Patterns of brachiopod faunal and body-size changes across the Permian−Triassic boundary: Evidence from the Daoduishan section in Meishan area, South China

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2015.11.023Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Significant changes of brachiopod assemblages took place during the Permian–Triassic transition in the Meishan area, South China.

  • Permian–Triassic Lilliput is significantly identified.

  • First commenced high end-Permian environmental and ecological stresses in deep waters, forced deep-water brachiopods to migrate to shallow waters.

  • Brachiopod morphological features indicate the survivors had advantageous adaptations to living in an anoxic/dysoxic and/or low-productivity environment during the Permian–Triassic crisis.

Abstract

New analysis of Permian–Triassic brachiopod assemblages and body-size changes in South China provides insights into the process of the environmental crisis in the lead up to the end-Permian mass extinction. The recently discovered Daoduishan section of South China can be considered as an important auxiliary section for the study of brachiopods at the Meishan Section D of South China, the GSSP of the Permian–Triassic Boundary (PTB). This paper studied changes of the brachiopod assemblages and body sizes through the upper part of the Changxing Formation and basal Yinkeng Formation of Daoduishan. The results show that significant changes of brachiopod assemblages took place between Beds 24e and 26. Brachiopods?Prelissorhynchia sp. and Paracruirithyris pygmaea are the dominators in Beds 14–24e, while Tethyochonetes pigmaea and Paryphella spp. are the dominators in Beds 26–29. Body sizes of brachiopods significantly decreased between Beds 24e and 26 and then maintained smaller means in Beds 27–29. Studies of brachiopod morphological features indicate both Tethyochonetes and Paryphella had advantageous adaptations enabling them to copy with living in an anoxic/dysoxic and/or low-productivity environment during the Permian–Triassic crisis.

Introduction

Numerous studies on the end-Permian mass extinction and causes have been conducted based on materials from the Meishan Section D of South China, the GSSP of the PTB (e.g., Grice et al., 2005, Xie et al., 2007, Shen et al., 2011, Joachimski et al., 2012, Sun et al., 2012, Yin et al., 2012, Song et al., 2013, Chen et al., 2015, He et al., 2015). Whether the extinction was abrupt or episodic remains debatable (Yang et al., 1991, Jin et al., 2000, Xie et al., 2005, Chen et al., 2006, Chen et al., 2010, Chen et al., 2015, Song et al., 2009, Song et al., 2013, Yin et al., 2012, Wang et al., 2014), although there is an emerging consensus that the main extinction intervals span from Beds 25 to 28 at the Meishan Section D. Brachiopods, one of the key marine benthic clades in the Permian global marine ecosystem, were severely and adversely affected by this mass extinction and, consequently, have furnished as an important source of information for the study of the end-Permian mass extinction and recovery (Chen et al., 2002, Chen et al., 2005a, Chen et al., 2005b, Chen et al., 2006, Chen et al., 2010, Chen et al., 2015, Song et al., 2013). Several brachiopod faunas have been reported or simply described from the Permian–Triassic boundary beds at the Meishan GSSP sections (Liao, 1979, Liao, 1984, Zhao et al., 1981, Sheng et al., 1984, Xu and Grant, 1994, Chen et al., 2002, Chen et al., 2006, Chen et al., 2010, Chen and Liao, 2009), but only a few papers have actually analyzed the changes of brachiopod species diversity, assemblage, and body size in the Meishan area (Jin et al., 2000, Chen et al., 2002, Chen et al., 2005b, Chen et al., 2006, He et al., 2007, He et al., 2015, Chen and Liao, 2009). Further, among these earlier studies, some have suffered either from focusing on too short a stratigraphic interval, typically just across the Permian–Triassic boundary beds, to allow a broader analysis and thus a deeper understanding of the evolution of the brachiopod assemblages over a longer timescale (e.g., Sheng et al., 1984); or from the relative small sample size of the brachiopod assemblages due to difficulty (at the time) in collecting brachiopod fossils from the dense Changxing limestone (Changxing Formation) at the Meishan sections (e.g., Chen and Liao, 2009).

Here, we present an updated and much expanded dataset of brachiopod stratigraphical occurrences and body-size changes from the upper Changhsingian to the lowest Triassic from the Daoduishan section in the Meishan area. Based on this new dataset, we studied the changing patterns of brachiopod assemblages and body sizes through time and discussed the significance of certain brachiopod morphological adaptations in aiding their survivorship across the end-Permian crisis. The primary aim was to gain a deeper understanding of the temporal dynamics of brachiopod faunal turnover and body-size changes across an expanded PTB interval in South China. The ultimate objective of this study was to provide new insights into the causes of the end-Permian mass extinction.

