological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, 144 pp.Google Scholar
Jenkins, RJ (1995) The problems and potential of using animal fossils and trace fossils in terminal Proterozoic biostratigraphy. Precambrian Research 73, 51–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, S (2003) The Proterozoic and earliest Cambrian trace fossil record; patterns, problems and perspectives. Integrative and Comparative Biology 43, 219–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jensen, S and Palacios, T (2016) The Ediacaran-Cambrian trace fossil record in the Central Iberian Zone, Iberian Peninsula. Comunicações Geológicas 103 (Especial I), 83–92.Google Scholar
Jones, DOB, Alt, CHS, Priede, IG, Reid, WDK, Wigham, BD, Billett, DSM, Gebruk, AV, Rogacheva, A and Gooday, AJ (2013) Deep-sea surface-dwelling enteropneusts from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge: their ecology, distribution and mode of life. Deep Sea Research II 98, 374–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitchell, JA, Kitchell, JF, Johnson, GL and Hunkins, KL (1978) Abyssal traces and megafauna: comparison of productivity, diversity and density in the Arctic and Antarctic. Paleobiology 4, 171–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoll, AH and Carroll, SB (1999) Early animal evolution: emerging views from comparative biology and geology. Science 284, 2129–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Książkiewicz, M (1977) Trace fossils in the flysch of the Polish Carpathians. Palaeontologia Polonica 36, 1–208.Google Scholar
Le Corre, C, Auvray, B, Ballèvre, M and Robardet, M (1991) Le Massif Armoricain. Sciences Géologiques, Bulletin 44, 31–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebesconte, P (1886) Constitution générale du Massif Breton. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, 3ème série 17, 776–91.Google Scholar
Lemche, H, Hansen, B, Madsen, FJ, Tendal, OS and Wolff, T (1976) Hadal life as analyzed from photographs. Videnskabelige Meddelelser dansk naturhistorisk Forening 139, 263–336.Google Scholar
Linnemann, U, Ovtcharova, M, Schaltegger, U, Gärtner, A, Hautmann, M, Geyer, G, Vickers-Rich, P, Rich, T, Plessen, B, Hofmann, M, Zieger, J, Krause, R, Kriesfeld, L and Smith, J (2019) New high-resolution age data from the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary indicate rapid, ecologically driven onset of the Cambrian explosion. Terra Nova 31, 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, AG, McIlroy, D and Brasier, MD (2010) First evidence for locomotion in the Ediacara biota from the 565 Ma Mistaken Point Formation, Newfoundland. Geology 38, 123–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, GA, Hayes, JM, Hieshima, GB and Summons, RE (1995) Terminal Proterozoic reorganization of biogeochemical cycles. Nature 376, 53–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacNaughton, RB and Narbonne, GM (1999) Evolution and ecology of Neoproterozoic-Lower Cambrian trace fossils, NW Canada. Palaios 14, 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maletz, J (2014) Hemichordata (Pterobranchia, Enteropneusta) and the fossil record. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 398, 16–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malusà, MG, Carter, A, Limoncelli, M, Villa, IM and Garzanti, E (2013) Bias in detrital zircon geochronology and thermochronometry. Chemical Geology 359, 90–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mángano, MG and Buatois, LA (2014) Decoupling of body-plan diversification and ecological structuring during the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition: evolutionary and geobiological feedbacks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 281, 20140038.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mángano, MG and Buatois, LA (2016) The Cambrian Explosion. In The Trace-Fossil Record of Major Evolutionary Events, Volume 1: Precambrian and Paleozoic (eds Mángano, MG and Buatois, LA), pp. 73–126. