If you do not need this report after it has served your purpose please return it to the Geological 

Survey, using the official mailing label at the end

UNITED

A

STATES

NEW

DEPARTMENT OF THE

UPPER

INTERIOR

CRETACEOUS

RUDISTID FROM THE

CLAY OF

GEOLOGICAL

TEXAS

KEMP

SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 19&-A

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Harold L. Ickes, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

W. C. M endenhall, Director

Professional Paper 193-A

A NEW UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID 

FROM THE KEMP CLAY OF TEXAS

BY

LLOYD WILLIAM STEPHENSON

Shorter contributions to general geology, 1938

(Pages 1-15)

UNITED STATES

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON : 1938

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. ------- Price 25 cents
CONTENTS

Page 

Abstract _ ____-_____________-___________-______________________-__---_____---_-------_---------------_------- 1

Introduction __________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1

Description of species____________________________________________-_--_-___-_---_-------_-------_-------_---_--_ 3

Bibliography__ ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 6

ILLUSTRATIONS

Page 

PLATES 1-5. Upper Cretaceous rudistids____________-_________________________-_______-_______--_______--_____-_- 9

II
SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY, 1938

A NEW UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID FROM THE KEMP CLAY OF TEXAS

By LLOYD WILLIAM STEPHENSON

ABSTRACT

The paper describes a new rudistid species, Titanosarcolites 

oddsensis, from the Kemp clay (Maestrichtian), the uppermost 

formation of the Upper Cretaceous of Texas, and the uppermost 

of four formations composing the Navarro group. The genus 

Titanosarcolites Trechmann (1924) is founded on a rudistid 

species from Jamaica, first described by Whitfield in 1897 as 

Caprinula gigantea. Titanosarcolites giganteus (Whitfield) has 

subsequently been recorded from Cuba, questionably from the 

Island of St. Croix, and from Chiapas, Mexico. This is the 

first record of Titanosarcolites as far north as Texas. Since the 

Maestrichtian age of the Kemp clay is generally accepted, the 

presence in it of this tropical genus tends to confirm the Maestrichtian age of the rudistid fauna of the Caribbean region, which 

includes in addition to this genus, Barrettia Woodward, Praebarrettia Trechmann, Bournonia Mac Gillavry, Biradiolites 

D'Orbigny, Antillocaprina Trechmann, Tampsia Stephenson, 

Lapeirousia Bayle, and other genera. Outside of the Caribbean 

region and north of it representatives of this fauna have been 

recorded from Guatemala (Barrettia and Biradiolites), Chiapas, 

Mexico (Barrettia and Titanosarcolites), and Tamaulipas, Mexico 

(Tampsia). The species Titanosarcolites oddsensis, here described, indicates the range of at least one member of the fauna 

as far north as the Gulf Coastal Plain of Texas, and fragmentary 

material indicates the range of this or a closely related genus in the 

Western Interior of the United States as far north as Montana.

INTRODUCTION

A new paleontologic link between the Upper Cretaceous series of the Gulf Coastal Plain and that of 

Jamaica, Cuba, and other West Indian islands, is afforded by a large rudistid shell found by me in Falls 

County, Tex., in November 1936. The specimen was 

obtained from the upper part of the Kemp clay, the 

uppermost formation of the Cretaceous series and the 

uppermost of the four formations composing the 

Navarro group. Though incomplete and externally 

poorly preserved, the specimen internally clearly reveals 

on polished surfaces many of the bizarre structural 

features of the group of rudistids to which it belongs. 

The shell was closely associated with numerous impure 

limonite-stained septarian concretions of calcium carbonate, which were weathered out of the clay. These 

concretions contained a few imperfectly preserved 

fossils, among which were recognized Crenella serica 

Conrad, Turritella vertebroides Morton (var.), Den41442—38

talium sp., Sphenodiscus sp., and Discoscaphites sp. 

This associated fauna is strictly a Gulf Coastal Plain 

assemblage not known in the Carribbean Upper Cretaceous.

Rudistids are rare in the Navarro group of Texas. 

The sum total of the known rudistid material from the 

Navarro consists of Durania sp., too poorly preserved 

for specific identification, found in the Neylandville 

marl in Navarro County, a more completely preserved 

undescribed species of Sauvagesia? from the Corsicanr. 

marl near San Antonio, Bexar County, the large shell 

here described, from Falls County, and a few fragments from scattered localities.

The Falls County shell is here referred to the genur 

Titanosarcolites Trechmann. Although closely related 

to the genotype, Titanosarcolites giganteus (Whitfield), 

from Jamaica, it possesses distinctive specific characters and is described below under the new name T. 

oddsensis.

The recorded distribution of material referred to T. 

giganteus indicates that in places the individuals of thir 

species made up a considerable part of the rudistid fauns, 

of the Jamaica-Cuba- region hi late Upper Cretaeeour 

time. However, according to its recorders, most of the 

material studied is incompletely and imperfectly preserved, and Mac Gillavry (1937, p. 86) is of the opinior 

that it may represent more than one species. The 

associated rudistid fauna is a varied one, including 

forms that have been referred to Barrettia Woodward, 

Praebarrettia Trechmann, Bournonia Mac Gillavry, 

Biradiolites D'Orbigny, Antillocaprina Trechmann, 

Tampsia Stephenson, Lapeirousia Bayle, and other 

genera. Representatives of this rudistid fauna have 

been recorded from Jamaica, Cuba, Haiti (Woodring1 

and Brown, 1924, pp. 97-98), Puerto Rico? (Hubbard, 

1923, pp. 34-36), the Dominican Republic (Cooke, 1921, 

p. 55), and the Island of St. Croix (Stanton in Vaughan, 

1923, p. 305). The fauna is only meagerly represented 

in the recorded material from Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti, and Titanosarcolites has not 

been recognized in these places.

