Back
Energlynia indotata
Energlynia indotata "indotata" (Drugg, 1978, p.74-75, pl.8, figs.11-14) Fensome, 1981, p.51. Holotype: Drugg, 1978, pl.8, fig.12. NOW Wanaea. Originally (and now) Wanaea, subsequently Energlynia. Taxonomic senior synonym: Wanaea (as Energlynia) acollaris, according to Woollam (1980, p.250) - however, Feist-Burkhardt and Monteil (1997, p.45) retained Wanaea indotata. Age: Bajocian-Callovian.
Isotypes: Drugg, 1978
Locus typicus: Burton Bradstock, Dorset, England
Stratum typicum: Bajocian-Callovian
Original description: Drugg, 1978, p. 74-75: Wanaea indotata
Hypocyst mammilate in form with a prominent antapical horn or protrusion. The epicyst has not been seen intact in side view but is seemingly quite flat to slightly convex upward. Archaeopyle epicystal. Autophragm smooth with sparsely scattered grana or spinulae. The hypocystal paracingular fringe is limited to a very narrow fuzzy rim-like structure. Often it is entirely lacking. Paratabulation absent. The body width ranges from 65 to 117µm with most specimens being about 80 to 85 µm wide. The height ranges from about 60 to 70 µm.
Fensome, 1981, p. 51
Synopsis of diagnosis: A species of Eneglynia with a mammilate hypocyst, antapically with a prominent horn. The epicyst is small, shallow, apically flat to slightly convex. The autophragm is smooth, with scattered granulae or spinulae. Tabulation is entirely lacking, except for the posterior cingular suture, which may develop a low rim-like ridge; however it too is often absent.
Affinities:
Drugg, 1978, p. 75: Wanaea indonata
Wanaea spectabilis (Deflandre and Cookson) Cookson and Eisenack, 1958, is similar to W. indotata but has a well-defined narrow lacey paracingular flange. W. indotata lacks a paracingular flange entirely or, at best, merely has a fuzzy indistinct rim. It is similar to W. acollaris Dodekova, 1975, in that it lacks a well-defined paracingular structure but differs by not exhibiting paratabulation. It is no doubt closely related to W. acollaris. The simple morphology of W. indotata and its Bajocian occurrence suggests that it is part of an ancestral stock.
Fensome, 1981, p. 51: Energlynia indotata is distinguished from E. acollaris by its lack of marked plate boundaries. However, as noted above, E. aclooaris may also be devoid of tabulation. Thus E. indotata may well prove to be within the range of ariation of E. acollaris.
Isotypes: Drugg, 1978
Locus typicus: Burton Bradstock, Dorset, England
Stratum typicum: Bajocian-Callovian
Original description: Drugg, 1978, p. 74-75: Wanaea indotata
Hypocyst mammilate in form with a prominent antapical horn or protrusion. The epicyst has not been seen intact in side view but is seemingly quite flat to slightly convex upward. Archaeopyle epicystal. Autophragm smooth with sparsely scattered grana or spinulae. The hypocystal paracingular fringe is limited to a very narrow fuzzy rim-like structure. Often it is entirely lacking. Paratabulation absent. The body width ranges from 65 to 117µm with most specimens being about 80 to 85 µm wide. The height ranges from about 60 to 70 µm.
Fensome, 1981, p. 51
Synopsis of diagnosis: A species of Eneglynia with a mammilate hypocyst, antapically with a prominent horn. The epicyst is small, shallow, apically flat to slightly convex. The autophragm is smooth, with scattered granulae or spinulae. Tabulation is entirely lacking, except for the posterior cingular suture, which may develop a low rim-like ridge; however it too is often absent.
Affinities:
Drugg, 1978, p. 75: Wanaea indonata
Wanaea spectabilis (Deflandre and Cookson) Cookson and Eisenack, 1958, is similar to W. indotata but has a well-defined narrow lacey paracingular flange. W. indotata lacks a paracingular flange entirely or, at best, merely has a fuzzy indistinct rim. It is similar to W. acollaris Dodekova, 1975, in that it lacks a well-defined paracingular structure but differs by not exhibiting paratabulation. It is no doubt closely related to W. acollaris. The simple morphology of W. indotata and its Bajocian occurrence suggests that it is part of an ancestral stock.
Fensome, 1981, p. 51: Energlynia indotata is distinguished from E. acollaris by its lack of marked plate boundaries. However, as noted above, E. aclooaris may also be devoid of tabulation. Thus E. indotata may well prove to be within the range of ariation of E. acollaris.