Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

Geological Magazine

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map 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 Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by GONG, Y.-M. Articles by XU, R. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Pyrite framboids interpreted as microbial colonies within the Permian Zoophycos spreiten from southeastern Australia

YI-MING GONG^*,,, GUANG R. SHI^*,, ELIZABETH A. WELDON^*,, YUAN-SHENG DU^* and RAN XU^*

^* Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology of Ministry of Education; State Key Laboratory of Geological Processes and Mineral Resources, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, 430074, China
Institute of Resources and Environment; Key Laboratory of Biogenic Traces and Sedimentary Minerals of Henan Province, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, Henan, 454003, China
School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Melbourne Campus, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia

Author for correspondence: ymgong{at}cug.edu.cn

(Received 9 December 2006; accepted 31 May 2007)

	Abstract

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

 
Two types of pyrite framboids (PF, probably sulphate-reducing bacteria) have been found within the Zoophycos spreiten, hosted in the Guadalupian (Middle Permian) glaciomarine greywacke of the Westley Park Sandstone Member within the Broughton Formation from the southern Sydney Basin of southeastern Australia. They are composed of non-sheathed (PF1) and sheathed (PF2) sub-micron balls, respectively. Chemically, the sub-micron balls consist of iron, sulphur, carbon and oxygen. Both PF1 and PF2 occur in rhythmic alternation within the thick, light-grey and thin, dark-grey minor lamellae of Zoophycos spreiten. The framboids from the minor lamellae are highly abundant and occur in an orderly arrangement of equal density and in a good state of preservation. Within Zoophycos spreiten no homogeneous filling, fecal pellets, or any sign of re-exploitation of the minor lamellae have been recognized. No similar framboids have been observed outside Zoophycos spreiten. Therefore, the framboids are interpreted as the pyritized remains of microbial colonies within Zoophycos spreiten. The trace Zoophycos would be a multifunctional garden that may have been carefully constructed by the Zoophycos maker, where different microbial colonies were orderly and carefully planted and cultured within different minor lamellae. Further, it is proposed that the Zoophycos maker had a symbiotic relationship with microbial colonies on the mutual basis of food supply and redox conditions. The fact that the overlying spreiten cut the underlying ones indicates that the Zoophycos from the study area is of an upward construction. The rhythmic alternation of both the thick, light-grey and thin, dark-grey minor lamellae within Zoophycos spreiten may be suggestive of a gardening manner of the Zoophycos maker responding to the warm and cold changes, food supply in pulses and variations of sedimentation rate for planting and culturing microbial colonies under the conditions of a glaciomarine environment at the high latitudes.

Key Words: Zoophycos • pyrite framboids • microbial colony • ethology • Permian • Australia

	1. Introduction

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

 
Trace fossil Zoophycos is a highly complex burrow system with compositional, structural, developmental, operational/algorithmic, hierarchical/modular and ecological/physiological complexities (Miller, 2003). It is one of the most distinctive and widespread trace fossils, and ranges from the Early Cambrian (Crimes, 1987) to the Holocene (Wetzel & Werner, 1981; Löwemark & Schäfer, 2003). It occurs in a wide variety of depositional settings, involving carbonate, terrestrial and volcaniclastic rocks and in sedimentary environments from sublittoral to deep sea (Ekdale & Lewis, 1991). The sophisticated and enigmatic Zoophycos or Zoophycos group (Uchman, 1999) has attracted much interest for more than a century and continues to challenge the geological community. Current controversies are mainly concerned with the morphology, taxonomy, palaeoenvironmental distribution, constructional mode and evolution of the burrow system (Seilacher, 1967a, 1986; Bottjer, Droser & Jablonski, 1988; Savrda & Bottjer, 1994; Olivero, 1996, 2003; Miller, 1991; Bromley & Hanken, 2003), and the characteristics and ethology of the Zoophycos maker (Seilacher, 1967b; Simpson, 1970; Kotake, 1989, 1991; Löwemark & Schäfer, 2003), as well as the relationships between macro-Zoophycos maker(s) and microbes (Bromley, 1991; Fu & Werner, 1995; Bromley & Hanken, 2003).

