Organic preservation of vase‐shaped microfossils from the late Tonian Chuar Group, Grand Canyon, Arizona, USA

Vase‐shaped microfossils (VSMs) are found globally in middle Neoproterozoic (800–730 Ma) marine strata and represent the earliest evidence for testate (shell‐forming) amoebozoans. VSM tests are hypothesized to have been originally organic in life but are most commonly preserved as secondary mineralized casts and molds. A few reports, however, suggest possible organic preservation. Here, we test the hypothesis that VSMs from shales of the lower Walcott Member of the Chuar Group, Grand Canyon, Arizona, contain original organic material, as reported by B. Bloeser in her pioneering studies of Chuar VSMs. We identified VSMs from two thin section samples of Walcott Member black shales in transmitted light microscopy and used scanning electron microscopy to image VSMs. Carbonaceous material is found within the internal cavity of all VSM tests from both samples and is interpreted as bitumen mobilized from Walcott shales likely during the Cretaceous. Energy dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (EDS) and wavelength dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (WDS) reveal that VSM test walls contain mostly carbon, iron, and sulfur, while silica is present only in the surrounding matrix. Raman spectroscopy was used to compare the thermal maturity of carbonaceous material within the samples and indicated the presence of pyrite and jarosite within fossil material. X‐ray absorption spectroscopy revealed the presence of reduced organic sulfur species within the carbonaceous test walls, the carbonaceous material found within test cavities, and in the sedimentary matrix, suggesting that organic matter sulfurization occurred within the Walcott shales. Our suite of spectroscopic analyses reveals that Walcott VSM test walls are organic and sometimes secondarily pyritized (with the pyrite variably oxidized to jarosite). Both preservation modes can occur at a millimeter spatial scale within sample material, and at times even within a single specimen. We propose that sulfurization within the Walcott Shales promoted organic preservation, and furthermore, the ratio of iron to labile VSM organic material controlled the extent of pyrite replacement. Based on our evidence, we conclude that the VSMs are preserved with original organic test material, and speculate that organic VSMs may often go unrecognized, given their light‐colored, translucent appearance in transmitted light.

[1]  Matthew R. Downen,et al.  The exceptional preservation of Aix-en-Provence spider fossils could have been facilitated by diatoms , 2022, Communications Earth & Environment.

[2]  N. Planavsky,et al.  Strong evidence for a weakly oxygenated ocean–atmosphere system during the Proterozoic , 2022, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  D. Lahr,et al.  Diverse vase-shaped microfossils within a Cryogenian glacial setting in the Urucum Formation (Brazil) , 2021, Precambrian Research.

[4]  W. Fischer,et al.  Ancient Oil as a Source of Carbonaceous Matter in 1.88-Billion-Year-Old Gunflint Stromatolites and Microfossils. , 2021, Astrobiology.

[5]  A. Czaja,et al.  Phosphatic scales in vase‐shaped microfossil assemblages from Death Valley, Grand Canyon, Tasmania, and Svalbard , 2021, Geobiology.

[6]  P. Donoghue,et al.  Experimental taphonomy of organelles and the fossil record of early eukaryote evolution , 2020, Science Advances.

[7]  Samuel M. Webb,et al.  SIXpack: a graphical user interface for XAS analysis using IFEFFIT , 2020, International Tables for Crystallography.

[8]  R. Keil,et al.  Microbial sulfate reduction and organic sulfur formation in sinking marine particles , 2020, Science.

[9]  C. Junium,et al.  Total organic carbon and the preservation of organic-walled microfossils in Precambrian shale , 2020, Geology.

[10]  F. Guyot,et al.  Mechanisms of Pyrite Formation Promoted by Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria in Pure Culture , 2020, Frontiers in Earth Science.

[11]  A. Knoll,et al.  Morphologically diverse vase-shaped microfossils from the Russøya Member, Elbobreen Formation, in Spitsbergen , 2020 .

[12]  E. al.,et al.  Early formation and taphonomic significance of kaolinite associated with Burgess Shale fossils , 2020, Geology.

[13]  J. Crawford,et al.  Phylogenetic and physiological signals in metazoan fossil biomolecules , 2020, Science Advances.

[14]  A. Knoll,et al.  Aluminosilicate haloes preserve complex life approximately 800 million years ago , 2020, Interface Focus.

[15]  C. Laberty‐Robert,et al.  Rapid pyritization in the presence of a sulfur/sulfate-reducing bacterial consortium , 2020, Scientific Reports.