1
SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL, GEOLOGY, 1938

Rudistids are primarily indigenous to tropical and 

semitropical seas, but they spread sparingly into temperate seas. So far as known the northern limit of the 

range of rudistids in the Upper Cretaceous series of the 

Gulf Coastal Plain is latitude 36° N. A few specimens 

belonging to Durania Douvill6 or Sauvagesia Bayle? 

have been found in east-central and northeastern Texas, 

southwestern Arkansas, Mississippi as far north as 

West Point, and Alabama in the vicinity of Selma and 

Montgomery. One small fragment, recorded as Caprinella coraloidea Hall and Meek? has been found in 

McNairy County, Term. (Wade, 1926, p. 82). No 

authentic rudistids have been recorded from the Cretaceous of the Atlantic Coastal Plain east and northeast of Alabama. That the rudistid group strayed 

well into the Upper Cretaceous sea of the Western 

Interior is evidenced by the finding of a few small more 

or less fragmentary specimens in the Niobrara formation and other beds of Niobrara age and in the Pierre 

shale of the Montana group, at scattered localities in 

New Mexico, Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, 

South Dakota, and Montana, the one farthest north 

being in Wibaux County, Mont., indicating a limit of 

range at least as far as 47° N. Most of this material 

is undescribed, but Logan (1898, p. 494) has described 

one species from the Niobrara formation, under the 

name Radiolites maximus, and Hall and Meek (1856, 

pp. 380-381) one species from the upper part of the 

Pierre shale, under the name Caprinella coraloidea 

(—Titanosarcolites? coraloideus}. The Niobrara material appears to belong mainly to Durania and that 

from the Montana group to Titanosarcolites or a closely 

related genus. The specimen from Wibaux County, 

Mont., mentioned above, belongs to Titanosarcolites?\ 

it is from the Pierre shale exposed in the Cedar Creek 

anticline 20 miles southwest of old Mingusville (now 

Wibaux). The Wibaux County locality appears to be 

on the extreme northern outskirts of the range of 

rudistids in North America.

There has been some difference of opinion as to the 

exact position in the Upper Cretaceous series of the 

rudistid-bearing beds of the West Indies, some authorities placing them as low as the Cenomanian or Turonian 

(Hawkins, 1923, 1924; Palmer, 1933), but the prevailing 

opinion now seems to be that they are high Upper 

Cretaceous. Trechmann (1924, pp. 397-400) and 

Spath (1925, pp. 28-32) place the Jamaican beds in 

the upper Campanian or Maestrichtian, and Mac Gillavry (1937, pp. 85-92) places the Loma Yucatan 

Limestone of Cuba in the Campanian and the overlying Habana formation, or Barrettia beds, in the 

Maestrichtian. Titanosarcolites giganteus is listed from 

the Barrettia beds. Vernmnt (1937, pp. 36-37; 1937, 

p. 263) concurs with Mac Gillavry in correlating the 

Habana formation with the Maestrichtian.

The high stratigraphic position of Titanosarcolites 

oddsensis, in the Kemp clay, is in harmony with the

view that the Caribbean beds carrying Titanosarcolites 

are of Maestrichtian age. A characteristic faunal 

element of the Kemp clay and its age equivalents in 

the Coastal Plain is the genus Sphenodiscus Meek, 

represented by several species. There is general agreement among students of Upper Cretaceous paleontology 

that the Sphenodiscus-beaxuig beds of the Atlantic and 

Gulf Coastal Plain are of Maestrichtian age. One 

apparent exception to the restricted range of Sphenodiscus is the discovery by Prof. F. L. Whitney, cited 

by Stephenson (1933, pp. 1357-1358), of one small 

specimen of an undescribed species of the gerus in the 

upper part of the Taylor marl (upper Campanian) in 

Travis County, Tex. One rare exception need not, 

however, invalidate the usefulness of the genus in 

correlation. After all, a genus represented by several 

species and many individuals in a given zone must 

somewhere have had an evolutionary development in 

earlier times.

The type specimens of Titanosarcolites giganteus 

(Whitfield) are preserved in the American Museum of 

Natural History. The loan of the six specimens illustrated by Whitfield (Am. Mus. Nat. History, 9685.1-6) 

and permission to cut and polish two of tt^m have 

made possible a critical comparison of the Texas and 

Jamaica material. For this privilege grateful acknowledgment is extended to Dr. Chester A. Reeds, curator 

of the department of geology and invertebrate paleontology, who has also kindly permitted the use of the 

two illustrations showing the internal structural 

features of Whitfield's species.