Here we report the pyrite framboids that are interpreted as the pyritized remains of microbial colonies (probably sulphate-reducing bacteria) preserved within the Zoophycos spreiten hosted in glaciomarine greywackes from the Middle Permian Broughton Formation of the southern Sydney Basin, southeastern Australia. These data provide new evidence pertaining to the Zoophycos maker’s behaviour and construction of this elaborate trace fossil, and to the understanding of the relationships between macro-trace-makers and microbes.

	2. Materials and methods

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

 
The Zoophycos material (230 outcrop photos showing Zoophycos and the samples of 50 kg containing Zoophycos and other trace fossils) was obtained from the Westley Park Sandstone Member at the base of the Middle Permian (Wordian) Broughton Formation, at Black Head, Gerroa, in the southern Sydney Basin, southeastern Australia (Figs 1, 2). The Westley Park Sandstone Member is mainly composed of green-grey massive siltstone and fine-grained tuffaceous greywacke. It is 190 m thick, generally flat lying, with a regional dip of about two degrees and localized dip of up to 12° towards the north to northwest. The strata contain abundant body fossils, including brachiopods, bivalves, gastropods, crinoids, sponges, bryozoans, conulariids, fragmental plant materials, and trace fossils, including Zoophycos, Rosselia, Chondrites and Palaeophycus. The fossils are associated with abundant dropstones (ice-rafted debris), glendonites and hummocky cross-bedding (Figs 2, 3e–f ). These features indicate that the strata containing the Zoophycos were deposited in a glaciomarine environment influenced by storm activity and volcanism (Bann & Jones, 2001).

View larger version (27K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Locality of the studied Zoophycos hosted in the Westley Park Sandstone Member, the base of the Middle Permian Broughton Formation from Black Head, southern Sydney Basin, southeastern Australia.

View larger version (28K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Stratigraphic column showing the characteristics of Zoophycos-bearing strata from the southern Sydney Basin, southeastern Australia.

View larger version (153K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Photographs showing the characteristics of Zoophycos studied herein in plan (a,b) and vertical (c–h) views. (a–d) Major lamellae (black arrows) radiate from the central shaft (white solid arrows) and curve distally to the left and right, (b) and (d) are the close-ups of (a) and (c), respectively; white hollow arrows indicate brachiopods in (a) and (b). (e–h) Zoophycos in outcrops (e–g) and polished surface (h) is associated with brachiopod (white hollow arrow in e) and dropstones (white solid arrows in e and f); a spreite (black arrows in f and g) of Zoophycos consists of light- and dark-grey minor lamellae in rhythmic alternation.

	3. Results

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

 
The observed Zoophycos shows a conical form consisting of a series of spreiten, which radiate from a central shaft (9–35 mm in diameter, 100–120 mm in height) that is perpendicular to the bedding surface and curves distally in either a sinistral or dextral manner. In vertical cross-section, Zoophycos is usually composed of a series of imbricate or superposed spreiten (Fig. 3c–h) that are distally arranged in rows sub-parallel to the bedding surface. No or little compaction has been observed in the central shaft and spreiten.

Both thick (10–25 mm; Fig. 3e–f ) and thin (< 10 mm; Fig. 3g–h) minor lamellae have been distinguished in the same sample or outcrop; the former mainly consists of coarse clastics (feldspar and quartz) poor in organic matter and with dropstones, and appears light-grey in colour (Fig. 3f ), whereas the latter is enriched in finer-grained sediments, clay minerals and organic matter and with no dropstones, and tends to be dark-grey in colour (Fig. 3f ).

The spreiten consist of both major lamellae and the oblique minor lamellae between the major lamellae (Fig. 3e–h). The minor lamellae appear as crescents or rounded chevrons. The direction of the crescents within any one spreite is always the same. It is commonly seen that the top of a spreite is truncated by succeeding spreiten. Occasionally, due to their sometimes sub-parallel nature, a spreite will disappear completely, having been cut off by an overlying slightly oblique spreite (Fig. 3g). The Zoophycos herein is tentatively referred to as Zoophycos cf. caudagalli Vanuxem, 1842. No marginal tube has been observed. Within the spreite structures, we have not observed any homogeneous filling, fecal pellets or any sign of re-exploitation of the minor lamellae.