[16]  B. Weiss,et al.  Paleomagnetism of the Chuar Group and evaluation of the late Tonian Laurentian apparent polar wander path with implications for the makeup and breakup of Rodinia , 2020, GSA Bulletin.

[17]  G. Love,et al.  Free and kerogen‐bound biomarkers from late Tonian sedimentary rocks record abundant eukaryotes in mid‐Neoproterozoic marine communities , 2019, Geobiology.

[18]  B. Rasmussen,et al.  Organic-rich microfossils produced by oil infiltration of hollow silicified bacteria: Evidence from the ca. 340 Ma Red Dog Zn-Pb deposit, Alaska , 2019, Geology.

[19]  A. Knoll,et al.  Insights into vase-shaped microfossil diversity and Neoproterozoic biostratigraphy in light of recent Brazilian discoveries , 2019, Journal of Paleontology.

[20]  Matthew W. Brown,et al.  Phylogenomics and Morphological Reconstruction of Arcellinida Testate Amoebae Highlight Diversity of Microbial Eukaryotes in the Neoproterozoic , 2019, Current Biology.

[21]  S. Porter,et al.  Evolution: Ancient Fossilized Amoebae Find Their Home in the Tree , 2019, Current Biology.

[22]  M. Gomes,et al.  Organic carbon burial during OAE2 driven by changes in the locus of organic matter sulfurization , 2018, Nature Communications.

[23]  A. Knoll,et al.  Exceptional preservation of organic matrix and shell microstructure in a Late Cretaceous Pinna fossil revealed by photoemission electron spectromicroscopy , 2018, Geology.

[24]  G. Gehrels,et al.  Cambrian Sauk transgression in the Grand Canyon region redefined by detrital zircons , 2018, Nature Geoscience.

[25]  N. Tosca,et al.  A mineralogical signature for Burgess Shale–type fossilization , 2018 .

[26]  S. Porter,et al.  Vase-shaped microfossil biostratigraphy with new data from Tasmania, Svalbard, Greenland, Sweden and the Yukon , 2017, Precambrian Research.

[27]  F. Macdonald,et al.  Coupled Re-Os and U-Pb geochronology of the Tonian Chuar Group, Grand Canyon. , 2017 .

[28]  Phoebe A. Cohen,et al.  Vase‐shaped microfossils from the Tonian Callison Lake Formation of Yukon, Canada: taxonomy, taphonomy and stratigraphic palaeobiology , 2017 .

[29]  D. Lahr,et al.  Carbonaceous and siliceous Neoproterozoic vase-shaped microfossils (Urucum Formation, Brazil) and the question of early protistan biomineralization , 2017, Journal of Paleontology.

[30]  G. Gehrels,et al.  Synthesis of the 780–740 Ma Chuar, Uinta Mountain, and Pahrump (ChUMP) groups, western USA: Implications for Laurentia-wide cratonic marine basins , 2017 .

[31]  Chun-Chieh Wang,et al.  Evidence of preserved collagen in an Early Jurassic sauropodomorph dinosaur revealed by synchrotron FTIR microspectroscopy , 2017, Nature Communications.

[32]  S. Porter,et al.  Systematics of organic-walled microfossils from the ca. 780–740 Ma Chuar Group, Grand Canyon, Arizona , 2016, Journal of Paleontology.

[33]  I. Bull,et al.  Fossilization of melanosomes via sulfurization , 2016, Palaeontology.

[34]  J. Hope,et al.  Early sponges and toxic protists: possible sources of cryostane, an age diagnostic biomarker antedating Sturtian Snowball Earth , 2016, Geobiology.

[35]  D. Lahr,et al.  The Phanerozoic diversification of silica-cycling testate amoebae and its possible links to changes in terrestrial ecosystems , 2015, PeerJ.

[36]  A. J. Kaufman,et al.  A unifying model for Neoproterozoic–Palaeozoic exceptional fossil preservation through pyritization and carbonaceous compression , 2014, Nature Communications.

[37]  A. Knoll,et al.  740 Ma vase-shaped microfossils from Yukon, Canada: Implications for Neoproterozoic chronology and biostratigraphy , 2014 .

[38]  M. Brasier,et al.  Enhanced cellular preservation by clay minerals in 1 billion-year-old lakes , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[39]  R. Summons,et al.  Ancient biomolecules: Their origins, fossilization, and role in revealing the history of life , 2014, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[40]  K. Grice,et al.  Biomarkers reveal the role of photic zone euxinia in exceptional fossil preservation: An organic geochemical perspective , 2013 .

