texas journal science

THE
TEXAS JOURNAL
OF
SCIENCE
GENERAL
INFORMATION
M E M B E R S H I P . — A n y person or members of any group engaged in
scientific work or interested in the promotion of science are eligible for
membership in The Texas Academy of Science. Dues for members are $30.00
annually; associate (student) members, $15.00; family members, $35.00;
affiliate members, $5.00; emeritus members, $10.00; life members, 20 times
annual dues; patrons, $750.00 or more in one payment; corporate members,
$250.00 annually; corporate life members, $2000.00 in one payment. Library
subscription rate is $45.00 annually. Payments should be sent to Dr. Michael
J. Carlo, P.O. Box 10986, Angelo State University, San Angelo, Texas 76909.
The Texas Journal of Science is a quarterly publication of The Texas
Academy of Science and is sent to most members and all subscribers.
Changes of address and inquiries regarding missing or back issues should be
sent to Dr. Robert D. Owen, Department of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech
University, Lubbock, Texas 79409-3131, (806) 742-3232.
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
Texas Section, American Association of Physics Teachers
Texas Section, Mathematical Association of America
Texas Section, National Association of Geology Teachers
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Texas Society of Mammalogists
The Texas Journal of Science (ISSN 0040-4403) is published quarterly at Lubbock, Texas U.S.A.
Second class postage paid at Post Office, Lubbock, Texas 79402. Postmaster: Send address
changes, and returned copies to The Texas Journal of Science, B o x 43151, Texas Tech
University, Lubbock, Texas 79409-3151, U.S.A.
T H E F O S S I L B I R D ICHTHYORNIS
IN T H E
CRETACEOUS OF TEXAS
D A V I D C. PARRIS AND JOAN ECHOLS
Bureau of Natural History, New Jersey State Museum, CN-530, Trenton,
New Jersey 08625-0530, and Department oj Earth Sciences, East Texas State
University,
Commerce, Texas 75428
ABSTRACT.—Four avian fossils from the Cretaceous of Texas are referred to Ichthyornis.
Two specimens identified as /. dispar (Marsh, 1872) are from the Ector Chalk (Coniacian)
of Fannin County. One specimen referred to /. antecessor (Wetmore, 1962) is from the
Pflugerville Formation of Travis County, and another is from the Roxton Member of the
Gober Chalk of Fannin County, both Campanian. The Texas specimens can be correlated
with greater precision than most material of Ichthyornis and span a period essentially equal
to that during which the Niobrara Formation, source of the classic specimens, was
deposited. Key words: Ichthyornis; Cretaceous; paleontology; geology; bird.
Since it was first described, the avian genus Ichthyornis
has been
among the taxa most associated with the classic chalk strata of North
America. The six species described by Marsh (summarized in Marsh,
1880) from the Niobrara Formation (Coniacian-Campanian) established
Ichthyornis
as one of the notable toothed birds of the Cretaceous of
Kansas, a genus familiar to anyone with a basic knowledge of vertebrate
paleontology. Interest in Ichthyornis has increased in the last few decades
(Walker, 1967; Stewart, 1990; Stewart et al., 1990). Descriptions of better
specimens than those available to Marsh have reinforced knowledge of
the anatomy of the genus (Gingerich, 1972; Martin and Stewart, 1977).
The geologic and geographic ranges have been greatly expanded in other
published reports (Olson, 1975; Lucas and Sullivan, 1982; Martin and
Stewart, 1982; Fox, 1984; Zinsmeister, 1985; Nesov, 1986). As yet,
however, n o comprehensive taxonomic review of the genus has been
published, although such a study is much to be desired.