Two types of pyrite framboids (PF1 and PF2) have been found within the minor lamellae of the Zoophycos spreiten (Figs 4, 5; Table 1). PF1 are composed of non-sheathed, hollow or infilled sub-micron balls with or without a smooth opening (Fig. 4a–d). PF2 consist of sheathed, hollow sub-micron balls with a thick wall (Fig. 5a–d). PF1 occur only within the thick, light-grey minor lamellae and shallowly penetrate into or adhere to broken surfaces or crystal surfaces of the detrital feldspar and quartz (Fig. 4a–d). PF2, on the other hand, are restricted to the thin, dark-grey minor lamellae. In generally, all the framboids are framboidal or spheroidal, 6–12 µm in diameter and consist of orderly arranged, equidimensional and equimorphic sub-micron balls 0.5–0.8 µm in diameter (Figs 4, 5; Table 1); they are highly abundant and occur in an orderly arrangement of equal density and in a good state of preservation within the minor lamellae (Figs 4, 5). No similar framboids have been found outside the minor lamellae. A systematic geochemical analysis of the framboids measured by EDXSM indicates that the main elements of the sub-micron balls are iron, sulphur, carbon and oxygen. All the balls and ball sheaths coated with gold or carbon within the framboids contain the element carbon (Table 2).

View larger version (197K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Scanning electron microscope images showing the pyrite framboids (PF1) interpreted as microbial colonies within the light-grey minor lamellae of Zoophycos spreiten. (a–d) PF1 consist of non-sheathed, hollow (black arrow in b) and infilled (white arrow in b) sub-micron balls with smooth opening, (b) is the close-up of (a), and (d) is the close-up of (c). PF1 shallowly penetrate into surfaces of the detrital feldspars in (a) and (c).

View larger version (160K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 5. Scanning electron microscope images showing the pyrite framboids (PF2) interpreted as microbial colonies within the dark-grey minor lamellae of Zoophycos spreiten. (a–d) The PF2 consist of sheathed (black arrows in b and d) and hollow (white arrow in b) sub-micron balls with thick wall; (b) is the close-up of (a), and (d) is the close-up of (c). PF2 are hosted in the environment rich in clay minerals and organic material in (a) and (c).

	4. Discussion

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

Biogenically formed minerals are characterized by unusual external morphologies and are often made of agglomerations of mineral crystals separated by organic material (Dove, De Yoreo & Weiner, 2003). Two avenues of evidence indicate that the framboids described herein are formed by biotic processes.

Firstly, the sub-micron balls within the framboids show unusual external morphologies and texture, such as a sheath-like appearance, a mouth-like opening, hollow/infilling textures, and smooth spherical surfaces (Table 1), which are quite different from the crystals within the framboids synthesized by abiotic processes (Sweeney & Kaplan, 1973; Butler & Rickard, 2000; Ohfuji & Rickard, 2005). The size (0.5–0.8 µm) of a single sub-micron ball within the framboids is larger than the minimum size of a living cell that metabolizes (0.1–0.2 µm in size: Maniloff, 1997) and smaller than the maximum size (1–2 µm) of most Bacteria and Archaea (see Javaux, Knoll & Walter, 2004). The minerals within the framboids synthesized by abiological processes either in a laboratory or in a natural setting usually show euhedral crystals of solid octahedral and cubic morphology (Ohfuji & Rickard, 2005). Chemically, as shown in Table 2, the sub-micron balls within the framboids have high contents of carbon in the measured samples coated with gold. Therefore, we speculate that the framboids are very likely the pyritized remains of the framboidal microbial colonies (probably sulphate-reducing bacteria) preserved in Zoophycos spreiten.