Geographically, the Daoduishan section is located about 2.5 km northeast of the Meishan Section D, 20 km northwest of Changxing County, Zhejiang Province, South China (Fig. 1). Palaeogeographically, the Daoduishan section was situated in the eastern part of the South China block (Fig. 2). The South China block was mainly subdivided into deep-water siliceous basins and shallow-water carbonate platforms during the Changhsingian (Fig. 2). The deep-water basins are characterized by chert and siliceous mudstone intercalated with calcareous mudstone, suggesting an outer shelf deep-sea depositional setting (He et al., 2015). The shallow-water carbonate platforms are featured by limestone, of an inner shelf origin (He et al., 2008, He et al., 2015). Similar to the Meishan Section D, the studied Daoduishan section was located on the upper part of a ramp linked to one of the carbonate platforms. In contrast, the Majiashan and Rencunping sections, both referred to in this paper for comparison with the Daoduishan section, were located in a deep-water (basinal) facies on the outer shelf (He et al., 2008, He et al., 2011, He et al., 2015). For the purpose of comparison, the Huangzhishan section was also chosen in this study to represent shallow-water carbonate platform facies (He et al., 2015).

The upper Changhsingian to the basal Triassic sequences at the Daoduishan section include the upper part of the Changxing Formation and the basal part of the Yinkeng Formation (Fig. 3). The component of the upper Changxing Formation consists of gray to light gray thin- to medium-bedded bioclastic limestone, occasionally intercalated with gray thick-bedded bioclastic limestone and black cherty nodules, with hummocky cross-stratification, parallel stratification, or wavy cross-bedding in Beds 14, 15, 23, and 24 (Fig. 3, Fig. 4A, B). The basal Yinkeng Formation is composed of dark gray thin-bedded calcareous mudstone and dark gray thin- to medium-bedded argillaceous limestone, intercalated with pale volcanic ash, with fine laminations in calcareous mudstone (Fig. 3).

At Daoduishan, the upper part of Bed 21 to Bed 24b yield the conodont Clarkina yini Zone, equal to the counterpart from the top part of Bed 22 to Bed 24d of the Meishan Section D (for the latest conodont zonation of the Meishan Section D, see Yuan et al., 2014). Beds 24c to 26 yield the Clarkina meishanensis Zone, roughly equivalent to Beds 24e to 25 of the Meishan Section D (Yuan et al., 2014). Bed 27 at Daoduishan yields conodont Clarkina taylorae, suggesting correlation with Beds 27a–b of the Meishan Section D (Zhang et al., 2009). Additionally, Bed 26 at Daoduishan contains ammonoid Hypophiceras sp., typical for the uppermost Changhsingian, thus allowing alignment with Bed 26 of the Meishan Section D where Hypophiceras sp. is also present (Yin et al., 2001). Bed 29 at Daoduishan yields ammonoid Ophiceras sp., typical for the basal Triassic. Following these correlations, the PTB at the Daoduishan section is therefore placed between Beds 28 and 29 (Fig. 3), although the typical fossil Hindeodus parvus marking the base of the Triassic has not been found at this section.

Section snippets

Methods of brachiopod collection and body-size measurement

Brachiopods were collected from selected beds of the upper part of the Changhsingian and the basal Triassic strata at Daoduishan. These beds were chosen because they had relatively abundant brachiopods. Meanwhile, to reduce sampling bias, an area of about 0.5–0.6 m2 was sampled in each studied bed. All brachiopods found during excavating were collected, including both complete individuals and fragments. The number of specimens was counted for each species in each bed. When counting, if both a

Stratigrapical ranges of brachiopod species and temporal fluctuations of brachiopod diversity

The stratigrapical ranges of brachiopod species along the upper Changxing Formation to the basal Yinkeng Formation show that most species (10 species) survived into the lowest Triassic (Beds 29–30) except some larger species (such as Araxathyris sinensis, linoproductids, ?Prelissorhynchia sp., Prelissorhynchia xui, ?Squamularia sp., and Haydenella sp.) which disappeared in Bed 26 or older beds (Fig. 3).

Turnover of brachiopod assemblages

The stratigraphic variation of the abundance of brachiopod species, measured by the counts of

Discussion

Why did the turnover of brachiopod assemblages take place at the Permian–Triassic transition? A number of factors could each have played a role, or collectively inter-played to reinforce the turnover of brachiopod assemblages through time.

Firstly, the change of substrate, from the lime-rich sediment in Beds 14–24e to the mud-rich substrate in Beds 26–29, could explain the turnover, at least in part. As already demonstrated in several recent studies (He et al., 2015, Zhang et al., 2016),

Acknowledgments

We thank L. Y. Zhu, X. Chen, and B. X. Su for help with field work. We also wish to express thanks to S. Z. Shen for his helpful suggestion on the identification of brachiopods, sincere thanks to E. A. Weldon for her further improving the manuscript and thanks to three anonymous reviewers for offering good comments and suggestions for the revision of this manuscript. This paper has been supported by NSFC (grant nos. 41372030, 40872008) and the Ministry of Education of China (B08030 of 111

References (59)

  • G.A. Afanasjeva

    Changes in the communities of Paleozoic brachiopods due to their development of their filtering system

    Paleontol. J.

    (2009)
  • C.H.C. Brunton et al.

    Productida

  • Z.Q. Chen et al.

    Brachiopod faunas across the Wuchiapingian-Changhsingian (Late Permian) boundary at the stratotype section and subsurface of Changxing area, South China

    N. Jb. Geol. Paläont.

    (2009)
  • Z.Q. Chen et al.

    A new genus of Rhynchonellid brachiopod from the Lower Triassic of South China and implications for timing the recovery of brachopoda after the end-Permian mass extinction

    Palaeontology

    (2002)
  • Z.Q. Chen et al.

    Early Triassic recovery of the brachiopod faunas from the end-Permian mass extinction: a global review

    Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol.

    (2005)
  • Z.Q. Chen et al.

    Survival brachiopod faunas of the end-Permian mass extinction from the southern Alps (Italy) and South China

    Geol. Mag.

    (2006)
  • Z.Q. Chen et al.

    Complete biotic and sedimentary records of the Permian–Triassic transition from Meishan section, South China: ecologically assessing mass extinction and its aftermath

    Earth Sci. Rev.

    (2015)
  • Q.L. Feng et al.

    Uppermost Changhsingian (Permian) radiolarian fauna from southern Guizhou, southwestern China

    J. Paleontol.

    (2002)
  • F.T. Fürsich et al.

    Environmental factors determining the distribution of brachiopods

    Palaeontology

    (1974)
  • V. Garilli et al.

    Physiological advantages of dwarfing in surviving extinctions in high-CO2 oceans

    Nat. Clim. Chang.

    (2015)
  • R.E. Grant

    Structural adaptation in two Permian brachiopod genera, Salt Range, West Pakistan

    J. Paleontol.

    (1968)
  • K. Grice et al.

    Photic zone euxinia during the Permian-Triassic superanoxic event

    Science

    (2005)
  • Ø. Hammer et al.

    PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis

    Palaeontol. Electron.

    (2001)
  • W.H. He et al.

    A late Changhsingian (latest Permian) radiolarian fauna from Chaohu, Anhui and a comparison with its contemporary faunas of South China

    Alcheringa

    (2008)
  • W.H. He et al.

    A latest Permian radiolarian fauna from Hushan, South China, and its geological implications

    Alcheringa

    (2011)
  • W.H. He et al.

    Systematics and palaeoecology of Changhsingian (Late Permian) Ambocoeliidae brachiopods from South China and implications for the end-Permian mass extinction

    Alcheringa

    (2012)
  • W.H. He et al.

    Changhsingian (latest Permian) deep-water brachiopod fauna from South China

    J. Syst. Palaeontol.

    (2014)
  • W.H. He et al.

    Late Permian marine ecosystem collapse began in deeper waters: evidence from brachiopod diversity and body size changes

    Geobiology

    (2015)
  • R. Hofmann et al.

    Palaeoecology of the Spathian Virgin Formation (Utah, USA) and its implications for the Early Triassic recovery

    Acta Palaeontol. Pol.

    (2013)
  • Cited by (19)

    • Temporal shell-size variations of bivalves in South China from the Late Permian to the early Middle Triassic

      2023, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology
      Citation Excerpt :

      To date, numerous pieces of evidence for the Lilliput effect have been recognized during the aftermaths of the end-Permian mass extinction (e.g., Twitchett, 2007; Song et al., 2011; Schaal et al., 2016), end-Triassic mass extinction (Opazo and Twitchett, 2022), end-Cretaceous mass extinction (Keller and Abramovich, 2009; Sogot et al., 2014), and early Toarcian extinction events (Morten and Twitchett, 2009; Caswell and Dawn, 2019; Piazza et al., 2019, 2020). As the most intensively studied interval, the end-Permian mass extinction was accompanied by the Lilliput effect in various fossil groups, including brachiopods (He et al., 2016; Chen et al., 2019), bivalves (Twitchett, 2007; Metcalfe et al., 2011; Foster et al., 2020), gastropods (Payne et al., 2005; in debate with Brayard et al., 2010, 2015), foraminifers (Song et al., 2011; Feng et al., 2020), conodonts (Luo et al., 2008; Chen et al., 2013; Wu et al., 2019; Leu et al., 2019), and ostracods (Chu et al., 2015). However, various patterns of size evolution were shown among different taxonomic groups (Schaal et al., 2016).

    • Size variation of brachiopods from the Late Permian through the Middle Triassic in South China: Evidence for the Lilliput Effect following the Permian-Triassic extinction

      2019, Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Such size decreases have been observed in various animal groups after mass extinction events, and a pattern of size reduction may be common to major biotic crises (Arnold et al., 1995; Smith and Jeffery, 1998; Twitchett and Barras, 2004; Lockwood, 2005; Twitchett, 2007; Harries and Knorr, 2009; Huang et al., 2010). In addition, recent studies found that at least within some brachiopod species, statistically significant size reduction was already taking place prior to the P-Tr mass extinction (He et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2016, 2017). However, there has been no consistent recognition of the mechanism for size reduction in the earliest Triassic.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text