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mángano, MG and Buatois, LA (2020) The rise and early evolution of animals: where do we stand from a trace-fossil perspective? Interface Focus 10, 20190103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mansuy, C and Vidal, G (1983) Late Proterozoic Brioverian microfossils from France: taxonomic affinity and implications of plankton productivity. Nature 302, 606–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzotti, P, Poujol, M and Ballèvre, M (2015) Detrital zircon geochronology in blueschist-facies meta-conglomerates from the Western Alps: implications for the late Carboniferous to early Permian palaeogeography. International Journal of Earth Sciences 104, 703–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marusin, VV and Kuper, KE (2020) Complex tunnel systems of early Fortunian macroscopic endobenthos in the Ediacaran-Cambrian transitional strata of the Olenek Uplift (NE Siberian Platform). Precambrian Research 340, 105627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, TR, Stanistreet, IG and Tavener-Smith, R (1983) Spiral trace fossils from the Permian Ecca Group of Zululand. Lethaia 16, 241–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMahon, WJ, Davies, NS and Went, DJ (2017) Negligible microbial matground influence on pre-vegetation river functioning: evidence from the Ediacaran-Lower Cambrian Series Rouge, France. Precambrian Research 292, 13–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menasova, AS (2003) New representatives of the Vendian biota from localities of Podolia. Theoretical and Applied Aspects of Local Biostratigraphy of the Phanerozoic of Ukraine: collection of scientific works of the Institute of Geological sciences of NAS of Ukraine. Kiev: Institute of Geological Sciences of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, pp. 139–42.Google Scholar
Meysman, FJ, Middelburg, JJ and Heip, CH (2006) Bioturbation: a fresh look at Darwin’s last idea. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21, 688–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minter, NJ and Braddy, SJ (2009) Ichnology of an Early Permian intertidal flat: the Robledo Mountains Formation of southern New Mexico, USA. Special Papers in Paleontology 82, 1–107.Google Scholar
Minter, NJ, Buatois, LA, Lucas, SG, Braddy, SJ and Smith, JA (2006) Spiral-shaped graphoglyptids from an Early Permian intertidal flat. Geology 34, 1057–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narbonne, GM and Hofmann, HJ (1987) Ediacaran biota of the Wernecke Mountains, Yukon, Canada. Palaeontology 30, 647–76.Google Scholar
Narbonne, GM, Myrow, PM, Landing, E and Anderson, MM (1987) A candidate stratotype for the Precambrian–Cambrian boundary, Fortune head, Burin Peninsula, southeastern Newfoundland. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 24, 1277–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Néraudeau, D, Dabard, M-P, El Albani, A, Gougeon, R, Mazurier, A, Pierson-Wickmann, A-C, Poujol, M, Saint Martin, J-P and Saint Martin, S (2019) First evidence of Ediacaran–Fortunian elliptical body fossils in the Brioverian series of Brittany, NW France. Lethaia 51, 513–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Néraudeau, D, Gougeon, R, Dabard, M-P and Poujol, M (2016) Les traces de vie de la limite Ediacarien-Cambrien dans le Massif armoricain. Géochroniques 140, 26–8.Google Scholar
Nio, SD and Yang, CS (1991) Diagnostic attributes of clastic tidal deposits: a review. In Clastic Tidal Sedimentology (eds Smith, DG, Reinson, GE, Zaitlin, BA and Rahmani, RA), pp. 3–28. Calgary: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 16.Google Scholar
Noffke, N, Gerdes, G, Klenke, T and Krumbein, WE (2001) Microbially induced sedimentary structures: a new category within the classification of primary sedimentary structures. Journal of Sedimentary Research 71, 649–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orr, PJ (2001) Colonization of the deep-marine environment during the early Phanerozoic: the ichnofaunal record. Geological Journal 36, 265–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasteels, P and Doré, F (1982) Age of the Vire-Carolles granite. In Numerical Dating in Stratigraphy (ed Odin, GS), pp. 784–91. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Pflüger, F (1999) Matground structures and redox facies. Palaios 14, 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabu, D, Chantraine, J, Chauvel, JJ, Denis, E, Balé, P and Bardy, P (1990) The Brioverian (Upper Proterozoic) and the Cadomian orogeny in the Armorican Massif. In The Cadomian Orogeny (eds D’Lemos, RS, Strachan, RA and Topley, CG), pp. 81–94. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 51.Google Scholar