Ichthyornis
was reported from the Cretaceous of Texas by Marsh
(1877). The Yale University specimen ( Y P M 1796), the only published
report of an alleged Cretaceous bird from Texas, was designated the type
of a distinct species, Ichthyornis lentus (originally referred to the genus
Graculavus). The specimen was attributed to the Austin Chalk near Fort
McKinney (now McKinney), Collin County (misprinted as Colling
County in Brodkorb, 1967). The taxonomic identity and geologic age of
that specimen have been questioned, however (Shufeldt, 1915; Martin
and Stewart, 1982). Despite skepticism about /. lentus, the genus
Ichthyornis would be expected to occur in the chalk horizons of Texas.
In fact, two well-documented Texas specimens of Ichthyornis
have
been known since 1940, although they apparently have not been
described. Their existence presumably was noted in organizational reports
202
T H E T E X A S J O U R N A L OF SCIENCE—VOL. 44, NO. 2, 1992
and they were studied by leading authorities on the genus. Unfortunately,
reviewers of Cretaceous faunas (Russell, 1988) generally were unaware of
these specimens.
We describe here four Texas specimens of Ichthyornis, the two noted
above and two that have been collected more recently. All are from the
Austin Division of Young (1986), a single transgression-inundation event
(Fig. 1). Texas specimens of Ichthyornis
are of particular importance
because of their intermediate geographic position between records from
Kansas and Alabama, and because the well-studied biostratigraphy of
Texas (especially ammonite zonation) enables a high degree of age
resolution for them.
Institutional collection prefixes used here are: ET, East Texas State
University; T M M , Texas Memorial Museum; U S N M , National Museum
of Natural History (Smithsonian Institution); Y P M , Yale University
(Peabody Museum of Natural History).
SYSTEMATIC PALEONTOLOGY
Order Ichthyornithiformes Marsh, 1873
Family Ichthyornithidae Marsh, 1873
Genus Ichthyornis Marsh, 1872
Ichthyornis dispar (Marsh, 1872)
Holotype.—YPM
1450, an incomplete postcranial skeleton from the
Smoky Hill Chalk Member of the Niobrara Formation in Section 1,
Township 6 S, Range 19 W, Rooks Co., Kansas.
Referred specimens.—TMM
31051-24, a complete right humerus (Fig.
2), and T M M 31051-25, a right wing with complete humerus, partial
ulna, partial radius, and portion of carpometacarpus (Fig. 3), both
specimens from the Ector Chalk Formation of the Austin Group at the
Savoy Pit, Fannin Co., Texas (Ector 7.5' Quadrangle). F o r descriptions
of the locality and Bureau of Economic Geology collecting projects, refer
to Springer (1957) and Bardack (1968). Collected by Bureau of Economic
Geology field party (Gregory) in 1940.
Description.—The
specimens are well preserved except for minor
breakage and crushing, and include the conspicuous pectoral crests of the
humerus that are diagnostic of the genus. Pending a generic revision, the
best means of species determination remains comparison of measure­
ments to specimens described by Marsh himself. As shown in Table 1, the
T M M humeri are similar to the Marsh specimens of Ichthyornis
dispar,
including the type. Other species of the genus for which the humerus is
known differ significantly in dimensions. Both of the referred specimens
from Texas are prepared in relief on blocks of matrix, somewhat limiting
the views available for detailed description. However, the shaft is
ICHTHYORNIS
F R O M THE C R E T A C E O U S O F T E X A S
203
FIGURE 1. Part of northeastern Texas with primary outcrop area of Austin Group (after
Oetking, 1 9 5 9 ) . Localities of specimens are Gober (G) and Savoy (S) in Fannin County,
and Austin (A) in Travis County. Inset shows relationships of Austin Division rocks
(after Young, 1 9 8 6 ) .
relatively robust in both of the distal ends of the humeri, a characteristic
of /. dispar noted by Olson (1975). Length of the ulna as preserved is
63.5 mm.
Discussion.—Although
a revision of the genus probably will result in a
reduction in the number of species of Ichthyornis,
the validity of the
T H E T E X A S J O U R N A L O F S C I E N C E — V O L . 44, N O . 2,
204
FIGURE 2 (upper). T M M 31051-24, Ichthyornis
dispar,
right
1992
humerus, oblique view of
anconal side.
