DavidRoyHunter.pdf

1914), to a ..ell founded dl~,"{sul of the first four of ch" above five
hypoth~"e:l. The 1..,,[ hypothesis, h"""vet, does appear to b" on" 'Jay of
explaining grovth, sh"pe. syrrnctry and h"1IIOlogy of conodonts.
~rrls (1976), dese.thed an In,,,,rtebnte, """"'d Odontogriphus
o""'lusJolorris, frolll the Borge"" "hale (C"mbrlan) of British Colull'bls. It
carries a horse-sho'", shap"d structursof teeth-llke ..Ie_nts that ste (onsidered
to have supported a lophophore. This lnd""d is an exciting find,
and One that I"so""'''''hat In support of 1.1ndstrol1'shypothes!s (Lindstr""',
1964. 1973, 1974). however, the lophophorau described by Monls Is badly
cotllpressed and needs to:'e supponed by addHionaldlscoverie".
The fossijj,.ed reoulns of a sroall soft bodied organism Irm" th"
Be3rGulchLi....,stone (Carbonlf"rous) In Hontana, loiaS found to contain
conodont eh_nts thaI are dllconod.ont pr"dltor,., ralll"r than conortont
animals. tf the conodcnlS liere eaten by thec"nod,,"tochonlates, th"max-
ImuTlslze of Ihec"nodont animal
couldnoth;\vebaenm"chgr."tcrth