Secondly, the framboids under study have only been found within Zoophycos spreiten, where thick and light-grey minor lamellae alternate rhythmically with thin and dark-grey minor lamellae. The framboids show a high abundance, an orderly arrangement of even density and are in a good state of preservation. PF1 occur only within the light-grey minor lamellae and shallowly penetrate into or adhere to broken surfaces or crystal surfaces of the detrital feldspar and quartz (Fig. 4a–d). PF2 are restricted to the dark-grey minor lamellae. In addition, no similar framboids have been found outside the Zoophycos spreiten. These features do not support the suspicion that the framboids were formed by an inorganic process or by man-made contamination, and would suggest that the Zoophycos maker may have intentionally created optimal conditions for planting and culturing both the framboidal microbial colonies with no sheath (PF1) and with sheath (PF2). The similar pyrite framboids formed by microbial processes were reported from the modern sulphidic aquifer in carbonate rock in Romania (Popa, Kinkle & Badescu, 2004).

4.b. Comparisons of morphology and ethology
Two basic types of Zoophycos, J-type and U-type, were first distinguished in modern deep-sea sediments (Wetzel & Werner, 1981). The J-type has a J-shaped shaft spreite with only one opening connected to the seafloor, which has been taken to suggest a well-oxygenated environmental condition. The U-type Zoophycos, on the other hand, has a U-shaped shaft spreite with two openings connected to the seafloor, and therefore would indicate poorly oxygenated conditions (Wetzel & Werner, 1981; Wetzel, 1991). A major difference between the reconstruction model of Wetzel & Werner (1981) and that of the Zoophycos documented here lies in the presence in the latter of a single shaft (Fig. 3c, d) instead of a shaft spreite. This feature of Zoophycos from the southern Sydney Basin is similar to the reconstruction of the modern Portuguese Zoophycos presented by Löwemark & Schäfer (2003).

The Zoophycos from the southern Sydney Basin has neither the U-shaped shaft spreiten nor the discontinuous Rhizocorallium-like spreiten reported from the Upper Cretaceous to lower Oligocene of New Zealand (Ekdale & Lewis, 1991) and the Miocene of Turkey (Uchman & Demircan, 1999). The fact that the overlying spreiten cut the underlying ones (Fig. 3c–h) indicates that the Zoophycos from the study area is of an upward construction, which differs from the downward-constructed Zoophycos reported from the Upper Cretaceous in Scandinavia (Ekdale & Bromley, 1983; Bromley, Ekdale & Asgaard, 1999) and the Pliocene in Japan (Kotake, 1989), but is comparable to the upward-constructional Zoophycos reported from the modern deep sea in the Portuguese continental margin (Löwemark & Schäfer, 2003), the Mesozoic slope to deep basin in southeastern France (Olivero, 2003) and the Lower Devonian neritic sea in New York, USA (Marintsch & Finks, 1982).

As described above, the Zoophycos from the southern Sydney Basin is closely associated with dropstones and brachiopods, neither of which has been found from the Zoophycos reported from the modern deep sea in the Portuguese continental margin (Löwemark & Schäfer, 2003), or those from the Mesozoic slope to deep basin environment in southeastern France (Olivero, 2003). In the Zoophycos spreiten, both the thick and light-grey minor lamellae poor in organic matter and with dropstones and the thin and dark-grey minor lamellae rich in clay minerals, organic matter and with no dropstone can be distinguished. Their alternation in rhythm may be suggestive of a gardening manner of the Zoophycos maker responding to the warm and cold changes, food supply in pulses and variations of sedimentation rate for planting and culturing microbial colonies under the conditions of a glaciomarine environment at high latitudes.

A large number of ethological modes involving Zoophycos have been put forth on the basis of different Zoophycos characteristics, including the deposit feeder mode (Seilacher, 1967a; Simpson, 1970; Wetzel & Werner, 1981; Ekdale & Lewis, 1991), the inverse conveyor or cesspit mode (Kotake, 1989, 1991), refuse dump mode (Bromley, 1991), cache mode (Jumars et al. 1990; Bromley, 1991; Miller & D’Alberto, 2001; Löwemark et al. 2004; Löwemark, Lin & Sarnthein, 2006), gardening mode (Bromley, 1991), and composite mode (e.g. deposit feeder mode + gardening mode: Bromley & Hanken, 2003; detritus feeding mode + cache mode: Löwemark & Schäfer, 2003). Since a diverse morphological range of Zoophycos has been described from the early Cambrian to the present, and from sublittoral to abyssal environments, it is highly unlikely that the various Zoophycos were made by the same taxon, nor is it likely that the behavioural modes employed by the varied Zoophycos makers were consistent in different sedimentary environments throughout Phanerozoic times.