Rex, MA and Etter, RJ (2010) Deep-Sea Biodiversity: Pattern and Scale. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 368 pp.Google Scholar
Runnegar, B (1991) Precambrian oxygen levels estimated from the biochemistry and physiology of early eukaryotes. Global and Planetary Change 5, 97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runnegar, BN (1992) Evolution of the earliest animals. In Major Events in the History of Life (ed. Schopf, JW), pp. 65–93. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.Google Scholar
Sacco, F (1888) Note di paleoicnologia Italiana. Atti della Società Italiana di Scienze Naturali 31, 151–92.Google Scholar
Sanders, HL and Hessler, RR (1969) Ecology of the deep-sea benthos. Science 163, 1419–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sedorko, D, Netto, RG and Horodyski, RS (2019) Tracking Silurian-Devonian events and paleobathymetric curves by ichnologic and taphonomic analyzes in the southwestern Gondwana. Global and Planetary Change 179, 43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seilacher, A (1956) Der Beginn des Kambriums als biologische Wende. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen 103, 155–80.Google Scholar
Seilacher, A (1967a) Vorzeitliche Mäanderspuren. In Die Strassen der Tiere (ed Hediger, H), pp. 294–306. Wiesbaden: Vieweg+Teubner Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seilacher, A (1967b) Fossil behavior. Scientific American 217, 72–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seilacher, A (1974) Flysch trace fossils: evolution of behavioural diversity in the deep-sea. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Monatshefte 4, 233–45.Google Scholar
Seilacher, A (1977) Pattern analysis of Paleodictyon and related trace fossils. In Trace Fossils 2 (eds Crimes, TP and Harper, JC), pp. 289–334. Liverpool: Seel House Press.Google Scholar
Seilacher, A (1986) Evolution of behavior as expressed in marine trace fossils. In Evolution of Animal Behavior: Paleontological and Field Approaches (eds Kitchell, JA and Nitecki, MH), pp. 62–87. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Seilacher, A, Buatois, LA and Mángano, MG (2005) Trace fossils in the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition: behavioral diversification, ecological turnover and environmental shift. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 227, 323–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seilacher, A and Pflüger, F (1994) From biomats to benthic agriculture: a biohistoric revolution. In Biostabilization of Sediments (eds Krumbein, WE, Paterson, DM and Stal, LJ), pp. 97–105. Oldenburg: Bibliotheks und Informationssystem der Universität Oldenburg.Google Scholar
Shaowu, N (1998) Confirmation of the genus Grypania (megascopic alga) in Gaoyuzhuang Formation (1434Ma) in Jixian (Tianjin) and its significance. Progress in Precambrian Research 21, 36–46.Google Scholar
Smith, KL, Holland, ND and Ruhl, HA (2005) Enteropneust production of spiral fecal trails on the deep-sea floor observed with time-lapse photography. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 52, 1228–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stepanek, J and Geyer, G (1989) Spurenfossilien aus dem Kulm (Unterkarbon) des Frankenwaldes. Beringeria 1, 1–55.Google Scholar
Tessier, B, Archer, AW, Lanier, WP and Feldman, HR (1995) Comparison of ancient tidal rhythmites (Carboniferous of Kansas and Indiana, USA) with modern analogues (the Bay of Mont-Saint-Michel, France). In Tidal Signatures in Modern and Ancient Sediments (eds Flemming, BW and Bartholomä, A), pp. 259–71. International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication no. 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trautmann, F, Paris, F and Carn, A (1999) Notice explicative, Carte géologique de France (1/50 000), feuille Rennes (317). Orléans: BRGM, 85 pp.Google Scholar
Uchman, A (1998) Taxonomy and ethology of flysch trace fossils: revision of the Marian Książkiewicz collection and studies of complementary material. Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae 68, 105–218.Google Scholar
Uchman, A (2003) Trends in diversity, frequency and complexity of graphoglyptid trace fossils: evolutionary and palaeoenvironmental aspects. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 192, 123–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Grient, JM and Rogers, AD (2015) Body size versus depth: regional and taxonomical variation in deep-sea meio-and macrofaunal organisms. In Advances in Marine Biology (ed. Curry, BE), pp. 71–108. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, vol. 71.Google Scholar
