Back
Dapsilidinium pumilum
From Fensome et al., 2019:
Dapsilidinium? pumilum (Davey and Williams, 1966b, p.93–94, pl.7, figs.3–4) Lentin and Williams, 1981, p.70. Holotype: Davey and Williams, 1966b, pl.7, fig.3; Fauconnier and Masure, 2004, pl.20, fig.2. Originally Polysphaeridium, subsequently Polysphaeridium?, thirdly (and now) Dapsilidinium?. Questionable assignment: Lentin and Williams (1981, p.93). Age: Cenomanian.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original diagnosis: Davey and Williams, 1966, p.93: Polysphaeridium pumilum
Subspherical central body having numerous small open tubular processes. Processes terminating distally in a slightly recurved more or less entire margin. Length of processes less than half that of the maximum body diameter.
Dimensions: holotype: overall diameter 40x34 µm, diameter of central body 25x19 µm, length of processes 8-10 Ám. Number of processes c.44. Range: overall diameter 30-40 µm, diameter of central body 17-25 µm, length of processes 7-10 µm, with of processes 1-1.5 µm, number of processes 38-44.
Original description: Davey and Williams, 1966, p. 94: Polysphaeridium pumilum
The central body has a smooth surface. The processes are tubular with a thin wall. They widen slightly proximally, at the junction with the central body, and distally up to about 2 Ám. The distal termination of a process superficially strongly resembles that of Hystrichosphaeridium sheppeyi, but on closer examination the presence of spines has not been observed. The distall margin is probably entire or slightly denticulate. The number of processes present indicate that each precingular and postcingular area bears two processes. An archaeopyle has not been observed with certainty.
Affinities:
Davey and Williams, 1966, p. 94: Polysphaeridium pumilum
This species is clearly differentiated from all other species by its size and the number and type of processes present.
Dapsilidinium? pumilum (Davey and Williams, 1966b, p.93–94, pl.7, figs.3–4) Lentin and Williams, 1981, p.70. Holotype: Davey and Williams, 1966b, pl.7, fig.3; Fauconnier and Masure, 2004, pl.20, fig.2. Originally Polysphaeridium, subsequently Polysphaeridium?, thirdly (and now) Dapsilidinium?. Questionable assignment: Lentin and Williams (1981, p.93). Age: Cenomanian.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original diagnosis: Davey and Williams, 1966, p.93: Polysphaeridium pumilum
Subspherical central body having numerous small open tubular processes. Processes terminating distally in a slightly recurved more or less entire margin. Length of processes less than half that of the maximum body diameter.
Dimensions: holotype: overall diameter 40x34 µm, diameter of central body 25x19 µm, length of processes 8-10 Ám. Number of processes c.44. Range: overall diameter 30-40 µm, diameter of central body 17-25 µm, length of processes 7-10 µm, with of processes 1-1.5 µm, number of processes 38-44.
Original description: Davey and Williams, 1966, p. 94: Polysphaeridium pumilum
The central body has a smooth surface. The processes are tubular with a thin wall. They widen slightly proximally, at the junction with the central body, and distally up to about 2 Ám. The distal termination of a process superficially strongly resembles that of Hystrichosphaeridium sheppeyi, but on closer examination the presence of spines has not been observed. The distall margin is probably entire or slightly denticulate. The number of processes present indicate that each precingular and postcingular area bears two processes. An archaeopyle has not been observed with certainty.
Affinities:
Davey and Williams, 1966, p. 94: Polysphaeridium pumilum
This species is clearly differentiated from all other species by its size and the number and type of processes present.