Chaisson & Pearson (1997):
This species is difficult to distinguish from Gt. woodi from the middle Pliocene to lower Pleistocene, where their ranges overlap. A conservative definition is adopted for Gt. rubescens and a more inclusive one for Gt. woodi. This decision is made based on the large amount of morphologic variation observed in Gt. woodi throughout its range. Specimens are called Gt. rubescens if they have a relatively smooth final chamber and a relatively loose whorl, which gives the test a more tetrahedral appearance. By contrast, the chambers of Gt. woodi tend to be more tightly embracing. In addition, the apertural lip of Gt. rubescens tends to be more distinct to even flange-like (Sample 154-925B-9H-5, 65-67 cm), and the aperture itself tends to be round (Sample 154-925B-8H-5, 65-67 cm). |
Hofker,J. (1956):
Foraminifers of Santa Cruz and Thatcher Island, Virginia Archipelago, West Indies. . Copenhagen Univ., Zool. Mus. Spolia (Skrifler) Vol. 15
Hofker,J. (1977):
La famille Turborotalitidae N. Fam . Revue de Micropaléontologie Vol. 19
Kennett,J. and Srinivasan,M.S. (1983):
Neogene Planktonic Foraminifera - A Phylogenetic Atlas.
Chaisson,W.P. and Pearson,P.N. (1997):
Planktonic foraminifer biostratigraphy at Site 925: middle Miocene–Pleistocene.
In: Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results Vol. 154 Eds: Shackleton, N.J.Curry, W.B.Richter, C.Bralower, T.J.
Chaisson,W.P. and d'Hondt,S.L. (2000):
Neogene planktonic foraminifer biostratigraphy at Site 999, Western Caribbean Sea.
In: Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results Vol. 165 Eds: Leckie, R.M.Sigurdsson, H.Acton, G.D.Draper, G. p. 19-56
|
Taxon Concept provided by
