Back
Geiselodinium miocenicum
Geiselodinium? miocenicum Nagy, 1965
Stover and Evitt, 1978, considered this to be a provisionally accepted species of Geiselodinium.
Holotype: Nagy, 1965, pl.1, fig.3; pl.2, fig.11
Age: Middle Miocene
Original description, Nagy 1965: Geiselodinium miocenicum n. sp. (table I, Fig. 3; table II, Fig. 11)
Holotype: in the Pollen Laboratory of the Hungarian Geological Institute; Zengõvárkony, bore-hole No. 45; sample No. 1; Plate 1, cross-table numbers; 34.4 to 117.4.
Locus typicus: Zengõvárkony, Mecsek Mountains.
Stratum typicum: Helvetian, fresh/water, yellow, coarse/grained sand, Zengõvárkony. Bore/hole No. 45+ 8.6 to 13.2 m.
Description and diagnosis: 62 x 50 µm large, rotund, slightly pentagonal outer shell lying closely on the central cyst, both very thin. Apical horn 7 µm long, on the hypotheca mildly developed appendages. Transversal girdle hardly observable )according to the left outline also two small thickenings visible’. No longitudinal furrow. Secondarily highly folded (Fig. 3).
One specimen was found.
Differential diagnosis: Differs from Geiselodinium eocenicum described by Krutzsch 1962, p. 40 to 45) from the fresh water Eocene at Geiseltal in being slightly more elongate and in fact, that both antapical horns are only rather assumable. On the other hand, instead of the cap-like formation the epitheca has an apical appendage.
Stover and Evitt, 1978, considered this to be a provisionally accepted species of Geiselodinium.
Holotype: Nagy, 1965, pl.1, fig.3; pl.2, fig.11
Age: Middle Miocene
Original description, Nagy 1965: Geiselodinium miocenicum n. sp. (table I, Fig. 3; table II, Fig. 11)
Holotype: in the Pollen Laboratory of the Hungarian Geological Institute; Zengõvárkony, bore-hole No. 45; sample No. 1; Plate 1, cross-table numbers; 34.4 to 117.4.
Locus typicus: Zengõvárkony, Mecsek Mountains.
Stratum typicum: Helvetian, fresh/water, yellow, coarse/grained sand, Zengõvárkony. Bore/hole No. 45+ 8.6 to 13.2 m.
Description and diagnosis: 62 x 50 µm large, rotund, slightly pentagonal outer shell lying closely on the central cyst, both very thin. Apical horn 7 µm long, on the hypotheca mildly developed appendages. Transversal girdle hardly observable )according to the left outline also two small thickenings visible’. No longitudinal furrow. Secondarily highly folded (Fig. 3).
One specimen was found.
Differential diagnosis: Differs from Geiselodinium eocenicum described by Krutzsch 1962, p. 40 to 45) from the fresh water Eocene at Geiseltal in being slightly more elongate and in fact, that both antapical horns are only rather assumable. On the other hand, instead of the cap-like formation the epitheca has an apical appendage.