	5. Conclusions

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

 
Based on our study of Zoophycos, the following conclusions can be made:

1. The pyrite framboids documented in this study are the pyritized remains of framboidal microbial colonies enriched within Zoophycos spreiten from the Middle Permian glaciomarine greywacke of the Westley Park Sandstone Member within the Broughton Formation in the southern Sydney Basin of southeastern Australia. The framboids are composed of both non-sheathed (PF1) and sheathed (PF2) sub-micron balls. Both PF1 and PF2 occur in rhythmic alternation within the thick, light-grey and thin, dark-grey minor lamellae of Zoophycos spreiten. No similar framboids have been found in the surrounding host strata.
   
2. The fact that the overlying spreiten cut the underlying ones indicates that the Zoophycos from the study area is of an upward construction. The rhythmic alternation of both the thick, light-grey and thin, dark-grey minor lamellae within Zoophycos spreiten may be suggestive of a gardening manner of the Zoophycos maker responding to the warm and cold changes, food supply in pulses and variations of sedimentation rate for planting and culturing microbial colonies under the condition of a glaciomarine environment at high latitudes.
   
3. The highly complex and orderly Zoophycos in external morphology and internal texture documented herein from the southern Sydney Basin hinted that the Zoophycos would have been the multifunctional garden that was carefully constructed by the Zoophycos maker, where the trace-maker may have intentionally created optimal conditions (substrate types and the quality and quantity of food) for planting and culturing microbes and selectively and periodically introduced sediments rich in clastics, organic matter and clay minerals or other useful components through the central shaft from the seafloor above into the spreiten for the microbial colonies to cultivate and feed on.
   
4. It is proposed that the Zoophycos-producer had a symbiotic relationship with microbial colonies on the mutual basis of the food supply and redox conditions.
   

	Acknowledgements

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

 
This research was jointly supported by grants from the Natural Science Foundation of China (40472020, 40328003, 40621002), the Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (2004000127), the Special Project of Basic Research of China (2005CCA05000; G0800-06-ZS-319), an Australian Research Council Discovery grant (DP0772161) and a Chinese Academy of Science research grant (2006-1-16).

	References

Top Abstract 1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods 3. Results 4. Discussion 5. Conclusions Acknowledgements References

 

BANN, G. R. & JONES, B. G. 2001. The Coolangatta Latite Member and associated tuffs: newly identified basal units in the Gerringong Volcanics, southern Sydney Basin, NSW. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 123, 23–37.[Web of Science][GeoRef]

BOTTJER, D. J., DROSER, M. L. & JABLONSKI, D. 1988. Palaeoenvironmental trends in the history of trace fossils. Nature 333, 252–5.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

BROMLEY, R. G. 1991. Zoophycos: Strip mine, refuse dump, cache or sewage farm? Lethaia 24, 460–2.[CrossRef][Web of Science]

BROMLEY, R. G., EKDALE, A. A. & ASGAARD, U. 1999. Zoophycos in the Upper Cretaceous chalk of Denmark and Sweden. Greifswalder Geowissenschaftliche Beiträge 6, 133–42.

BROMLEY, R. G. & HANKEN, N.-M. 2003. Structure and function of large, lobed Zoophycos, Pliocene of Rhodes, Greece. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 192, 79–100.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

BUTLER, I. B. & RICKARD, D. 2000. Framboidal pyrite formation via the oxidation of iron (II) monosulfide by hydrogen sulphide. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 64, 2665–72.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

CRIMES, T. P. 1987. Trace fossils and correlation of late Precambrian and early Cambrian strata. Geological Magazine 124, 97–119.[Abstract][Web of Science][GeoRef]

DOVE, P. M., DE YOREO, J. J. & WEINER, S. 2003. Biomineralization, Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, vol. 54 (series ed. J. J. Rosso). Washington, DC: The Mineralogical Society of America, 381 pp.

EKDALE, A. A. & BROMLEY, R. G. 1983. Trace fossils and ichnofabric in the Kjolby Gaard Marl, Upper Cretaceous, Denmark. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Denmark 31, 107–19.