[41]  A. Knoll,et al.  Scale Microfossils from the Mid-Neoproterozoic Fifteenmile Group, Yukon Territory , 2012, Journal of Paleontology.

[42]  D. Canfield,et al.  Mechanism for Burgess Shale-type preservation , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[43]  I. McNulty,et al.  The MicroAnalysis Toolkit: X‐ray Fluorescence Image Processing Software , 2011 .

[44]  T. Cavalier-smith,et al.  Novel cultured protists identify deep-branching environmental DNA clades of cercozoa: New Genera Tremula, Micrometopion, Minimassisteria, Nudifila, Peregrinia. , 2011, Protist.

[45]  G. Cody,et al.  Molecular signature of chitin-protein complex in Paleozoic arthropods , 2011 .

[46]  G. Vidal,et al.  Acritarchs from the Upper Proterozoic and Lower Cambrian of East Greenland , 2011 .

[47]  Vladimir N. Sergeev,et al.  Taxonomy, Paleoecology and Biostratigraphy of the Late Neoproterozoic Chichkan Microbiota of South Kazakhstan: The Marine Biosphere on the Eve of Metazoan Radiation , 2010, Journal of Paleontology.

[48]  D. Canfield,et al.  High isotope fractionations during sulfate reduction in a low-sulfate euxinic ocean analog , 2010 .

[49]  A. Knoll,et al.  An emerging picture of Neoproterozoic ocean chemistry: Insights from the Chuar Group, Grand Canyon, USA , 2010 .

[50]  Yanan Shen,et al.  Biotic turnover driven by eutrophication before the Sturtian low-latitude glaciation , 2009 .

[51]  Stefan Schouten,et al.  Investigating pathways of diagenetic organic matter sulfurization using compound-specific sulfur isotope analysis , 2008 .

[52]  C. Berney,et al.  A molecular time-scale for eukaryote evolution recalibrated with the continuous microfossil record , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[53]  M. McNamara,et al.  High-fidelity organic preservation of bone marrow in ca. 10 Ma amphibians , 2006 .

[54]  G. Gehrels,et al.  Tectonic inferences from the ca. 1255–1100 Ma Unkar Group and Nankoweap Formation, Grand Canyon: Intracratonic deformation and basin formation during protracted Grenville orogenesis , 2005 .

[55]  Everett L. Shock,et al.  Formation of jarosite‐bearing deposits through aqueous oxidation of pyrite at Meridiani Planum, Mars , 2004 .

[56]  J. Roberts,et al.  PRESERVATION OF MICROBORINGS AS FLUID INCLUSIONS , 2004 .

[57]  Jacob H. Masliyah,et al.  Role of fine clays in bitumen extraction from oil sands , 2004 .

[58]  Z. Aizenshtat,et al.  Reaction of polysulfide anions with α, β unsaturated isoprenoid aldehydes in aquatic media: simulation of oceanic conditions , 2004 .

[59]  J. Geissman,et al.  Paleomagnetism of the Neoproterozoic Chuar Group, Grand Canyon Supergroup, Arizona: implications for Laurentia’s Neoproterozoic APWP and Rodinia break-up , 2004 .

[60]  J. Damsté,et al.  Organic sulfur biogeochemistry: Recent advances and future research directions , 2004 .

[61]  A. Knoll,et al.  VASE-SHAPED MICROFOSSILS FROM THE NEOPROTEROZOIC CHUAR GROUP, GRAND CANYON: A CLASSIFICATION GUIDED BY MODERN TESTATE AMOEBAE , 2003, Journal of Paleontology.

[62]  Gary A. Smith,et al.  Neoproterozoic Chuar Group (̃800-742 Ma), Grand Canyon: a record of cyclic marine deposition during global cooling and supercontinent rifting , 2001 .

[63]  K. Karlstrom,et al.  Proterozoic multistage (ca. 1.1 and 0.8 Ga) extension recorded in the Grand Canyon Supergroup and establishment of northwest- and north-trending tectonic grains in the southwestern United States , 2001 .

[64]  D. Canfield.  Biogeochemistry of Sulfur Isotopes , 2001 .

