Monday, June 20, 2011

Dinomischus.

There are two species of Dinomischus, Dinomischus isolatus and Dinomischus venustum. This image shows two views of Dinomischus venustum. Dinomischus was a rare Cambrian fossil. It is thought to be parasitic.


These are Dinomischus isolatus buried in the sand. Unlike Dinomischus venestum, Dinomischus isolatus had sort of a bulb that would anchor into the sand. It is thought that on the inside of the petals, Dinomischus had cilia which directed food into the mouth.


Dinomischus was a 4" high oddball animal that didn't fit into any modern group. It had a U-shaped gut, and the results were the anus was right next to the mouth.

Dinomischus looked sort of like a crinoid. A crinoid is an animal with a long, feathery stalk, then a top which looks something like a very skinny, hairy flower.

15 comments:

  1. Wow, this is a neat one. It does look something like a flower. Which raises a question: what do we know about plant life from this period?

    ReplyDelete
  2. God did not place life in this period, there WAS no period this far back, carbon dating is politically motivated junk science, it is clearly the work of "scientists", the same bunch w/ their glo-BULL Warming scam. Those who question the TRUTH of Genesis will burn in Hell. Have a nice day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How you explain the fossil and the geological evidences? Or you really think that these life forms were extinct during the deluge, because Noe don't put them on the arch, that disappeared? And the polar callotes, they are disappearing because god wants, global warming? Nah, god wants! This little boy of 7 years old questioned the truth of Genesis, he will burn on hell? No, cuz hell and god doens't exist!

      Delete
  3. I believe Mr. Ready is kidding here.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "...Sort of a bulb that would anchor into the sand." When you put it that way, it really is like a flower, except for the "eating" part. If you run out of arthropods, I know you can switch over and talk about botany.

    And, I think T.R. needs to understand that God created scientists to uncover mysteries. Let's not presume we know everything about everything; He did keep some things secret--perhaps for 7-year-old bloggers to discover....

    ReplyDelete
  5. @anonymous I don't really know about the plants from this period, but I do believe that plants probably weren't much, because in the Cambrian Period, it's more the animals that get complex.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think that during the Cambrian, plants were basically limited to lichens and moss on land and algae in the sea. (Lichens are actually formed through a partnership of fungi and algae, I believe.) It wasn't until the Ordovician that plants first evolved roots and stems.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks for the reply ABC. I know very little about this period so your blog is a real treat!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Micke from SwedenJune 22, 2011 at 4:14 PM

    So most of these animals ate algae?

    ReplyDelete
  9. This animal kind of looks like a silicone brush used for cooking, you know? Congratulations on getting recognized on Forbes! Keep up the fantastic work!

    ReplyDelete
  10. @ Micke Some creatures in the Cambrian were predators, like Anomalocaris, Kerygmachela, Pambdelurion, Sanctacaris, Opabinia, and Ottoia. And some Cambrian creatures were not predators, like Dinomischus, a few kinds of trilobites, Wiwaxia, Odontogriphus, Orthozanclus, and Haplophrentis. Which probably ate algae, plankton, and whatever they could find in the sediment.

    ReplyDelete
  11. What would it parasitize? Would it's parasitize in it's flowerish form or in it's larval form?

    ReplyDelete
  12. @William If it was parasitic, it may have gotten onto a trilobite carapace while it was in its larval form (if it had a larval form) then it grew up on the trilobite, and moved to new places to feed without even having to move. But this is just a guess.

    ReplyDelete