EKDALE, A. A. & LEWIS, D. W. 1991. The New Zealand Zoophycos revisited: morphology, ethology and paleoecology. Ichnos 1, 183–94.

FOLK, R. L. 2005. Nannobacteria and the formation of framboidal pyrite: textural evidence. Journal of Earth System Science 114, 369–74.[CrossRef][Web of Science]

FU, S. & WERNER, F. 1995. Is Zoophycos a feeding trace? Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie Abhandlungen 195, 37–47.

GARCIA-GUINEA, J., MARTINEZ-FRIAS, J., GONZALES-MARTIN, R. & ZAMORA, L. 1997. Framboidal pyrites in antique books. Nature 388, 631.[GeoRef]

JAVAUX, E. J., KNOLL, A. H. & WALTER, M. R. 2004. TEM evidence for eukaryotic diversity in mid-Proterozoic oceans. Geobiology 2, 121–32.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

JUMARS, P. A., MAYER, L. M., DEMING, J. W., BAROSS, J. A. & WHEATCROFT, R. A. 1990. Deep-sea deposit-feeding strategies suggested by environmental and feeding constraints. Philosophical Transactions of Royal Society of London A331, 85–101.[CrossRef]

KOTAKE, N. 1989. Paleoecology of the Zoophycos producers. Lethaia 22, 327–41.[Web of Science][GeoRef]

KOTAKE, N. 1991. Non-selective surface deposit feeding by the Zoophycos producers. Lethaia 24, 379–85.[Web of Science][GeoRef]

LOVE, L. G. 1957. Micro-organisms and the presence of syngenetic pyrite. The Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 113, 429–40.

LOVE, L. G. 1962. Biogenic primary sulphide of the Permian Kupferschiefer and Marl Slate. Economic Geology 57, 350–66.[Abstract/Free Full Text][CrossRef][GeoRef]

LOWEMARK, L., LIN, I.-T., WANG, C.-H., HUH, C.-A., WEI, K.-Y. & CHEN, C.-W. 2004. Ethology of the Zoophycos-producer: Arguments against the gardening model from ¹³C_org evidences of the spreiten material. TAO (Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences) 15, 713–25.

LOWEMARK, L., LIN, H. L. & SARNTHEIN, M. 2006. Temporal variations of the trace fossil Zoophycos in a 425 ka long sediment record from the South China Sea: implications for the ethology of the Zoophycos producer. Geological Magazine 143, 105–14.[Abstract/Free Full Text][CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

LOWEMARK, L. & SCHAFER, P. 2003. Ethological implications from a detailed X-ray radiograph and ¹⁴C study of the modern deep-sea Zoophycos. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 192, 101–21.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

MANILOFF, J. 1997. Nannobacteria: size limits and evidence. Science 276, 1776.[Web of Science][Medline]

MARINTSCH, E. J. & FINKS, R. M. 1982. Lower Devonian ichnofacies at Highland Mills, New York and their gradual replacement across environmental gradients. Journal of Paleontology 56, 1050–78.[Abstract][Web of Science][GeoRef]

MILLER, M. F. 1991. Morphology and paleoenvironmental distribution of Paleozoic Spirophyton and Zoophycos: implications for the Zoophycos ichnofacies. Palaios 6, 410–25.[Abstract/Free Full Text][GeoRef]

MILLER, W. III. 2003. Paleobiology of complex trace fossils. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 192, 3–14.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

MILLER, W. & D’ALBERTO, L. 2001. Paleoethologic implications of Zoophycos from Late Cretaceous and Paleocene limestones of the Venetian Prealps, northeastern Italy. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 166, 237–47.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

OHFUJI, H. & RICKARD, D. 2005. Experimental syntheses of framboids – a review. Earth-Science Reviews 71, 147–70.