I have not seen any of the recorded rudistid material 

identified by Mac Gillavry, Palmer, and others from 

the Habana formation of Cuba but have had the privilege of cursorily examinmg in the Philadelphia Academy 

of Sciences a fine unstudied collection of rud:stids and 

other fossils made by Sr. Emilio Aleman, under the 

direction of Dr. Roy E. Dickerson. Conspicuous 

among the rudistids were large, massive shells belonging to the genus Parastroma (Orbignya of Palmer), 

large more or less imperfectly preserved shells of 

Titanosarcolites, apparently belonging to t^ Q- species 

T. giganteus (Whitfield), and the shells of Barrettia. 

Dr. Dickerson kindly donated five large examples of 

Titanosarcolites to the United States National Museum 

and also several smaller shells, among which is the lower 

valve of a well-preserved young individual possessing 

the typical shell structure and apertural features of the 

genus Tampsia; it may belong to T. lopez-trigoi Palmer 

or to T. rutteni Vermunt, both from Cuba, but it appears 

to be very closely related to T. bishopi Stephenson 

from Tamaulipas, Mexico. In the absence of adult 

shells a satisfactory comparison cannot be nade with 

the T. bishopi. Cut and polished cross sections of 

several of the shells referred to Titanosarcolites exhibit 

internal structure which, though badly damaged by 

crystallization of the calcite, is obviously more like
A NEW UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID FROM TEXAS

that of T. giganteus (Whitfield) than it is like that of 

the Texas species T. oddsensis Stephenson.

The specimens of Titanosarcolites giganteus (Whitfield) received from Dr. Dickerson were collected in 

Pinar del Rio Province at two localities: Locality A-6 

(3 specimens) is 10 kilometers west from Pinar del 

Rio on the road and trail passing through Guayabo, 

600 meters west of Guayabo and 200 meters east of 

the great Pinar fault, which forms the contact between 

the San Cayetano formation (Jurassic) and the Upper 

Cretaceous. Locality A-12 (2 specimens) is in a field 

on Finca Anton Alvarez in the western part of the 

province, 7 kilometers northeast of San Juan y Mar.- 

tinez. The specimen of Tampsia came from an exposure in a creek in Santa Clara Province (locality P) 

1 kilometer west of Central Perseverancia, a sugar mill 

40 kilometers northwest of Cienfuegos; the specimen 

was associated with a large and as yet unstudied fauna 

of pelecypods, gastropods, echinoids, and corals, collected by Dr. Dickerson and Sefior Aleman.

The photographs reproduced in plates 1 to 5 were 

taken by N. W. Shupe in the laboratory of the Geological Survey.

References to the bibliography at the end of this 

paper are given in parentheses by dates and pages.

DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES

Genus TITANOSARCOLITES Trechmann (1924, pp. 397-400)

Type species: Oaprinula gigantea Whitfield (1897, 

pp. 194-196).

The genus Titanosarcolites Trechmann was erected 

to include those large thick-shelled subequivalve 

rudistids, each valve of which is traversed by a comparatively small longitudinal septate body cavity and 

each valve of which has a thick outer shell layer 

traversed by a series of relatively large tubes of irregular 

size and distribution and circular, oval, and irregular 

cross section; the tubular layer is developed around the 

anteroventral side. The two valves are curved in one 

plane with the tips turned toward each other. This 

large cumbersome bivalve is interpreted not to have 

been attached at the beak of either valve but to 

have lain recumbent on the sea bottom on the anteroventral side (Trechmann, 1924, p. 397; Cox, 1933, pp. 

379-388).

A detailed description of the genus, with especial 

reference to Cuban material is given by Mac Gillavry 

(1937, pp. 85-92).

Both Douville (1927, pp. 131-133) and Mac Gillavry 

assign to the genus a monopleurid rather than a 

caprinid or radiolitid ancestry, a conclusion based on 

the arrangement of the cardinal apparatus. Mac Gillavry points out the relation of this apparatus to 

that of such genera as Antillocaprina, Trechmanella, 

Hippurites, and Rousselia, to all of which he ascribes a 

monopleurid origin.

Neither the cardinal apparatus nor the dentition are 

preserved in Titanosarcolites oddsensis, anjl its reference 

to this genus is based on the similarity of such of its 

features as the longitudinal septate cavity, the longitudinal canals, and the series of large longitudinal tubes 

in the outer part of the shell on the anteroventral side. 

That this Texas shell is specifically different from 

T. giganteus is indicated by the smaller size of th^ 

septate cavity, the more sharply defined perimeter of 

this cavity, the much larger size of the longitudinal 

canals, and the larger average size of the longitudinal 

tubes. These differences are readily seen in the illustrations of the polished cross sections shown in plates 2-5.

In addition to the Texas specimens herein described, 

fragmentary material that may belong to Titanosarcolites has been recorded from the Upper Cretaceous 

of the United States under the names Ichthyosarcolites 

Desmarest and Caprinella D'Orbigny. However, none 

of these specimens has shown in the parts preserved 

any evidence of the presence of the thick outer shelllayer traversed by large longitudinal tubes, such as 

characterizes Titanosarcolites.

Tuomey (1854, p. 172) described three species of socalled Ichthyosarcolites from Noxubee County, Miss., 

which may have been representatives of Titanosarcolites, 

but he did not illustrate his material, his descriptions ar^ 

inadequate, and his types are lost. In the collection of 

the National Museum is a cast of the internal septate 

cavity of a Titanosarcolitesf (U. S. Nat. Mus. 12689) 

from Alabama, which F. B. Meek identified as belonging to "Ichthyosarcolites cornutus," one of the three 

species described by Tuomey.

