Cyclopsinella neumannae Cherchi, 1980

Simmons, Michael, Bidgood, Michael, Consorti, Lorenzo & Schlagintweit, Felix, 2025, A Review Of The Identity And Biostratigraphy Of Cenomanian “ Larger ” Benthic Foraminifera: Part 2 - The Order Loftusiida (Excluding The Suborder Orbitolinina), Acta Palaeontologica Romaniae 21 (1), pp. 103-192 : 138

Cyclopsinella neumannae Cherchi, 1980

Figure 14

? 1948c Zekritia langhami n. gen., n. sp. – Henson, p. 95, pl. 11, fig. 7; “Turonian” (possibly Cenomanian), Qatar.

? 1964 Cyclolina sp. – Bozorgnia & Banafti, pl. LXXXII; fig. 1; Cenomanian, central Iran.

1964 Cyclopsinella steinmanni (Munier-Chalmas) – Neumann, p. 51-52; pl. 1, fig. 5; pl. 2, fig. 1-3, 5-8; middle Cenomanian (after Moreau, 1976), western France.

1967 Cyclopsinella steinmanni – Neumann, p. 162-164; pl. 27, fig. 1-5; middle Cenomanian (after Moreau, 1976), western France.

T 1980 Cyclopsinella neumannae n. sp. – Cherchi, p. 74- 79; pl. 1, fig. 1-4; pl. 2, fig. 1-4; pl. 3, fig. 1-4; middle Cenomanian (after Moreau, 1976), Western France.

1985 Cyclopsinella neumannae – Cherchi in Schroeder & Neumann, p. 19-21, pl. 5, figs. 1-6; middle Cenomanian (after Moreau, 1976), western France.

1987 Cyclopsinella steinmanni – Loeblich & Tappan, pl. 87, figs, 2-4; middle Cenomanian (after Moreau, 1976), western France.

? 1998 Zekritia langhami – Whittaker et al., p. 87-88, pl. 107, figs. 5-6; “Turonian” (possibly Cenomanian), Qatar.? 2018 Zekritia langhami – BouDagher-Fadel, pl. 5.22, fig. 1; “Turonian” (possibly Cenomanian), Qatar.

Reference Images: Schroeder & Neumann (1985) pl. 5, figs. 1-6.

Taxonomy/Identity: The genus Cyclopsinella was introduced by Galloway (1933) with Cyclopsina steinmanni Munier-Chalmas, 1887 as described from the Santonian of southern France and northern Spain as the type species (known to range to the late Maastrichtian – see Schlagintweit (2020) for a review). It is a large, discoidal, microgranular/finely agglutinating form, that in the macrospheric generation has a protoconch and deuteroconch followed by numerous cyclic chambers. Later chambers have endoskeletal pillars arising from a median position on the chamber floor to extend radially from one septum the next, and may bifurcate and fuse to give an irregular appearance in thin-section and a misleading false appearance of two layers of chambers. Multiple apertures are present in a double row of pores. Mangashtia Henson, 1948c (emended Fourcade et al., 1997) is similar but the pillars are in the form of beams and only a single row of apertural pores are present.

Specimens described as C. steinmanni from the middle Cenomanian of western France ( Neumann, 1964, 1967) formed the basis of the introduction of Cyclopsinella neumannae by Cherchi (1980) and further documented by Cherchi in Schroeder & Neumann (1985), which was the last taxonomic discussion of this species.

Specimens of C. neumannae are typically 4 – 6 mm in diameter (max. 6.6 mm), with test thickness increasing towards the periphery to c. 0.3 mm. Four ontogenetic stages are known: (i) a central embryonic apparatus, formed of a protoconch and deuteroconch. The protoconch, with a diameter between 0.078 and 0.092 mm, is ellipsoidal or more rarely subspherical; (ii) the embryo is followed laterally by a series of 4 undivided sickle-shaped chambers; (iii) there follows a series of 15- 20 annular undivided annular chambers; (iv) The last ontogenetic stage is characterized by annular chambers, divided in the equatorial plane. This dividing partition is interrupted by large holes which are, in the first half of this stage, frequent, and connected by stolons that are sometimes a little oblique.

C. steinmanni is distinguished from C. neumannae by the larger dimensions of the test (6 – 7 mm in diameter) and of the embryonic apparatus (protoconch: 0.15 mm; deuteroconch: 0.2 mm). It lacks sickle-shaped chambers following the embryo. Cyclopsinella roselli described from the Campanian of Spain ( Villalonga et al., 2019) is probably a synonym of C. steinmanni (Schlagintweit, 2020) .

Zekritia langhami described as a new genus and species by Henson (1948c) from the Turonian (possibly Cenomanian on regional grounds – Le Blanc, 2015; Bromhead et al., 2022) is a possible synonym ( Gendrot, 1964; Fourcade et al., 1997; Schlagintweit, 2020), but description is limited to a single thin-section specimen and crucial features cannot be seen ( Whittaker et al, 1998) although the cyclopsinellid structure of the pillars ( Hottinger, 2006, p. 12) can be seen. Zekritia and Z. langhami are effectively taxa of uncertain status ( Loeblich & Tappan, 1987). Probably mistakenly, BouDagher-Fadel (2018) considered Zekritia a soritid.

Confident Stratigraphic Range: middle Cenomanian.

Uncertain Stratigraphic Range: late Cenomanian.

The only confirmed record is the type description from the middle Cenomanian of France (Cherchi, 1980; Cherchi in Schroeder & Neumann, 1985; age after Moreau, 1976). The species has been recorded (as "cf.") but not illustrated from the late Cenomanian of Morocco ( Ettachfini & Andreu, 2004) and Cyclopsinella sp. has been recorded from the late Cenomanian of Kuwait, although an illustration (pl. 6, fig. 13) is most likely not this genus (El-Naggar & Al-Rifaiy, 1973). These same authors also report but do not illustrate Zekritia from the Mishrif Formation of Kuwait, occurring alongside Praealveolina , Cisalveolina , etc. Thus, most likely late Cenomanian. An illustration of " Cyclolina sp. " from the undifferentiated Cenomanian of central Iran (Bozorgnia & Banafti, 1964) may be this species. As noted above, Z. langhami might be a synonym, and the stratigraphic position of its type occurrence (from the Mishrif Formation of Qatar) suggests a late Cenomanian or possibly early Turonian age ( Le Blanc, 2015, Bromhead et al., 2022; Simmons et al., 2024a).

Geographic Distribution: Confirmed occurrences are restricted to France but this species has been reported (though unconfirmed) ranging as far eastwards as Qatar and central Iran.

Figures

Fig. 14. Representative illustrations of Cyclopsinella neumannae: a. Equatorial section, Schroeder & Neumann (1985, pl. 5, fig. 1, France); b. Partial equatorial section, Schroeder & Neumann (1985, pl. 5, fig. 6, France); c. Partial equatorial section, Schroeder & Neumann (1985, pl. 5, fig. 5, France); d. Axial section, Schroeder & Neumann (1985, pl. 5, fig. 4, France).