Vermeesch, P (2018) IsoplotR: a free and open toolbox for geochronology. Geoscience Frontiers 9, 1479–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walcott, CD (1899) Pre-Cambrian fossiliferous formations. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 10, 199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walter, MR, Du, R and Horodyski, RJ (1990) Coiled carbonaceous megafossils from the Middle Proterozoic of Jixian (Tianjin) and Montana. American Journal of Science 290, 133–48.Google Scholar
Walter, MR, Oehler, JH and Oehler, DZ (1976) Megascopic algae 1300 million years old from the Belt Supergroup, Montana: a reinterpretation of Walcott’s Helminthoidichnites . Journal of Paleontology 50, 872–81.Google Scholar
Went, DJ (2017) Alluvial fan, braided river and shallow-marine turbidity current deposits in the Port Lazo and Roche Jagu formations, Northern Brittany: relationships to andesite emplacements and implications for age of the Plourivo-Plouézec Group. Geological Magazine 154, 1037–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, DA (2004) Survival strategies. In Nematode Behaviour (eds Gaugler, R and Bilgrami, AL), pp. 371–99. Wallingford: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xia, B, Lu, H, Xiong, B, He, Y and Hu, B (1987) Spirodesmos kaihuaensis in the upper Ordovician flysch in the Kaihua County, west part of Zhejiang province. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica 5, 73–9.Google Scholar
Yan, Y and Liu, Z (1998) Does Sangshuania represent eukaryotic algae or trace fossils? Acta Micropalaeontologica Sinica 15, 101–10.Google Scholar
Yancey, PH, Rhea, MD, Kemp, K and Bailey, DM (2004) Trimethylamine oxide, betaine and other osmolytes in deep-sea animals: depth trends and effects on enzymes under hydrostatic pressure. Cellular and Molecular Biology 50, 371–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Yang, Z, Yin, J and He, T (1982) Early Cambrian trace fossils from the Emei-Ganluo region, Sichuan, and other localities. Geological Review 28, 291–8.Google Scholar
Zapletal, J and Pek, I (1971) Nález spirálních bioglyfů v kulmu Nízkého Jeseníku. Časopis pro Mineralogii a Geologii 16, 285–9.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Geological map of northwestern France, and new U–Pb dating. (a) Location of the Brioverian deposits in northwestern France. (b) Close-up showing the Brioverian deposits, and the three localities with planispiral trace fossils. NASZ – North Armorican Shear Zone; SASZ – South Armorican Shear Zone. (c) Kernel density estimation diagrams for La Lammerais and Le Lorinou samples.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Terminology of planispirals: (a) an irregular one-way spiral; (b) a regular one-way spiral; (c) a regular two-way spiral; and (d) a bounded spiral. See text for further explanations.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Spirodesmos isp. and Spirodesmos archimedeus from the uppermost Brioverian beds of Brittany. (a) Spirodesmos isp. (irregular one-way spiral trace fossil) from Le Bois-du-Buisson (IGR 2852). (b, c) Spirodesmos archimedeus (regular one-way spiral trace fossils) from (b) Les Grippeaux (IGR 112628) and (c) La Plage-du-Goulien. Scale bars are 1 cm across.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Macro-evolutionary profile of Spirodesmos comparable to the Brioverian material, with emphasis on the Ediacaran and the Cambrian systems (coloured diagrams). Positions suggested for the Brioverian material are emphasized by diagrams with dashed lines. Brioverian Spirodesmos belonged to an Ediacaran–Fortunian, marginal-marine to shelf pool. A Spirodesmos onshore–offshore migration is suggested, during Ediacaran–Fortunian to Ordovician time. See text for further explanations.

Supplementary material: File

Gougeon et al. supplementary material

Gougeon et al. supplementary material 1

Download Gougeon et al. supplementary material(File)
File 55.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Gougeon et al. supplementary material

Gougeon et al. supplementary material 2

Download Gougeon et al. supplementary material(File)
File 486.4 KB