Hall and Meek (1856, pp. 380-381) described one 

valve of a rudistid shell from Sage Creek, Nebr., from 

the upper part of division No. 4 (= upper part of Pierre 

shale), under the name Caprinella coraloidea; it may be a 

Titanosarcolites. The description and figures indicate 

a short conical, somewhat spirally twisted shell about 

2.5 inches long, having an internal cavity divided into 

chambers by lamellae or septa convex toward the apex, 

spaced at intervals of 1 to 4 millimeters; the chambers 

are filled with matrix or secondary calcite. The shell is 

composed of numerous four- to six-sided longitudinal 

canals whose hollow interiors are interrupted at irregular intervals by thin transverse laminae. According 

to J. B. Reeside 1 shell fragments of this character havo 

subsequently been found at several localities in the 

Pierre shale. Wade (1926, p. 82) identified a small 

fragment from Coon Creek, McNairy County, Tenn., 

as belonging questionably to Hall and Meek's species,

Titanosarcolites oddsensis Stephenson, n. sp.

Plates 1, 2; plate 3, figure 1

The holotype, a left valve, is incomplete at both ends, 

and the outer surface is badly damaged and largely 

destroyed by corrosion. Scattered about over the

1 Oral communication.
SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY, 1938

surface are the incomplete attached portions of small 

irregular oysters of undetermined species.

The adult shell is large, very thick, conular, rather 

strongly curved, traversed longitudinally by a proportionately small eccentric tubular septate body 

cavity. The poorly preserved outer surface of the shell 

appears to be longitudinally ribbed, the ribs probably 

being of only moderate strength. The body cavity is 

markedly eccentric in position as shown by the cross 

sections; it lies 10 to 20 millimeters within the shell a 

little to one side of the plane of maximum curvature of 

the cone. The side of the cavity has been partly 

crushed in mechanically, the pressure having been 

applied from the thinnest side of the surrounding shell; 

as a result the thin septa have been broken and the fragments segregated in parts of the cavity (see pi. 3, fig. 1). 

Before the crushing took place the cavity was probably 

subovate in cross section and had a maximum diameter 

of about 32 millimeters.

The maximum measurable thickness of the shell 

surrounding the septate cavity is 109 millimeters. 

Radially outward from the cavity the shell is divisible 

into three layers or bands of unequal thickness. The 

inner layer is 1 millimeter or less in thickness and forms 

a well-defined lining or boundary to the cavity; it is 

lamellar in structure, the lamellae lying parallel to the 

inner surface of the cavity; the septa, which are also 

lamellate, protrude inward across the cavity from this 

layer and are concave toward the larger end of the 

shell. The intermediate layer has a maximum measured thickness of about 52 millimeters and is composed 

of two kinds of canals. The main body of the layer is 

made up of longitudinal four- to six-sided thin-walled 

chambered canals measuring in cross section as much 

as 2.5 millimeters and showing no serial arrangement 

in any direction. The transverse laminae dividing 

these canals into chambers are irregularly spaced, the 

spaces ranging from 0.5 to 2.5 millimeters; the laminae 

are concave toward the larger end of the shell. As 

shown in the polished cross sections of the shell a subordinate part of the intermediate layer is composed of 

tabular or "stretched" canals, which are subdivided 

into rectangular spaces by much thinner transverse 

longitudinal walls. These tabular canals are arranged 

in three separate longitudinal groups whose cross 

sections are seen in the illustrations; a large, sharply 

outlined group, elongated lens-shaped in cross section, 

lies to the right of the septate cavity, the lower end 

almost touching the inner shell-layer, and the other end 

lying upward to the right of and obliquely away from 

the septate cavity; a second smaller more irregularshaped group lies above and well away from the first 

group; a third group, seen only in the smaller cross 

section, is badly crushed, but at the smaller broken 

end of the shell itself this group appears as a large, 

broad well-defined patch similar to, but less elongated

than, the first group described. These groupr of tabular canals mark the areas of muscular, attachment 

during the successive stages of shell growth; the large 

crushed area to the left of the septate cavity in plate 3, 

figure 1, is interpreted to mark the position of the 

posterior myophore (mp) and the one to the right the 

anterior myophore (ma).

The outside shell-layer has a maximum measured 

thickness of 79 millimeters, and the cross section cut 

near the large incomplete end shows that the thickness 

of this layer does not fall below 50 millimeters in an 

incompletely preserved band extending around the 

anteroventral side of the shell. This layer is traversed 

longitudinally by many tubular cavities ranging in cross 

section from less than 2 millimeters to a measured 

maximum of 39 millimeters. The cavities have a 

heterogeneous arrangement and range in cro^s section 

from subcircular to elongate-ovate; some are irregular. 

The cavities are filled with fine brown calcareous silt 

matrix. They are separated from each other by proportionately thin walls of shell substance, the better 

preserved parts of which are seen to be canaliculate like 

the intermediate shell layer already described. However, the structure has been partly destroyed or obscured 

apparently by the recrystallization of the celcite, and 

much of the layer is stained with limonite and therefore 

appears dark in the photographs. Each cavity is lined 

with a calcitic layer generally less than a quarter of a 

millimeter thick.

The dental apparatus is not preserved in the holotype, 

and there is no indication of the position of the ligament.

The greatest dimension of the incomplete holotype, 

measured in the longitudinal direction, is about 250 

millimeters; the minimum and maximum dimensions of 

the largest cross section are respectively 152 and 208 

millimeters; the smaller broken end of the specimen has 

minimum and maximum diameters of approximately 

104 and 112 millimeters.

A smaller mechanically flattened specimen, incomplete at both ends, from the type locality, probably 

belongs to the same species and is listed as a paratype. 

It is 140 millimeters long; in its crushed condition it 

increases from about 75 millimeters in maxurum diameter at the small end to 92 millimeters at the large end. 

The shell structure has been destroyed by recrystallization of the calcite. Two fragments from a concretion 

in the same formation at another locality in Falls 

County probably belong to this species.

