The Great Fossil Enigma (64 page)

24.
Janvier, “Conodont affinity: A reply.”

25.
S. Tillier and J. P. Cuif, “L'animale-conodonte est-il un mollusque Aplacophore,”
Cr. Hebd. Séanc. Acad. Sci., Paris
303 (1986): 627–32; S. Tillier and P. Janvier, “Le retour de l'animal-conodonte,”
Recherche
17 (1986): 1574–1575; D. E. G. Briggs, R. J. Aldridge, and M. P. Smith, “Conodonts are not aplacophoran mollusks,”
Lethaia
20 (1987): 381–82.

26.
Sweet,
Conodonta
(see ch. 6, n. 8). A book had been produced in Chinese but had limited impact.

27.
See also H. Gee, “Four legs to stand on…,”
Nature
342 (1989): 738–39.

28.
R. J. Aldridge and D. E. G. Briggs, “Sweet talk,”
Paleobiology
16 (1990): 241–46.

29.
M. P. Smith, “The Conodonta – Palaeobiology and evolutionary history of a major Palaeozoic chordate group,”
Geol. Mag.
127 (1990): 365–69.

30.
S. Conway Morris,
“Typhloesus wellsi
(Melton and Scott, 1973), a bizarre metazoan from the Carboniferous of Montana, USA,”
Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond.
, ser. 327 (1990): 595–624, is the most comprehensive account. The author presented on the animal in the United States in 1979. That account was not published until 1985.

31.
Gould,
Wonderful Life
, 148; D. E. G. Briggs, and S. Conway Morris, “Problematica from the Middle Cambrian Burgess Shale of British Columbia,” in Hoffman and Nitecki,
Problematic Fossil Taxa
, 167–83. Bengtson and others published on this animal in 2006.

32.
R. Fortey, “Shock lobsters,” review of Conway Morris's
Crucible of Creation, Lond. Rev. Books
20, no. 19 (1998).

33.
S. Conway Morris, “Conodont palaeobiology: Recent progress and unsolved problems,”
Terra Nova
1 (1989): 135–50, 141.

14. OVER THE MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON

1.
This account of the Soom Shale investigation draws upon Dick Aldridge's unpublished account and correspondence files (see ch. 13, n. 1). I am also grateful, via Dick, to Hannes Theron for recounting details of the discovery.

2.
J. N. Theron and E. Kovacs-Endrody, “Preliminary note and description of the earliest known vascular plant, or an ancestor of vascular plants, in the flora of the Lower. Silurian Cedarberg Formation, Table Mountain Group, South Africa,”
S. African. J. Sci.
82 (1986): 102–105.

3.
R. J. Aldridge and J. N. Theron, “Conodonts with preserved soft tissue from a new Ordovician Konservat-Lagerstatte,”
J. Micropalaeo.
12 (1993): 113–17; A. Ritchie, “New evidence on
Jamoytius kerwoodi
White, an important ostracoderm from the Silurian of Lanarkshire, Scotland,”
Palaeontology
11 (1968): 21–39.

4.
R. J. Aldridge, J. N. Theron, and S. E. Gabbott, “The Soom Shale: A unique Ordovician fossil horizon in South Africa,”
Geology Today
10 (1994): 218–21.

5.
R. J. Krejsa, P. Bringas, and H. C. Slavkin, “A neontological interpretation of conodont elements based on agnathan cyclostome tooth structure, function and development,”
Lethaia
23 (1990): 369–78; R. J. Krejsa, P. Bringas, and H. C. Slavkin, “The cyclostome model: An interpretation of conodont element structure and function based on cyclostome tooth morphology, function and life history,”
Cour. Forsch.-Inst. Senckenberg
118 (1990): 473–92.

6.
M. M. Smith and B. K. Hall, “Development and evolutionary origins of vertebrate skeletogenic and odontogenic tissues,”
Biol. Rev.
65 (1990): 277–373; R. J. Aldridge et al., “The anatomy of conodonts,”
Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc.
, ser. B, 340 (1993): 405–21.

7.
D. K. Elliot, A. R. M. Blieck, and P. -Y. Gagnier, “Ordovician vertebrates,” in C. R. Barnes, and S. H. Williams (eds.),
Advances in Ordovician Geology
, Geological Survey of Canada Paper 90–9, 93–106 (1991).

8.
D. Palmer, “Early vertebrates given new teeth,”
New Scientist
, 29 August 1982, 16.

9.
I. J. Sansom et al., “Presence of earliest vertebrate hard tissues in conodonts,”
Science
256 (1992): 1308–11.

10.
M. Smith, I. J. Sansom and P. Smith, “‘Teeth' before armour: The earliest vertebrate mineralized tissues,”
Modern Geology
20 (1996): 303–19, a paper presented in 1993 and updated during delayed publication.

11.
N. Nuttal, “Razor-toothed fish bites into human history,”
Times
, 10 June 1992; “Limestone yields the oldest set of teeth,”
Independent
, 10 June 1992; J. H., “Teething troubles,”
Telegraph
, 22 June 1992; Palmer, “Early vertebrates.”

12.
Discover
, January 1993, 68;
Northern Echo
, 11 June 1992.

13.
C. R. Barnes, R. Fortey, and S. H. Williams, “The patterns of global bioevents during the Ordovician Period,” in O. H. Walliser (ed.),
Global Events and Event Stratigraphy in the Phanerozoic
(Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1996), 142; D. E. G. Briggs, “Conodonts – a major extinct group added to the vertebrates,”
Science
256 (1992): 1285–86; Aldridge, Theron, and Gabbott, “Soom Shale,” 220–21; H. Gee,
Deep Time: Cladistics, the Revolution in Evolution
(London: Fourth Estate, 2000); H. Gee,
Before the Backbone
(London: Chapman & Hall, 1996).

14.
M. A. Purnell, “Skeletal ontogeny and feeding mechanisms in conodonts,”
Lethaia
27 (1994): 129–38; M. A. Purnell and P. H. von Bitter, “Blade-shaped conodont elements functioned as cutting teeth,”
Nature
359 (1992): 629–31.

15.
M. A. Purnell, “Feeding mechanisms in conodonts and the function of the earliest vertebrate hard tissues,”
Geology
21 (1993): 375–77; R. J. Aldridge andM. A. Purnell, “The conodont controversies,”
Trends in Ecology and Evolution
11 (1996): 463–68.

16.
R. S. Nicoll, “Conodont element morphology, apparatus reconstructions and element function: A new interpretation of conodont biology with taxonomic implications,”
Cour. Forsch. Inst. Senckenberg182
(1995): 247–62. See also O. H. Walliser, “Architecture of the polygnathid conodont apparatus,”
Cour. Forsch. Inst. Senckenberg
168 (1994): 31–36.

17.
D. E. G. Briggs and A. J. Kear, “Decay of the lancelet
Branchiostoma lanceolatum
(Cephalochordata): Implications for the interpretation of soft-tissue preservation in conodonts and other primitive chordates,”
Lethaia
26 (1994): 275–87.

18.
Aldridge et al., “Anatomy of conodonts.”

19.
P. Forey and P. Janvier, “Agnathans and the origin of jawed vertebrates,”
Nature
361 (1993): 129–34. See also Aldridge and Purnell, “Conodont controversies,” 464, for further debate.

20.
I. J. Sansom, M. P. Smith, and M. M. Smith, “Dentine in conodonts,”
Nature
368 (1994): 591.

21.
A. Kemp and R. S. Nicoll, “Protochordate affinities of conodonts,”
Cour. Forsch. Inst. Senckenberg
182 (1995): 235–45; A. Kemp and R. S. Nicoll, “Ahistochemical analysis of biological residues in conodont elements,”
Modern Geology
20 (1996): 287–302. Also H.-P. Schultze, “Conodont histology: An indicator of the vertebrate relationship,”
Modern Geology
20 (1996): 275–85.

22.
M. A. Purnell, “Microwear in conodont elements and macrophagy in the first vertebrates,”
Nature
374 (1995): 798–800.

23.
S. E. Gabbott, R. J. Aldridge, and J. N. Theron, “A giant conodont with preserved muscle tissue from the Upper Ordovician of South Africa,”
Nature
374 (1995): 800–803.

24.
R. Monastersky, “Fossil enigma bares teeth, tells its tale,”
Science News
147 (1995): 261.

25.
P. Janvier, “Conodonts join the club,”
Nature
374 (1995): 761–72; J. Mallet, “Ventilation and origin of jawed vertebrates: A new mouth,”
Zool. J. Linn. Soc.
117 (1996): 329–404; P. Janvier, “The dawn of the vertebrates: Characters versus common ascent in the rise of current vertebrate phylogenies,”
Palaeontology
39 (1996): 259–87.

26.
Donoghue, “Growth and patterning.”

27.
P. C. J. Donoghue and M. A. Purnell, “Growth, function and the conodont fossil record,”
Geology
27 (1999): 251–54.

28.
R. J. Aldridge et al., “The apparatus architecture and function of
Promissum pulchrum
Kovács-Endrödy (Conodonta, Upper Ordovician), and the prioniodontid plan,”
Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond.
, ser. B, 347 (1995): 275–91.

