Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Dickinsonia by NTamura Dickinsonia by NTamura
Dickinsonia costata from the Ediacaran fauna of Australia. Nobody is quite sure what this was, a jellyfish, a worm, a chordate ancestor, a mushroom, a lichen, a placozoan? Hypotheses abound...

Dedicated to fellow paleoartist :iconavancna:
Add a Comment:
 
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Jul 29, 2014
Yes. Thanks for the correction...
Reply
:iconarticwolfbui:
ArticWolfBui Featured By Owner Jul 30, 2014  Professional Artist
Your welcome!
Reply
:iconryivhnn:
Ryivhnn Featured By Owner Nov 17, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Stop letting the truth get in the way of good stories :D
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Nov 17, 2011
Sorry ! :D
Reply
:iconcybershot:
cybershot Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2011
Very nice!
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2011
Thank you!
Reply
:iconcharanty:
Charanty Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2011
oh dear, for a while i thought that it's real.
Reply
:iconsickchickjay:
sickchickjay Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
I don't care what it is but I definitely want one as a pet! X-D
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
It would make quite a boring pet if you ask me... ;)
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011  Professional General Artist
That's bullshit, saying they dont know what it is. The people who matter think it is a worm, and by that I mean, the people who work with the actual fossils.
Reply
:iconarticwolfbui:
ArticWolfBui Featured By Owner Jul 29, 2014  Professional Artist
worms are an informal group that has been outdated for over 150 years en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worm en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermes
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2014  Professional General Artist
I meant to say "segmented worm" which is what I was told, segmented worms are all Annelida.
Reply
:iconarticwolfbui:
ArticWolfBui Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2014  Professional Artist
ok, but right now, Dickinsonia is most likely a placozoan, but annelid worm is reasonable as well :)
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
Who?
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011  Professional General Artist
A personal friend of mine was put in charge of reconstructing Dickinsonia for the South Australian Museum, he considered it "a worm, before they learned to dig".

Basically, the South Australian Museum is where most of the boffins on the Ediacaran fossils are, which, rather conveniently, I visit often, living in South Australia. I would consider Dickinsonia a proto-worm, or an early bilaterian, but the segmentation clinches it as a worm.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2011
The problem with the worm interpretation is that like for Spriggina, the symmetry is not quite bilateral. The segments in one side are shifted by half with respect to the other side. Such a pseudo-bilateral symmetry is unknown in any living animal.
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2014  Professional General Artist
Page 121 of this symposium.

www.ipc4mendoza2014.org.ar/wp-…

The abstract says that sliding symmetry is a taphonomic effect, and not true to life. This study was done from better preserved ediacaran organisms, and that they are truly bilateral. They might be early bilaterians, and not true worms. At least it got into the literature this time.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2014
Thanks. That's only an abstract though... I hope they will soon publish their findings as a peer reviewed journal paper.
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2014  Professional General Artist
Oops, I thought I heard somewhere that the Russian journals were not peer reviewed, I may be wrong. It seems some journals in Russia suffer during peer review because there are very few competent Paleontological peers in the first place, in any given specialization.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2014
I don't know about this. The papers were translated in English and published in "Paleontological Journal" given them some kind of legitimacy as being peer reviewed...
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2014  Professional General Artist
Also, Charnia and Charnodiscus do have branching, fractal symmetry which is sort of like sliding symmetry. But this is because they are probably the most primitive multicellular animals after sponges, and grew in a plant-like, fractal way.
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2014  Professional General Artist
I have no idea why it's so hard to believe that they didn't have sliding symmetry, I mean after all such an odd attribute would need proper evidence. Maybe you should ask for a peer-reviewed paper on sliding symmetry in the first place, because the Russian journals that those hypotheses come from are not peer reviewed either, just published by museums. I think we have reason to be skeptical of sliding symmetry, because all it does is support the hypothesis that ediacarans are dead-ends not related to living creatures, which is not a proper hypothesis, in my view, it's only supported by how amorphous ediacarans are, which we would expect in the most primitive animals, in the first place. I trust people who are actually working first-hand with the fossils, Dr Jim Gehling is an expert on the  ediacaran creatures of the Flinders Ranges.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 28, 2014
I agree with you... it would make much more sense if these animals were true bilaterans. But all the available literature (papers by Ivantsov) unfortunately support the sliding symmetry hypothesis. I really wish your friends from the Australian Museum write a paper on the alternate hypothesis. Can I contact them?
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 20, 2011  Professional General Artist
I contacted my friend. He tells me that the consensus at the museum is, that the skewed segmentation is a taphonomic effect, from the body of the animal being "squished" at a slight angle, not from directly above. The museum has some rare specimens of Dickinsonia that have no skewed symmetry, which are perfectly preserved, which shows the true nature of the animal's segmentation. Because of this, they consider the segmentation to be bilateral, and the Dickinsonia to be a primitive worm.

You need to remember, this information is coming from the people who work with the ACTUAL fosils, wereas most other workers do so from photos, or the rather limited sample of russian white sea material.

Because of the scientific establishment's obsession with the "Cambrian Explosion", some of the South Australian Museum's discoveries have been refuted unfairly as misinterpretations. These are namely the discovery of Ediacaran-age trilobites, and the discovery of the protochordate. Both of these discoveries were hard to swallow, but true nonetheless, and have not been accepted.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 20, 2011
Thanks for coming back to me. This is really interesting. Did you friend has some publications that I can consult?
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 20, 2011  Professional General Artist
I can ask him for references on the preservation issue, when I see him on friday. The trilobite and protochordate thing have been rejected in the journals due to incredulity, and also owing to the fact that the reviewers were cambrian researchers, and not specialising in ediacaran studies.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 21, 2011
Thanks! :) Yes, science can be biased sometimes...
Reply
(2 Replies)
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2011  Professional General Artist
You have a point, actually.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2011
Maybe you should ask your friend about this ?
Reply
:iconpristichampsus:
Pristichampsus Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2011  Professional General Artist
Good point, I'll try to contact him soon. He just tends to think that some of the adiacarans are clearly allied to modern groups. I'm not sure if this is the museum's consensus or not.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2011
Let me know what he thinks. I am interested to see all points of vue :)
Reply
(2 Replies)
:iconavancna:
avancna Featured By Owner Sep 14, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
For a moment, I thought you sculpted it out of plastic.
We do know that there were, apparently, several species.
Reply
:iconzippo4k:
Zippo4k Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
Second... Great work! You're clearly getting better. :)
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
Yeah, it look like a piece of plastic...
Reply
:iconzippo4k:
Zippo4k Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
I'm quite jealous of your progressing skills. :)
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
Now I need to get better on the more complex organism as well... ;)
Reply
:iconzippo4k:
Zippo4k Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
true... ;)
Reply
:iconavancna:
avancna Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
...So fantastic/ made of plastic...
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
Doesn't quite look alive yet ...
Reply
:iconzer05um:
Zer05um Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2011  Professional General Artist
Although how to make such a creature / organism look alive is an interesting question in itself. Ediacaran life was... different.
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2011
Indeed...
Reply
:iconavancna:
avancna Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Perhaps you should put in feeding tracks, then?
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2011
Any evidence of fossilized trackway?
Reply
:iconavancna:
avancna Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2011
Then if it as a fungi there should be no trackway...
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconskull-island-master:
Skull-Island-Master Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
its amazing, looks really realistic IMO !
Reply
:iconntamura:
NTamura Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2011
Thank you!
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
September 14, 2011
Image Size
5.9 MB
Resolution
3837×2592
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
2,206
Favourites
43 (who?)
Comments
77

License

Creative Commons License
Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
×