OLIVERO, D. 1996. Zoophycos distribution and sequence stratigraphy. Examples from Jurassic to Cretaceous deposits in southeastern France. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 123, 273–87.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

OLIVERO, D. 2003. Early Jurassic to Late Cretaceous evolution of Zoophycos in the French Subalpine Basin (southern France). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 192, 59–78.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

POPA, R., KINKLE, B. K. & BADESCU, A. 2004. Pyrite framboids as biomarkers for iron-sulfur system. Geo-microbiology Journal 21, 193–206.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

RICKARD, D. T. 1970. The origin of framboids. Lithos 3, 269–93.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

ROYCHOUDHURY, A. N., KOSTKA, J. E. & CAPPELLEN, P. V. 2003. Pyritization: a palaeoenvironmental and redox proxy reevaluated. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 57, 1183–93.[CrossRef]

RUST, G. W. 1935. Colloidal primary copper ores at Cornwall Mines, southeastern Missouri. Journal of Geology 43, 398–426.[Web of Science][GeoRef]

SAVRDA, C. E. & BOTTJER, D. J. 1994. Ichnofossils and ichnofabrics in rhythmically bedded pelagic/hemipelagic carbonates: recognition and evaluation of benthic redox and scour cycles. International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 19, 195–210.

SCHIEBER, J. 2002. Sedimentary pyrite: a window into the microbial past. Geology 30, 531–4.[Abstract/Free Full Text][CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

SCHNEIDERHOHN, H. 1923. Chalkographische Untersuchung des Mansfelder Kupferschiefers. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie 47, 1–38.

SCHOUTEN, C. 1946. The role of sulphur bacteria in the formation of the so-called sedimentary copper ores and pyritic ore bodies. Economic Geology 41, 517–38.[Abstract/Free Full Text][CrossRef][GeoRef]

SEILACHER, A. 1967a. Bathymetry of trace fossils. Marine Geology 5, 413–28.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

SEILACHER, A. 1967b. Fossil behavior. Scientific American 217, 72–80.[Web of Science][GeoRef]

SEILACHER, A. 1986. Evolution of behavior as expressed in marine trace fossils. In Evolution of Animal Behavior, Paleontological and Field Approaches (eds M. H. Nitecki & J. E. Kitchell), pp. 62–87. New York: Oxford University Press.

SIMPSON, S. 1970. Notes on Zoophycos and Spirophyton. In Trace Fossils (eds T. P. Crimes & J. C. Harper), pp. 505–14. Geological Journal (Special Issue) 3.

SWEENEY, R. E. & KAPLAN, I. R. 1973. Pyrite framboids formation: laboratory synthesis and marine sediments. Economic Geology 68, 618–34.[Abstract/Free Full Text][CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

TAYLOR, K. G. & MACQUAKER, J. H. S. 2000. Early diagenetic pyrite morphology in a mudstone-dominated succession: the Lower Jurassic Cleveland Ironstone Formation, eastern England. Sedimentary Geology 131, 77–86.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

UCHMAN, A. 1999. Ichnology of the Rhenodanubian Flysch (Lower Cretaceous–Eocene) in Austria and Germany. Beringeria 25, 65–171.

UCHMAN, A. & DEMIRCAN, H. 1999. A Zoophycos group trace fossil from Miocene flysch in southern Turkey: evidence for a U-shaped causative burrow. Ichnos 6, 251–9.

WETZEL, A. 1991. Ecologic interpretation of deep-sea trace fossil communities. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 85, 47–69.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

WETZEL, A. & WERNER, F. 1981. Morphology and ecological significance of Zoophycos in deep-sea sediments off NW Africa. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 32, 185–212.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

WIGNALL, P. B., NEWTON, R. & BROOKFIELD, M. E. 2005. Pyrite framboid evidence for oxygen-poor deposition during the Permian–Triassic crisis in Kashmir. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 216, 183–8.[CrossRef][GeoRef]

WILKIN, R. T., ARTHUR, M. A. & DEAN, W. E. 1997. History of water column anoxia in the Black Sea indicated by pyrite framboid size distributions. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 148, 517–25.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

WILKIN, R. T. & BARNES, H. L. 1997. Formation processes of framboidal pyrite. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 61, 323–39.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

WILKIN, R. T., BARNES, H. L. & BRANTLEY, S. L. 1996. The size distribution of framboidal pyrite in modern sediments: an indicator of redox conditions. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 60, 3897–912.[CrossRef][Web of Science][GeoRef]

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map 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 Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by GONG, Y.-M. Articles by XU, R. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation