Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Responsive image
Issue: Vol. 8 No. 3: June 2025
Type: Article
Published: 2025-06-27
DOI: 10.11646/palaeoentomology.8.3.1
Page range: 235-242
Abstract views: 59
PDF downloaded: 8

Epibiont communities on mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber

State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China
State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China
State Key Laboratory of Palaeobiology and Stratigraphy, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China
encrust hard substrate Cretaceous Myanmar

Abstract

The mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber was extensively colonized by marine epibiont communities, including pholadids, corals, oysters, and serpulids. In this study, we report a diverse array of marine organisms that adhered to the amber, forming epibiont communities. Notably, cheilostome bryozoans are documented for the first time as an additional group of colonizing organisms on Burmese amber. These bryozoans formed extensive sheets and proliferated on the amber surface, often encrusting other epilithic taxa such as serpulids and oysters. The encrusting organisms exhibited significant marginal competitive interactions, including overgrowth and stand-off behaviours, as they competed for space. These hard substrate communities display trends similar to those observed in extensive soft substrate communities, resembling many counterparts in both modern and geological records. This discovery provides valuable insights into the composition of epibionts, the sequence of their colonization, and their ecological interactions on Burmese amber. Furthermore, this study indicates that the establishment of epibiont communities on Burmese amber occurred later than the entrapment of bioinclusions but earlier than the deposition of nearshore gravel strata.

References

  1. Ager, D.V. (1961) The epifauna of a Devonian spiriferid. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 117, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.117.1.0001
  2. Aitken, A.E. & Risk, M.J. (1988) Biotic interactions revealed by macroborings in Arctic bivalve molluscs. Lethaia, 21, 339–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1502-3931.1988.tb01762.x
  3. Alexander, R.R. & Scharpf, C.D. (1990) Epizoans on late Ordovician brachiopods from southeastern Indiana. Historical Biology, 4, 179–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/08912969009386542
  4. Alvarez, F. & Taylor, P.D. (1987) Epizoan ecology and interactions in the Devonian of Spain. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 61, 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-0182(87)90039-3
  5. Barnes, D.K.A. (1994) Communities of epibiota on two erect species of Antarctic Bryozoa. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 74, 863–872. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002531540009010X
  6. Barnes, D.K.A., Rothery, P. & Clarke, A. (1996) Colonisation and development in encrusting communities from the Antarctic intertidal and sublittoral. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 196, 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(95)00132-8
  7. Barnes, D.K.A. & Dick, M.H. (2000a) Overgrowth competition in encrusting bryozoan assemblages of the intertidal and infralittoral zones of Alaska. Marine Biology, 136, 813–822. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002270000253
  8. Barnes, D.K.A. & Dick, M.H. (2000b) Overgrowth competition between clades: implications for interpretation of the fossil record and overgrowth indices. Biological Bulletin, 199, 85–94. https://doi.org/10.2307/1542710
  9. Barnes, D.K.A. & Lehane, C. (2001) Competition, mortality and diversity in South Atlantic coastal boulder communities. Polar Biology, 24, 200–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003000000196
  10. Breitburg, D.L. (1985) Development of a subtidal epibenthic community: factors affecting species composition and the mechanisms of succession. Oecologia, 65, 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00379215
  11. Devescovi, M. (2009) Biometric differences between date mussels Lithophaga lithophaga colonizing artificial and natural structures. Acta Adriatica, 50 (2), 129–138.
  12. De Gibert, J.M., Domènech, R. & Martinell, J. (2012) Rocky shorelines. Developments in Sedimentology, 64, 441–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53813-0.00015-0
  13. Furlong, C.M., Schultz, S.K., Gingras, M.K. & Zonneveld, J.P. (2016) Oregon Sea stack: ecological diversity of a modern Trypanites ichnofacies. Ichnos, 23 (1-2), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10420940.2015.1136512
  14. Harmelin, J.G. (1990) Interactions between small sciaphilous scleractinians and epizoans in the northern Mediterranean, with particular reference to bryozoans. Marine Ecology, 11, 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0485.1990.tb00388.x
  15. Jӓger, M. (2012) Sabellids and serpulids (Polychaeta Sedentaria) from the type Maastrichtian, the Netherlands and Belgium. Scripta Geologica-Special Issues, 8, 45–82.
  16. Klikushin, V.G. (1996) Late Jurassic crinoids from Sudak environs (Crimea). Palaeontographica, Abteilung A: Paläozoologie, 238, 97–151. https://doi.org/10.1127/pala/238/1995/97
  17. Mao, Y.Y., Liang, K., Su, Y.T., Li, J.G., Rao, X., Zhang, H., Xia, F.Y., Fu, Y.Z, Cai, C.Y. & Huang, D.Y. (2018) Various amberground marine animals on Burmese amber with discussions on its age. Palaeoentomology, 1 (1), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.11646/palaeoentomology.1.1.11
  18. McCall, P.L. & Tevesz, M.J.S. (1983) Soft-bottom succession and the fossil record. In: Tevesz, M.J.S. & McCall, P.L. (Eds), Biotic interactions in recent and fossil benthic communities. Plenum, New York, 157–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-0740-3_4
  19. Rakús, M. & Zítt, J. (1993) Crinoid encrusters of ammonite shells (Carixian, Tunisia). Geobios, 26, 317–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-6995(06)80386-4
  20. Ross, A.J. (2024) Complete checklist of Burmese (Myanmar) amber taxa 2023. Mesozoic, 1 (1), 21–57. https://doi.org/10.11646/mesozoic.1.1.4
  21. Smith, R.D. & Ross, A.J. (2017) Amberground pholadid bivalve borings and inclusions in Burmese amber: implications for proximity of resin–producing forests to brackish waters, and the age of the amber. Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 107, 239–247. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755691017000287
  22. Taylor, P.D. & Wilson, M.A. (2003) Palaeoecology and evolution of marine hard substrate communities. Earth-Science Reviews, 62 (1-2), 1–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-8252(02)00131-9
  23. Taylor, P.D. (2016) Competition between encrusters on marine hard substrates and its fossil record. Palaeontology, 59 (4), 481–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/pala.12239.
  24. Vinn, O., Ten Hove, H.A. & Mutvei, H. (2008) On the tube ultrastructure and origin of calcification in sabellids (Annelida, Polychaeta). Palaeontology, 51, 295–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4983.2008.00763.x
  25. Vinn, O. & Mutvei, H. (2009) Calcareous tubeworms of the Phanerozoic. Estonian Journal of Earth Sciences, 58, 286–296. https://doi.org/10.3176/earth.2009.4.07
  26. Walker, K.R. & Diehl, W.W. (1986) The effect of synsedimentary substrate modification on the composition of paleocommunities: paleoecologic succession revisited. Palaios, 1, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.2307/3514460
  27. Wilson, M.A. (1985) Disturbance and ecologic succession in an Upper Ordovician cobble-dwelling hardground fauna. Science, 228, 575–577. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.228.4699.575
  28. Zhang, Y.Y. & Huang, D.Y. (2024a) Amberground serpulid polychaetes on mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber. Mesozoic, 1 (3), 309–314. https://doi.org/10.11646/mesozoic.1.3.11
  29. Zhang, Y.Y. & Huang, D.Y. (2024b) Rotularia (Annelida: Sabellida: Serpulidae) attached to the mid-Cretaceous Burmese amber. Mesozoic, 1 (4), 506–514. https://doi.org/10.11646/mesozoic.1.4.8