FIGURE 3. T M M 31051-25, Ichthyornis
dispar,
semiarticulated partial right wing, oblique
view of distorted humerus.
species /. dispar likely will be sustained. Although it was the second
species of Ichthyornis
to be described, it was the first to be directly
attributed to the genus, and is, therefore, considered the type species
(Brodkorb, 1967). It is certainly the most appropriate name in this case,
because the type specimen is adequate for diagnosis and includes skeletal
elements that are directly comparable. The type of /. anceps (the only
species of Ichthyornis described prior to /. dispar) is too fragmentary to
be useful for most specific diagnoses, being merely the distal end of a
ICHTHYORNIS
F R O M THE C R E T A C E O U S OF T E X A S
TABLE 1. Measurements of Ichthyornis
Length
Greatest proximal diameter
Distal width
Humerus distal depth
Ulnar condyle diameter
205
humeri (mm).
/. dispar
YPM 1450
/. dispar
Y P M 1730
58.0
13.0
9.6
5.0
62.5
15.
9.
-
-
-
-
5.
4.6
5.2
T M M 31051-24
T M M 31051-25
63.8
62.5
-
-
9.6
8.2
Measurements of YPM specimens published by Marsh (1880).
carpometarcarpus. However, it seems distinct from /. dispar based on
size, as noted by Marsh (1880), who published dimensions of the types.
Stratigraphy.—The
Ector Chalk is the basal formation of the Austin
Group and is the lowest unit of the Austin Division in the lithogenetic
classification of Young (1986). It is within the Peroniceras haasi Zone of
Young (1963) and correlates with the lower Coniacian Stage.
The type specimen of Ichthyornis
dispar is from Rooks County,
Kansas, from a locality mapped in the combined zones of
Cladoceramus
undulatoplicatus
and Platyceramus
platinus
by Stewart (1988),—his
Protosphyraena
Zone D. Thus it probably correlates with the Santonian
Stage.
Ichthyornis antecessor (Wetmore, 1962)
Holotype.—USNM
22820, the distal end of left humerus from the
Mooreville Formation (Selma Group) at Hewletts F a r m , Greene Co.,
Alabama.
Referred specimens.—TMM
42522-1 (Figs. 4 and 5), distal end of left
humerus from the Pflugerville Formation at the Little Walnut Creek-Old
Sprinkle Bridge Locality in Austin, Travis Co., Texas (Austin East 7.5'
Quadrangle). For description of the locality, see Young (1977). Obtained
by A. Busbey in 1985.
ET 4396 (L85-6), the proximal end of a left carpometacarpus (Figs. 68), from the R o x t o n Limestone Member of the Gober Formation at East
Texas State Locality 36, "Dig 2," obtained by D. Galbraith, J. Echols, G.
T. James, C. L. Rowett, and their East Texas State University earth
science class in the spring of 1965. The horizon was the upper R o x t o n
Limestone Member, about 15 centimeters below the top of the Gober
Chalk Formation, on the Woodson property approximately 100 meters
upstream from a bridge on an unnamed and unnumbered county road,
approximately one kilometer due east of Gober, Fannin Co., Texas, on
an unnamed tributary of the North Sulphur River (Gober 7.5'
Quadrangle).
Description.—TMM
42522-1 is directly comparable to the type of /.
206
THE T E X A S J O U R N A L OF SCIENCE—VOL. 44, NO. 2, 1992
FIGURE 4 (upper). T M M 42522-1, Ichthyornis antecessor, distal left humerus, palmar view.
FIGURE 5. T M M 42522-1, Ichthyornis antecessor, distal left humerus, anconal view.
antecessor and is only slightly smaller (distal diameter 10.1 mm, ulnar
condyle diameter 5.7 mm). The shaft is slenderer than in /. dispar, as
noted by Olson (1975), a feature clearly observable although only a small
portion of the shaft is preserved. The configuration of the brachial
depression resembles that of the type specimen as illustrated by Olson
(1975), and the ectepicondylar process is similarly placed. As these
features were designated as distinctive of the type, there seems to be no
doubt that the Austin, Texas, specimen is /. antecessor. Review of the
ICHTHYORNIS
F R O M T H E C R E T A C E O U S OF T E X A S
207
genus could demonstrate that /. antecessor is a junior synonym of a
previously described species, however.
N o specimens other than humeri can be compared directly to the type
of /. antecessor; however, the carpometacarpus, of ET 4396 (L85-6),
reasonably may be attributed to that species. It seems distinct from other
species of Ichthyornis
for which the carpometacarpus is known, as
discussed below. It is of approximately the same geologic age as both the
type of /. antecessor and the distal humerus referred to above, and is
later in geologic age than all other known species.
Identification of the carpometacarpus as Ichthyornis is based on the
shape of the trochlea of the proximal end. In end view, the grooved
aspect of the carpal trochlea is poorly developed, whereas it is welldeveloped in birds generally. The shape in end view is somewhat
rectangular, excepting the metacarpal I process, with the width being
about two-thirds of the length. This aspect differs from the condition in
all other orders of birds and was noted by Marsh as distinctive of
Ichthyornis.
He described it (Marsh, 1880) as an articulation that was
"plane transversely and oblique throughout with only one curvature" and
"destitute of the groove ordinarily seen at the ulnar side of this
articulation."
Identification of this specimen as Ichthyornis
also is supported by
several other characteristics. The process of metacarpal I is of moderate
size, as in most birds. Its most distal extent is approximately the same as
the divergence of metacarpal III from the opposite side of the fused bone.
This is the condition expected for Ichthyornis,
as described by Marsh
(1880). In most avian orders, the divergence of metacarpal III begins at a
more distal position, although there are similar conditions in some
Charadriiformes.
The precise shape of metacarpal I in ET 4396 (L85-6) is a process of
uniform width with its exterior edge slightly curved back proximad
(although it is broken and difficult to describe fully). There is no evidence
of a protuberance at the distal end of metacarpal I (which also is slightly
damaged). It is identical to the condition in Ichthyornis so far as may be
observed in this specimen.
We have compared E T 4396 (L85-6) to six carpometacarpi of
Ichthyornis from classic Kansas localities. Although some specimens are
crushed or broken, or both, there are some features that seem consistent
among them and that distinguish them from ET 4396 (L85-6). The carpal
trochlear surface in internal view is essentially not visible in typical
Niobrara specimens regardless of species. In ET 4396 (L85-6), the
trochlear surface projects slightly more proximad and is oriented
somewhat obliquely so that it is visible in internal view. The exterior
corner of metacarpal I is upturned proximad more closely to metacarpal
208
T H E T E X A S J O U R N A L O F S C I E N C E — V O L . 44, N O . 2, 1992
FIGURE 6 (upper). E T 4 3 9 6 ( L 8 5 - 6 ) , Ichthyornis antecessor, proximal left carpometacarpus,
internal view.
FIGURE 7. E T 4 3 9 6 ( L 8 5 - 6 ) , Ichthyornis antecessor, proximal left carpometacarpus, external
view.
ICHTHYORNIS
FROM THE CRETACEOUS O F TEXAS
209
FIGURE 8. E T 4396 (L85-6), Ichthyornis antecessor, proximal left carpometacarpus: A , end
view (left); B, internal view (center); C , external view (right).
II in E T 4396 (L85-6) than in any Niobrara specimen; indeed, some of
the processes in Niobrara specimens are upturned only slightly. T h e
proximal portion of metacarpal III is more prominent in the Kansas
Niobrara specimens than it is in E T 4396 (L85-6).