Types: Holotype U. S. Nat. Mus. 75979; 1 paratype, 

U. S. Nat. Mus. 75980.

Distribution in Texas.—Navarro group, upper part of Kemp 

clay: Limonite-stained calcium carbonate concretiors in a field 

north of the McClanahan-Odds road on the southwestward-f acing 

slope of Big Creek Valley 1 mile west by south of Odds (Limestone 

County), in Falls County (Geol. Survey Coll. 17373, type 

locality); questionably in a field on the westward-facing slope of 

Big Creek Valley 1.3 miles southeast of Parsons Bridge and 3
A NEW UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID FROM TEXAS

miles southwest of Stranger, Falls County (U. S. G. S. coll. 

17372).

Unidentified specimens of Titanosarcolites? from Texas

Specimens of Titanosarcolites? too incomplete for 

specific identification have been found at three localities in the Navarro group, as indicated below. In 

addition one small fragment was found in the upper 

part of the Taylor marl on State Highway 34, 5% miles 

northeast of Ennis, Ellis County (U. S. G. S. coll. 

17378).

The most complete of the Navarro specimens was 

obtained in the Nacatoch sand on Postoak Creek at the 

north edge of Corsicana, Navarro County (U. S. G. S. 

coll. 518, U. S. Nat. Mus. 20903). (See pi. 3, figs. 2-4.) 

This specimen indicates a short, rapidly expanding, 

strongly curved, slightly spiral shell. Except near the 

apex only the part of the shell on the inner side of the 

curve is preserved; it is proportionately very thick and 

is composed of longitudinal prismatic canals of varying 

sizes, of which most are four- to six-sided but a few of 

the smaller ones may be circular or oval in cross section. 

The hollow interior of each of the canals is interrupted 

at irregular intervals by thin transverse uncurved 

laminae, the laminae in one canal bearing no uniform 

relation in position to those in adjoining canals; the 

canals in one group, shown just to the left of the internal 

cavity in plate 3, figure 3, are smaller than the others. 

A part of the external surface on the inner curve of the 

shell is nearly smooth but exhibits fine radial striations and six or seven light-colored radial tines above 

the beak spaced at intervals of 2 to 4 millimeters. The 

septa that divide the inner cavity of the shell into chambers are not preserved, having apparently been lost 

before fossilization. This cavity ends apically in a 

bluntly rounded bottom, corresponding rather closely 

in shape to the inner cavity shown in Hall and Meek's 

illustrations of Caprinella coraloidea (1856, pp. 380-381 

pi. 1, figs. 3 a-c). The specimen cannot be satisfactorily identified with the latter species. Dimensions: 

Length, measured from the beak along the curve of the 

internal cavity to the outer margin, about 70 millimeters; maximum thickness of shell, about 28 millimeters.

One large imperfect shell fragment from the Nacatoch 

sand, found on the Dallas highway three-fifths of a 

mile west of Kaufman, Kaufman County (U. S. G. S. 

coll. 14098, U. S. Nat. Mus. 75981), is made up of 

polygonal prismatic canals like those of Titanosarcolites, except that the transverse septa hi the longitudinal canals are not curved. (See pi. 4, fig. 1.) The 

shell is very thick and the canals, though of irregular 

size, are in general larger than those of the Corsicana 

specimen. The hollow canals are set off at longitudinal 

intervals of 0.5 to 2 milometers by thin transverse 

laminae, and the intervening spaces are filled with

secondary calcite. The external tubular layer such as 

characterizes Titanosarcolites, if originally present, 

is wanting in the specimen as preserved. Dimensions: 

Greatest diameter, 106 millimeters; maximum thickness, 65 millimeters.

A small elongated, curved shell fragment was found 

in the Kemp clay in a creek bank on the east side of a 

road 3% miles north of Powell and 10 miles northerst 

of Corsicana, Navarro County (U. S. G. S. coll. 9556). 

The fragment is composed of irregular, polygonal canpls 

in which at longitudinal intervals of 0.5 to 1.5 minimeters are thin, transverse, uncurved laminae. TV Q 

structure is similar to that of Titanosarcolites.

Titanosarcolites giganteus (Whitfield)

Plate 4, figure 2; plate 5

This Jamaican species was originally described by 

Whitfield (1897, pp. 194-196) under the name Capnnula gigantea and was later made the genotype of 

TitanosarcoKtes Trechmann (1924, pp. 397-400). It is 

a common fossil in Upper Cretaceous limestones interbedded in the middle part of the unit known as the Blue 

Mountain series, which is 3,000 feet thick. The type 

material came from Logie Green, Clarendon Parish, 

Jamaica.

By permission of Dr. Chester A. Reeds, curator of 

the department of geology and invertebrate paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, I 

have figured in this paper cut and polished surfaces of 

two of the better-preserved cotypes for comparison 

with the Texas species. The pictures show that the 

two species are similar in their structural make-up. In 

each species both the valves are conical and each valve 

is traversed by a proportionately small longitudinal 

septate body cavity; the shell of each is divisible irto 

three parts—a thin inner lamellar layer, a thick median 

layer made up of small longitudinal septate canals, 

and a thick outer layer of the same sort but traversed 

by many small to large tubular cavities of irregular 

distribution.