29.
M. A. Purnell and P. C. J. Donoghue, “Architecture and functional morphology of the skeletal apparatus of ozarkodinid conodonts,”
Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond.
, ser. B, 352 (1997): 1545–64.

30.
P. C. J. Donoghue and M. A. Purnell, “Mammal-like occlusion in conodonts,”
Paleobiology
25 (1999): 58–74; M. A. Purnell, P. C. J. Donoghue, and R. J. Aldridge, “Orientation and anatomical notation in conodonts,”
J. Paleont.
74 (2000): 113–22; M. A. Purnell, “Feeding in extinct jawless heterostracan fishes and testing scenarios of early vertebrate evolution,”
Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond.
, ser. B, 269, no. 1486 (2002): 83–88.

31.
M. A. Purnell et al., “Conodonts and the first vertebrates,”
Endeavour
19 (1995): 20–27; M. A. Purnell, “Large eyes and vision in conodonts,”
Lethaia
28 (1995): 187–88.

32.
M. A. Purnell, “Armed to the teeth,”
Rockwatch
17 (1997): 10–11.

33.
Aldridge and Purnell, “Conodont controversies”; Gee,
Before
, xvii; H. Gee, “What remains, however improbable…,”
Nature
377 (1995): 675.

34.
Benton,
Basic Palaeontology
, 197–98.

35.
P. C. J. Donoghue, P. L. Forey, and R. J. Aldridge, “Conodont affinity and chordate phylogeny,”
Biol. Rev.
75 (2000): 191–251.

36.
P. A. Pridmore, R. E. Barwick, and R. S. Nicoll, “Soft anatomy and affinities of conodonts,”
Lethaia
29 (1997): 317–28; P. C. J. Donoghue, M. A. Purnell, and R. J. Aldridge, “Conodont anatomy, chordate phylogeny and vertebrate classification,”
Lethaia
31 (1998): 211–19.

37.
G. I. Buryi and A. P. Kasatkina, “Functional importance of new skeletal elements (‘eye capsules') of euconodonts,”
Albertiana
26 (2001): 7–10.

38.
A. Blieck, “Comments,”
Ordovician News
24 (2007): 8

39.
A. Blieck et al., “Organismal biology, phylogeny and strategy of publication: Why conodonts are not vertebrates (abstract),” Third International Conference Geologica Belgica 2009, Ghent University. The paper was published in 2010 in
Episodes
33:234–41.

AFTERWORD

1.
B. Malinowski,
Argonauts of the Western Pacific
(1922; reprint, London: Routledge, 2002), 18. On the ethnographic study of science, E. Gellner,
Postmodernism, Reason and Religion
(London: Routledge, 1993); S. Franklin, “Science as culture, cultures of science,”
Annual Reviews in Anthropology
24 (1995): 163–84; H. Gusterson,
Nuclear Rites
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996); S. Traweek,
Beamtimes and Lifetimes
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988). On constructive and dynamic disciplinary cultures, P. L. Berger and T. Luckmann,
The Social Construction of Reality
(London: Allen Lane, Penguin Press, 1967); R. Wagner,
Symbols that Stand for Themselves
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986); S. J. Knell, “Road to Smith.”

2.
On situated truths, M. Weber,
Economy and Society
(New York: Bedminster Press, 1968). This is oppositional, of course, to views such as those of Evans-Pritchard, who wrote in 1937, “Witches, as the Azande conceive them, clearly cannot exist”; if my conodont workers believed it, then for science it exists.

3.
J. Deetz,
In Small Things Forgotten
(Garden City, N. Y.: Double day Natural History Press, 1977), 7. The literature in anthropology and museum studies is extensive on this subject. Material culture is rarely discussed in studies of science culture, and when it is, it rarely engages with the rich literature in these other disciplines.

4.
On intentions, Berger and Luckmann,
Social Construction of Reality
, 34. Also E. H. Gombrich,
Art and Illusion
, 5th ed. (Oxford: Phaidon, 1977), 53, on mental sets. On perception, and naïve, scientific, and commonsensical readings of the real world, see P. F. Strawson, “Perception and its objects,” in G. McDonald (ed.),
Perception and Identity
(London: Macmillan, 1979), 41–60; J. -F. Lyotard,
The Post-Modern Condition
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1986), 76, argued that eclecticism is foundational to postmodernism but is only so as an overt performance. Implicitly it exists in all knowledge making. E. Wenger et al.,
Cultivating Communities of Practice
(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press, 2002) would refer to this as tacit knowledge.

5.
B. Latour,
Science in Action
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987) on black boxes.

6.
Berger and Luckmann,
Social Construction of Reality
, 35ff.

7.
It is noteworthy that connoisseurship in art history has roots in the natural sciences as seen in the art historians Giovanni Morrelli and Bernard Berenson.