[65]  A. Knoll,et al.  Chuar Group of the Grand Canyon: record of breakup of Rodinia, associated change in the global carbon cycle, and ecosystem expansion by 740 Ma. , 2000, Geology.

[66]  A. Knoll,et al.  Testate amoebae in the Neoproterozoic Era: evidence from vase-shaped microfossils in the Chuar Group, Grand Canyon , 2000, Paleobiology.

[67]  M. M. Mus,et al.  Internal morphology and taphonomic history of the Neoproterozoic vase-shaped microfossils from the Visings Group, Sweden , 2000 .

[68]  P. L. Hansley,et al.  The Search for a Source Rock for the Giant Tar Sand Triangle Accumulation, Southeastern Utah , 1999 .

[69]  J. Damsté,et al.  Laboratory sulfurisation of the marine microalga Nannochloropsis salina , 1998 .

[70]  Orr,et al.  Cambrian burgess shale animals replicated in clay minerals , 1998, Science.

[71]  R. J. Horodyski.  Paleontology of proterozoic shales and mudstones: examples from the Belt supergroup, Chuar group and Pahrump group, western USA , 1993 .

[72]  A. Knoll,et al.  Paleobiology of a Neoproterozoic tidal flat/lagoonal complex: the Draken Conglomerate Formation, Spitsbergen , 1991, Journal of Paleontology.

[73]  J. Damsté,et al.  Analysis, structure and geochemical significance of organically-bound sulphur in the geosphere : state of the art and future research , 1990 .

[74]  D. M. Ward,et al.  Distinctive hydrocarbon biomarkers from fossiliferous sediment of the Late Proterozoic Walcott Member, Chuar Group, Grand Canyon, Arizona , 1988 .

[75]  G. Ogden.  Fine Structure of the Shell Wall in the Soil Testate Amoeba Cyclopyxis kahli (Rhizopoda)1 , 1988 .

[76]  A. Knoll,et al.  Microfossils from oolites and pisolites of the Upper Proterozoic Eleonore Bay Group, central East Greenland , 1988, Journal of Paleontology.

[77]  S. Matsubara,et al.  Precambrian and Cambrian cherts in northwestern Tasmania , 1988 .

[78]  J. Damsté,et al.  The origin and fate of isoprenoid C20 and C15 sulphur compounds in sediments and oils , 1987 .

[79]  S. Brassell,et al.  Isoprenoid thiophenes: novel products of sediment diagenesis? , 1986, Nature.

[80]  B. Bloeser.  MELANOCYRILLIUM, A NEW GENUS OF STRUCTURALLY COMPLEX LATE PROTEROZOIC MICROFOSSILS FROM THE KWAGUNT FORMATION (CHUAR GROUP), GRAND CANYON, ARIZONA , 1985 .

[81]  T. Ford,et al.  Microbiotas from the late proterozoic chuar group (northern Arizona) and uinta mountain group (Utah) and their chronostratigraphic implications , 1985 .

[82]  C. G. Ogden.  Shell structure of some testate amoebae from Britain (Protozoa, Rhizopoda) , 1984 .

[83]  Robert Raiswell,et al.  Burial of organic carbon and pyrite sulfur in sediments over phanerozoic time: a new theory , 1983 .

[84]  R. J. Horodyski,et al.  Possible eukaryotic algal filaments from the late Proterozoic Chuar Group, Grand Canyon, Arizona , 1983 .

[85]  P. Binda,et al.  Chitinozoanlike microfossils in a late Precambrian dolostone from Saudi Arabia , 1980 .

[86]  T. Fairchild,et al.  Microfossils in the "Eopaleozoic" Jacadigo Group at Urucum, Mato Grosso, Southwest Brazil , 1978 .

[87]  J. Schopf,et al.  Chitinozoans from the Late Precambrian Chuar Group of the Grand Canyon, Arizona , 1977, Science.

[88]  T. Ford,et al.  Late Precambrian Chuar Group, Grand Canyon, Arizona , 1973 .

[89]  T. Ford,et al.  Microorganisms from the Late Precambrian of the Grand Canyon, Arizona , 1973, Science.

[90]  R. Berner.  Sedimentary pyrite formation , 1970 .

[91]  S. Rittenberg,et al.  MICROBIOLOGICAL FRACTIONATION OF SULPHUR ISOTOPES. , 1964, Journal of general microbiology.

[92]  C. Gundy.  NANKOWEAP GROUP OF THE GRAND CANYON ALGONKIAN OF ARIZONA , 1951 .