A difference that serves sharply to distinguish the 

two species is the relative sizes of the longitudinal 

canals, those of Titanosarcolites giganteus averaging less 

than half the diameter of those of T. oddsensis. The 

latter has a smaller body cavity, which is only about 

two-thirds the diameter of the former at a correspording stage of growth. T, giganteus appears to be the 

more slender of the two species, but this feature may 

vary with individuals. There appears to be a somewl at 

different arrangement of the muscle impressions in the 

two species, but this also may be a variable featrre 

among individuals; this difference may be seen by comparing my figure 1, plate 3, with Mac Gillavry's figure 1, 

plate 9 (1937). The polished surfaces of the types do 

not clearly show the positions of the muscle impressions.
6 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY, 19 3 8

Outside of Jamaica the species has been recorded 

from the Habana formation of Cuba in the Provinces 

of Gamaguey (Douvill6, 1927, pp. 131-133; Mac Gillavry, 1937), Santa Clara (Thiadens, 1936, p. 1018), 

and Pinar del Rio (Vermunt, 1937); questionably from 

the Island of St. Croix (Stanton in Vaughan, 1923), 

and from Chiapas, Mexico (Muellerried, 1934). The 

St. Croix material, which is preserved in the United 

States National Museum (U. S. G. S. coll. 10229), 

consists of one incomplete specimen whose internal 

structure is partly obscured by crystallization of the 

calcite, but the characteristic large longitudinal tubes 

are clearly preserved, and in a polished cross section 

the longitudinal canals and the outline of the septate 

cavity can be dimly seen; the edges of some of the septa 

are also faintly discernible. The specimen is probably 

correctly identified, but some doubt must remain as to 

its specific relationships. I have not seen the recorded 

specimens from either Cuba or Chiapas, but have seen 

the unrecorded material mentioned on page 2 of this 

paper.

On all the West Indian islands cited and in Chiapas, 

Mexico, Titanosarcolites giganteus is associated with 

Barrettia Woodward and other rudistid genera which 

most authorities regard as constituting a late Upper 

Cretaceous (Maestrichtian) fauna; one of these rudistid genera is Tampsia Stephenson (Palmer, 1933, 

pp. 100-101; Vermunt, 1937, pp. 273-274; and p. 2 of 

the present paper). Barrettia has also been recorded 

by Mac Gillavry from Guatemala (1935, pp. 558-559).

Tampsia was originally described from the upper 

part of the Mendez shale in the southern part of the 

State of Tamaulipas, Mexico (Stephenson, 1922, pp. 

4-9), and was at that time considered on meager evidence to be of Taylor (Campanian) age. Evidence 

subsequently afforded by Foraminifera, identified by 

Helen Jeanne Plummer and J. B. Dorr and cited by 

Muir (1936, pp. 67-76), is interpreted to indicate the 

Navarso (Maestrichtian) age of the upper part of the 

Mendez shale.

Assuming the correctness of the identifications by the 

different authors cited, a faunal connection seems to be 

indicated between the Upper Cretaceous rudistid-bearing limestones of the Antillean region (with TitanosarcoliUs, Barrettia, Tampsia, and other genera) and the 

upper part of the Kemp clay of Texas (with Titanosarcolites), through the Biradiolites- and Bcwrertia-bearing 

beds of Guatemala, the Barrettia- and Titanosarcolitesbearing beds of Chiapas, and the Tampsia-bearing beds 

in the upper part of the Mendez shale of southern 

Tamaulipas, Mexico.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1854. Tuomey, M., Description of some new fossils from the 

Cretaceous rocks of the Southern States: Acad. Nat. 

Sci. Philadelphia Proc., vol. 7, p. 172.

1856. Hall, James, and Meek, F. B., Descriptions of new species 

of fossils from the Cretaceous formations o* Nebraska: 

Am. Acad. Arts Sci. Mem., n. ser., vol. 5, pp. 380-381, 

pi. 1, figs. 3a-f.

1897. Whitfield, R. P., Descriptions of species of Rudistae from 

the Cretaceous rocks of Jamaica: Am. Mus. I Tat. History 

Bull. 9, pp. 194-196, pi. 18; pi. 19, figs. 1, 2; pi. 20; pi. 21; 

pi. 22, figs. 1-3.

1898. Logan, W. N., The invertebrates of the Bento^, Niobrara, 

and Fort Pierre groups: Kansas Univ. G<?ol. Survey, 

vol. 4, p. 494, pi. 115; pi. 119, fig. 1.

1921. Cooke, Wythe, Stratigraphy and structural geology and 

geologic history [Dominican Republic]: Dominican Republic Geol. Survey Mem., vol. 1, p. 55.

1922. Stephenson, L. W., Some Upper Cretaceous shells of the 

rudistid group from Tamaulipas, Mexico: U. S. Nat. 

Mus. Proc., vol. 61, Art. 1, pp. 4-9, pis. 1-?.

1923. Vaughan, T. Wayland, Stratigraphy of the Virgin Islands 

of the United States and of Culebra and Vie^ues islands, 

and notes on eastern Puerto Rico: Washington Acad. 

Sci. Jour., vol. 13, p. 305.

1923. Hawkins, H. L., Some Cretaceous Echiroidea from 

Jamaica: Geol. Mag., vol. 60, pp. 199-216.

1923. Hubbard, Bela, The geology of the Lares district, Porto 

Rico: New York Acad. Sci., Scientific survey of Porto 

Rico and the Virgin Islands, vol. 2, pt. 1, pp. 34-36.

1924. Trechmann, C. T., The Cretaceous limestones of Jamaica 

and their Mollusca: Geol. Mag., vol. 61, pp. 397-400; 

pi. 23, figs. 1, 2; text fig. 1.

