A History of Ideas in Ichnology - Trace Fossils as Indicators of Sedimentary Environments - page 10

Italian Alps, where he observed abundant trace fossils from the Apennines
foredeep basin ( Brongniart, 1828 : 45).
A new stage in the history of ichnology began in the year 1823, when Brong-
niart published his Observations sur les fucoides et sur quelques autres plantes
marines fossiles ( Brongniart, 1823; Osgood, 1970, 1975 ). By his attitude toward
comparative anatomy, Brongniart associated some branching forms of trace
fossils (e.g., Chondrites ) to modern algae, and according to the resemblance
to the brown alga Fucus , he used the term fucoid to indicate such fossils.
Although other researchers previously supported the botanical origin of trace
fossils (i.e., von Schlotheim, 1822 ), none of these reached the influence of
the French botanist. One reason may be found in the scientific authority of
Brongniart, who was recognized as the founding father of paleobotany even
during his lifetime ( Stafleu, 1966 ). Second, Brongniart provided the scientific
community with relevant tools: the first classification of all known fossil plants
(including fucoids) and its biostratigraphical application ( Brongniart, 1828 ).
Finally, French was one of the most used international languages in Europe,
being the language of diplomacy from the seventeenth to mid-twentieth
centuries ( Chew, 2009 ).
The French School and the rising discipline of paleobotany offered convinc-
ing arguments in support to the fucoid hypothesis (e.g., de Saporta, 1873 ), which
was readily accepted by the international scientific community. For instance, the
German paleontologist Bronn (1837) described and figured numerous Fucoidi-
ten , an interpretation that was also provided for Asterosoma ( von Otto, 1854 ).
Much of the fucoid research originated from the flysch in the Swiss Alps, where
Fischer-Ooster followed Brongniart in using “fucoids” for stratigraphical corre-
lation (Supplementary Material: http://booksite.elsevier.com/9780444538130 ) .
Among the various works that have dealt with fucoids, Flora Fossilis Helvetiae
( Heer, 1876/1877 ) stands preeminent for the detail of the descriptions.
The champions of the fucoid hypothesis came from themost disparate parts of
Europe. Specifically, the Portuguese paleontologist JoaquimNery Delgado had a
central role in supporting the botanical origin of trace fossils, although he succes-
sively interpreted Nereites and Skolithos as trace fossils (e.g., Delgado, 1903 ).
Similarly, the Bohemian geologist Sternberg (1833-1838) , one of the founding
fathers of paleobotany, was one of the most prominent authors of the Age of
Fucoids for his numerous descriptions of Chondrites .
The term fucoid soon became part of the international geological lexicon, from
Spain ( De Prado, 1864 ) to Poland ( Pusch, 1837 ), and from Britain ( Buckland,
1836 ) to Italy ( Savi and Meneghini, 1851 ). The important legacy of the fucoid
approach included not only substantial advances in descriptive knowledge
but also the establishment of still valid ichnogenera such as Rhizocorallium ,
Scolicia , Daedalus , Paleodictyon , Spirophyton , Diplocraterion , and Zoophycos
( H¨ntzschel, 1975 ). Particularly noteworthy is the case of Cruziana , described
as a body fossil by the French naturalist Alcide d'Orbigny during a mission for
the Paris Museum. He established the (ichno)-genus Cruziana after the Bolivian