The overall aspect thus observed is of a more gracile appearance for
ET 4396 (L85-6) relative t o any Niobrara specimen, although the damage
to metacarpal I in the Texas specimen tends t o exaggerate that
appearance. The distinctive aspects of E T 4396 (L85-6) suggest that is a
different species from any Niobrara specimen, and that it can be
attributed tentatively t o /. antecessor. More gracile proportions in /.
antecessor than in other species of Ichthyornis
would seem t o be
consistent with the more slender shaft of the holotypical humerus.
Stratigraphy.—TMM
42522-1 is from a well-known locality for which
correlations are thoroughly established (Young, 1977). The Pflugerville
Formation of the Austin Group is within the Delawarella
delawarensis
Zone and correlates with t h e Lower C a m p a n i a n Substage (Young, 1986).
ET 4396 (L85-6) is from the Gober Formation (specifically the R o x t o n
Limestone), which is the same age as the Pflugerville Formation (Young,
1963, 1986; Beikirch and Feldman, 1980), being within the same
ammonite zone. Both formations are within t h e Austin Division of
Young (1986). The type specimen of /. antecessor,
following the
discussions of Young (1963), Owens et al. (1970), and Martin and Stewart
210
THE T E X A S J O U R N A L OF SCIENCE—VOL. 44, NO. 2, 1992
(1982), should be of essentially the same age as the two Texas specimens
or possibly slightly younger.
The R o x t o n Limestone Member of the Gober Formation is not yet
recognized fully by the United States Geological Survey, but has general
acceptance among Texas geologists (Echols, 1972). Although a complete
taphonomic analysis has not been attempted as yet for this vertebratebearing unit, some of the more interesting aspects are worthy of
reiteration here for comparison with other Ichthyornis sites.
The R o x t o n Limestone is unusual among carbonates, being a
fragmental glauconitic biomicrite with large fragments (indicative of a
high energy environment) within a micritic matrix (typical of a low
energy situation). The R o x t o n Member has been compared to classic
condensed units. Echols (1972) noted evidence of enrichment by
winnowing, cessation of sedimentation, and washing together of scattered
material by water movements, as well as bioturbation as possible causes
of the fossil concentration. The evidence for low energy environment of
deposition is consistent with other marine Cretaceous units that have
yielded fossil birds, notably those with glauconite and chalk components
(Olson and Parris, 1987).
IMPORTANCE OF TEXAS ICHTHYORNIS SPECIMENS
As previously noted, Ichthyornis
specimens from Texas all are
attributable to formations of the Austin Division of Young (1986), a
division being Young's term for formations related by a single
transgression-inundation event. These Texas specimens can be related to
ammonite-zoned biostratigraphy better than any other known materials
of the genus. The four Texas specimens, two from each of two
chronostratigraphic horizons, cover a time span (early Coniacian-early
Campanian) that is essentially equivalent to that of the entire Niobrara
Formation, the classic source of Ichthyornis. A much-needed revision of
the genus may well be dependent on such materials, which are more
reliably correlated in worldwide sequences than any others of the genus.
More Ichthyornis material should be sought in Texas, and the many fine
amateur collections there should be examined for undetected specimens.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Barbara Smith Grandstaff, Dr. J. D . Stewart, and Dr. W. J. Zinsmeister for
useful information and comments. Dr. John Ostrom and Ms. Mary Ann Turner provided
access and loans to the collections of the Yale Peabody Museum. Dr. Melissa Winans
furnished information and loans from the collections of the University of Texas at Austin.
Dr. Arthur Busbey was especially helpful, providing extensive information on the locality of
T M M 42522-1, the specimen which he collected. Drs. William B. Gallagher, Storrs Olson,
Robert Ramsdell, and Daniel Womochel kindly read and commented on the manuscript.
The technical drawings were produced by Ms. Betty Montgomery of Dallas, Texas.