1924. Hawkins, H. L., Notes on a new collection of fossil Echinoidea from Jamaica: Geol. Mag., vol. 61, pp. 312-324.

1924. Woodring, W. P., Brown, J. S., and Burb*.nk, W. S., 

Geology of the Republic of Haiti, pp. 97-98, Department of Public Works, Port-au-Prince.

1925. Spath, L. F., On Senonian Ammonoidea from Jamaica: 

Geol. Mag., vol. 62, pp. 28-32.

1926. Sdnchez Roig, Mario, La fauna cretacica <*e la region 

central de Cuba: Soc. cubana hist. nat. "Felipe Poey" 

Mem., vol. 7, pp. 93-95, pi. 7.

1926. Wade, Bruce, The fauna of the Ripley formation on Coon 

Creek, Tennessee: U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 137, 

p. 82, pi. 25, figs. 13, 14.

1927. Douville, H., Quelques fossiles du Cre'tace' superieur de 

Cuba: Soc. geol. France Bull., 4« ser., tome 26, pp. 

131-133, pi. 8, fig. 5.

1928. Palmer, Robert H., The rudistids of soutl ?rn Mexico: 

California Acad. Sci. Occ. Paper 14, p. 29.

1933. Stephenson, L. W., The zone of Exogyra cancellata traced 

twenty-five hundred miles: • Am. Assoc. Petroleum 

Geologists Bull., vol. 17, pp. 1357-1358.

1933. Palmer, R. H., Nuevos rudistas de Cuba: Rev. agricultura, vol. 14, Nos. 15 y 16, pp. 100-101, Lam. 5, figs. 1, 2.

1933. Cox, L. R., The evolutionary history of the rudists: 

Geol. Assoc. London Proc., vol. 44, pp. 379-388.

1934. Mac Gillavry, Henry James, Some rudists from the Alta 

Verapaz, Guatemala: K. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam 

Proc., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 233-238.
A NEW UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID FROM TEXAS

1934. Muellerried, F. K. G., Sobre el hallazgo de paquidontos 

gigantescos en el cretacico de Chiapas: Inst. biologia, 

Mexico Anales, tomo 5, no. 1, pp. 81-82.

1935. Schuchert, Charles, Historical geology of the AntilleanCaribbean region: New York, J. Wiley & Sons, 811 

pp.; especially pp. 426, 429, 481, and 512.

1935. Mac Gillavry, Henry James, Remarks on rudistids: K. 

Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam Proc., vol. 38, no. 5, 

pp. 558-565.

1936. Thiadens, A., Rudistids from southern Santa Clara,

Cuba: K. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam Proc., vol. 39,

no. 8, p. 1018. 

1936. Muir, John M., Geology of the Tampico region, Mexico

(published by Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists), 280

pp. (especially pp. 67-76).

1937. Mac Gillavry, Henry James, Geology of the Province of 

Camaguay, Cuba, with revisional studies in rudist 

paleontology: Dissertation, Univ. Utrecht, 1937, pp. 

85-92, pi. 2, figs. 1-7, 10, 11; pi. 3, fig. 3; pi. 9, fig. 1. 

(Appears also as No. 14 of the Physiographic and Geologic series of the Geographic and Geologic Communications.)

1937. Vermunt, L. W. J., Geology of the Province of Pinar del 

Rfo, Cuba: Geog. geol. Mededeel. Phys.-Geol., Reeks, 

no. 13, pp. 36-37.

1937. Vermunt, L. W. J., Cretaceous rudistids of Pinar del Rfo 

Province, Cuba: Jour. Paleontology, vol. 11, no. 4, 

pp. 263, 273-274.

41442—38———2

PLATES 1-5
PLATE 1

Titanosarcolites oddsensis Stephenson. Anteroventral view of holotype, left valve (U. S. Nat. Mus. 75979), about % natural size. 

Openings of matrix-filled longitudinal tubes are in view on upper, weathered surface of shell; crosscuts show position of polished 

surfaces figured in plates 2 and 3. 

10
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 193 PLATE 1

AN UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID


GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 193 PLATE 2

br

be

— —\ It

AN UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTLD
PLATE 2

Titanosarcolites oddsensis Stephenson. Larger, up-facing cut and polished surface of holotype, about % natural size; be, body cavity; 

Ic, longitudinal canals; It, longitudinal tubes; ma, anterior myophore; 6r, areas to left of irregular black line show broken surfaces 

of shell not included in polished surface.

11
PLATE 3

FIGUKE 1. Titanosarcolites oddsensis Stephenson. Smaller up-facing cut and polished surface of holotype, about l %o natural size; 

6c, body cavity; s, fragments of septa in body cavity; Ic, longitudinal canals; ma, anterior myophore with "stretched" 

canals; mp, posterior myophore with "stretched" canals, badly crushed; It, longitudinal tubes.

2. Titanosarcolites? sp. (U. S. Nat. Mus. 20903). Incomplete specimen showing incurved beak and broken, distal ends of 

longitudinal canals. Natural size.

3. Opposite side of same specimen showing body cavity and longitudinal canals.

4. Gutta-percha squeeze of body cavity shown in figure 3. 

12
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 193 PLATE 3

mp

be"

ma

AN UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID


GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 193 PLATE 4

AN UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID
PLATE 4

FIGURE 1. Titanosarcolites? sp. (U. S. Nat. Mus. 75981). Incomplete specimen showing body cavity and broken ends of longitudinal

canals, about % natural size. Outside tubular layer, if originally present, has been destroyed.

