Page 11 - Coletti_al2016

Carnets Geol. 16 (3)

Figure 7: Comparison of the vegetative anatomy of fossil and Recent L. crispatum. (A) Zoned branch, Recent,
Mediterranean, Egadi Islands, Marettimo. (B) Zoned branch, Upper Langhian, Slovakia, Stupava-Vrchná Hora. (C)
Plumose ventral-core, L. crispatum lectotype, Recent, Rovigno, Mediterranean, Northern Adriatic, modified after
BASSO et al. (2011). (D) Plumose ventral-core, Upper Langhian, Slovakia, Stupava-Vrchná Hora.

Since no morphological evidence can be show that their morphology is remarkably simi-
used to separate modern L. crispatum from the lar. The fossil specimens analyzed here are thus
fossil corallines analyzed in this work, they conspecific with the modern Lithothamnion
must be considered conspecific, and conse- crispatum, whose stratigraphic range is exten-
quently the stratigraphic range of L. crispatum ded back at least to the Burdigalian. The
is extended at least to the Burdigalian. species has been found associated with
markedly different skeletal assemblages and in
Conclusions very varied climatic conditions throughout the
Cenozoic. The fossil record, consistent with its
Fossil and modern specimens share the modern cosmopolitan distribution, suggests a
same vegetative and reproductive anatomy and remarkable adaptability. Although the morpho-
are characterized by the same unique diagno- functional significance of L. crispatum roof pits
stic feature: the presence of a rosette of dege- remains unknown, they seem to be a successful
nerate cells (a pit in axial sections) around the and persistent feature.
multiporate conceptacle pore canals. Both
qualitative comparison and statistical analyses

37