ICHTHYORNIS
F R O M T H E CRETACEOUS O F T E X A S
211
Photographs were taken by Barbara Smith Grandstaff and Dr. Wayne L. Parris for the
New Jersey State Museum.
LITERATURE CITED
Bardack, D. 1968. Belonostomus sp., the first holostean from the Austin Chalk (Cretaceous)
of Texas. J. Paleontol., 42:1307-1309.
Beikirch, D . W. and R. M. Feldmann. 1980. Decapod crustaceans from the Pflugerville
Member, Austin Formation (Late Cretaceous: Campanian) of Texas. J. Paleontol.,
54:309-324.
Brodkorb, P. 1967. Catalogue of fossil birds: part 3 (Ralliformes, Ichthyornithiformes,
Charadriiformes). Bull. Florida State Mus., 2:99-220.
Echols, J. 1972. Biostratigraphy and reptile faunas of the upper Austin and Taylor groups
(Upper Cretaceous) of Texas, with special reference to Hunt, Fannin, Lamar, and Delta
counties, Texas. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. Oklahoma, Norman, 244 pp.
Fox, R. C. 1984. Ichthyornis (Aves) from the early Turonian (late Cretaceous) of Alberta.
Canadian J. Earth Sci., 22:258-260.
Gingerich, P. D . 1972. A new partial mandible of Ichthyornis. Condor, 74:471-473.
Lucas, S. G., and R. M. Sullivan. 1982. Ichthyornis in the Late Cretaceous Mancos Shale
(Juana Lopez Member), Northwestern New Mexico. J. Paleontol., 56:545-547.
Marsh, O. C. 1877. New vertebrate fossils. Amer. J. Sci. (3) xiv: 249-256.
. 1880. Odontornithes: a monograph on the extinct toothed birds of North America.
Rept. U.S. Geol. Exploration of the Fortieth Parallel, 7: xv + 1-201.
Martin, L. D . , and J. D. Stewart. 1977. Teeth in Ichthyornis
(class Aves). Science,
195:1331-1337.
. 1982. An ichthyornithiform bird from the Campanian of Canada. Canadian J. Earth
Sci., 19:324-327.
Nesov, L. 1986. Pervaya nakhodka pozdnemelovoy ptitsyikhtiornisa v starom svete i
nekotoryye drugiye kosti ptits iz mela i paleogena Sredney Axii [The first find of the
late Cretaceous bird, Ichthyornis, in the Old World, and some other bird bones from the
Cretaceous and Paleogene of Middle Asia]. Ekologicheskiye i faunisticheskiye
issledovniya ptits (Potapov, Roal'd Leonidovich ed.), Tr. Zool. Inst. Akad. Nauk SSR,
147:31-38.
Oetking, P. F. 1959. Geologic highway map of Texas. Dallas Geol. Soc. (map).
Olson, S. L. 1975. Ichthyornis in the late Cretaceous of Alabama. Wilson Bull., 87:103-105.
Olson, S. L., and D. C. Parris. 1987. The Cretaceous birds of New Jersey. Smithsonian
Contrib. Paleobiol., 63:1-22.
Owens, J. P., J. P. Minard, N. F. Sohl, and J. F. Mello. 1970. Stratigraphy of the
outcropping post-Magothy Upper Cretaceous formations in southern New Jersey and
northern Delmarva Peninsula, Delaware and Maryland. U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper,
674:1-60.
Russell, D . A. 1988. A checklist of North American marine Cretaceous vertebrates
including fresh water fishes. Occas. Papers Tyrrell Mus. Palaeontol., 4:1-58.
Shufeldt, R. W. 1915. Fossil birds in the Marsh Collection of Yale University. Trans.
Connecticut Acad. Arts Sci., 19:1-110.
Springer, V. G. 1957. A new genus and species of elopid fish (Laminospondylus
transversus)
from the Upper Cretaceous of Texas. Copeia, 1957: 135-140.