2. Titanosarcolites giganteus (Whitfield) (Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 9685.2). Up-facing cut and polished surface (% natural 

size) of a cotype, a left valve, figured in Am. Mus. Nat. History Bull., vol.- 9, pi. 19, fig. 1, and pi. 20; be, septate body 

cavity partly filled with calcite crystals; It, longitudinal tubes filled with matrix; t, tube of boring organism that has 

penetrated deeply into shell; c, solution (?) cavities lined with calcite crystals. Whitfield's statement that this specimen has been split longitudinally and retains only the inner half of the shell is incorrect; only crests of larger ribs have 

been broken away.

13
PLATE 5

Titanosarcolites giganteus (Whitfield) (Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 9685.3). Down-facing surface of cut and polished cross section (about 

%v natural size) of a cotype, a right valve, figured in Am. Mus. Nat. History Bull., vol. 9, pi. 21; be, septate body cavity lined 

and partly filled with calcite crystals; s, septa in body cavity; Ic, longitudinal canals; me, "stretched" marginal canals; U, 

longitudinal tubes filled with matrix; a, anterior alveole; p, posterior alveole; ma, anterior myophore. 

14
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 193 PLATE 5

Itt-..

ma

Ic --—- -s

AN UPPER CRETACEOUS RUDISTID

INDEX

Page

Abstract_________________________________________ 1 

Acknowledgments for aid_______________________________ 2,5 

Alabama, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in______________ 2,3 

Aleman, Emilio, rudistid collection of..______________________ 2 

Antillean region, faunal connection of Upper Cretaceous beds of, with Kemp

clay of Texas.. ______________________________ 6 

Antillocaprina Trechmann______________________________ 1,3 

Arkansas, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in _____________ 2

Barrettia Woodward..________________________________ 1,2,6 

Bibliography______________________________________ 6-7 

Biradiolites D'Orbigny________________________________ 1,6 

Bournonia Mac Gillavry..._____________________________ 1

Caprinella D'Orbigny--_______________________________ 3 

coraloidea Hall and Meek? ____ _______________________ 2,3,5 

Caprinula gigantea Whitfleld____________________________ 3,5 

Colorado, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in______________ 2 

Corsicana marl, rudistid material from_______________________ 1 

Crenella serica Conrad________________________________ 1 

Cuba, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in______________ 1,2,3,6

Dentalium sp______________________________________ 1

Dickerson, Roy E., acknowledgments to______________________ 2

Discoscaphites sp.-__._______________________________ 1

Dominican Republic, Upper Cretaceous fauna of.________________ 1

Durania DouvUle.___________________________________ 1,2

Falls County, Tex., fossil localities in________________________ 4-5 

rudistid shell from________________________________ 1

Guatemala, occurrence of Barrettia in....

Habana formation, correlation of... 

Haiti, Upper Cretaceous fauna of.. 

Hippurites__.___________________

Ichthyosarcolites Desmarest. 

cornutus.________________

Jamaica, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in_____________ 1,5

Kansas, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in.. 

Kemp clay, stratigraphic relations of__________

Lapeirousia Bayle_____________ 

Loma Yucatan formation, correlation of.

Page

Mendez shale, age of—__..———————————————————————————— 6

Mexico, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in——————————————— 2,6

Mississippi, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in.———————————— 2,3

Montana, rudistid material from —————————————————————————— 2

Nacatoch sand, rudistid material from——————————————————————— 5

Navarro County, Tex., fossil localities in——....————————————————— 5

Navarro group, fossils of.——————————————————————————————— 1

stratigraphic relations of_——————————————————————————— 1

Nebraska, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in...——————————— 2,3

New Mexico, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in———————————— 2

Neylandville marl, rudistid material from————————————————————— 1

Niobrara formation, rudistid material from.———————————————————— 2

Orbignya Palmer.

Parastroma.._____———————————————————————————————— 2

Pierre shale, rudistid material from....——————————————————————— 2,3

Praebarrettia Trechmann_____.____————————————————————— 1

Puerto Bico, Upper Cretaceous fauna of—————————————————————— 1

Radiolites maximus Logan___.__.-————————————————————— 2

Reeds, Chester A., acknowledgments to—————————————————————— 2,5

Rousselia_______—————————————————————————————— 3

St. Croixlsland, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in...————————— 1,6

Sauvagesia Bayle____——————————————————————————————— 1,2

South Dakota, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in_——————————— 2

Sphenodiscus Meek—_————————————————————————————— 1,2

Tampsia Stephenson.__________„_—————————————————— 1,2,3,6

bishopi Stephenson ——____————————————————————————— 2

lopez-trigoi Palmer...—————_——————————————————————— 2

rutteni Vermunt__________——„.—————————————————— 2

Tennessee, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in___———————————— 2, 3

Texas, range of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in..__________„_____———— 2

Titanosarcolites Trechmann________„__————————————————— 1,2,3

coraloideus..______—.——_——————————————————————— 2

giganteus (Whitfleld)________________________ 1, 2,3, 5, 6, pis. 4, 5

oddsensis Stephenson___————————————————————— 2, 3-5, pis. 1-3

unidentified specimen of_____________—__——————————— 5, pis. 3, 4

Trechmanella..—_________..———.————————————————————— 3

TurriteIlavertebroidesM]orton(var.)________„—————————————— 1

Western Interior, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in-- 

West Indies, correlation of Upper Cretaceous series in__________

Wyoming, occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rudistids in. ____

15

o