Stewart J. D. 1988. The stratigraphic distribution of late Cretaceous Protosphyraena
in
Kansas and Alabama. Fort Hays Studies., 3rd sen, 10:80-94.
. 1990. Stratigraphic distribution of Niobrara vertebrates. Pp. 19-30, in Niobrara
Chalk Excursion Guidebook, Soc. Vert. Paleo., 50th anniversary meeting at Lawrence,
Kansas.
212
THE T E X A S J O U R N A L OF SCIENCE—VOL. 44, NO. 2, 1992
Stewart, J. D., S. C. Bennett, and R. J. Zakrzeski 1990. Road log from Lawrence to the
type area of the Niobrara Chalk. Pp. 3-12, in Niobrara Chalk Excursion Guidebook,
Soc. Vert. Paleo., 50th anniversary meeting at Lawrence, Kansas.
Walker, M. V. 1967. Revival of interest in the toothed birds of Kansas. Trans. Kansas
Acad. Sci., 70:60-66.
Young, K. 1963. Upper Cretaceous ammonites from the Gulf Coast of the United States.
Publ. Univ. Texas Bur. Econ. Geol., 6304: viii + 1-373.
. 1977. Rocks of the Austin area. Pp. 16-75, in Guidebook to the geology of Travis
County (K. Young, ed.). Univ. Texas, Student Geol. S o c , 7:16-75.
. 1986. Cretaceous marine inundations of the San Marcos Platform, Texas. Cret.
Research, 7:117-140.
Zinsmeister, W. J. 1985. 1985 Seymour Island expedition. Antarctic J. U.S., 20:41-42.
THE TEXAS ACADEMY
OF SCIENCE,
1992-93
OFFICERS
President:
President-Elect:
Vice-President:
Immediate Past President:
Executive
Secretary:
Corresponding
Secretary:
Treasurer:
Editor:
AAS Council
Representative
Edward L. Schneider, Southwest Texas State University
David Buzan, Texas Water Commission
Ned E. Strenth, Angelo State University
David R. Gattis, Benbrook
Robert D . Owen, Texas Tech University
Donald H. Lokke, Dallas
Michael J. Carlo, Angelo State University
J. Knox Jones, Jr., Texas Tech University
Sandra West, Southwest Texas State University
DIRECTORS
1990
1991
1992
Stanley L. Sissom, Southwest Texas State University
Barbara ten Brink, Texas Education Agency
Larry D . McKinney, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
Ray F. Wilson, Texas Southern University
David D . Diamond, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
Joe C. Yelderman, Jr., Baylor University
SECTIONAL
CHAIRPERSONS
Biological Science: D. Royce Lee, East Texas State University
Botany: Carl E. Wood, Texas A & I University
Chemistry: Bobby L. Wilson, Texas Southern University
Computer Science: Ronald S. King, Lamar University
Conservation: Tom D. Hayes, Texas Nature Conservancy
Environmental Science: Robert E. Wilson, East Texas State University
Freshwater and Marine Sciences: Kenneth L. Dixon, University of North Texas
Geology: Arun Marjumdar, Sam Houston State University
Mathematics: Dovalee Dorsett, Baylor University
Physics: Thomas O. Calloway, Stephen F. Austin State University
Science Education: Donald H. Lokke, Dallas
Sociology: James F. Stovall, San Antonio
Systematics and Evolution: Allan W. Hook, St. Edwards University
Terrestrial Ecology: David Montgomery, Paris Junior College
COUNSELORS
Collegiate Academy: Helen Oujesky, University of Texas, San Antonio
Junior Academy: Ruth Spear, San Marcos
T H E T E X A S J O U R N A L O F SCIENCE
Box 43151, Texas Tech University
Lubbock, Texas 79409-3151, U.S.A.
BOUND PRINTED MATERIAL
R E T U R N POSTAGE G U A R A N T E E D
2nd C L A S S POSTAGE
P A I D AT LUBBOCK
T E X A S 79401