Spineless displays or why inaccurate restorations of fossil invertebrates discredit our museums

Abstract

Restorations of the morphology, ecology and function of fossil invertebrates may be inferior to those of groups more familiar to the public and artist, such as tetrapods. This is illustrated by an extreme example, a drawing of the Lower Jurassic pseudo- planktonic crinoid Pentacrinites Blumenbach on display in the Manchester Museum. It is shown, accurately, attached to the underside of a floating log. However, it is incorrectly illustrated attached by a cemented holdfast rather than by cirri. Indeed, the reconstruction lacks any cirri despite Pentacrinites having a dense- ly cirriferous stem; the column is too short, has an incorrect cross-section and an erroneous pattern of columnal insertion; the cup and proximal brachial plates are too big; the pattern of arm branching is wrong; and pinnulation is inaccurate. Yet Pentacrinites is known from multiple well-preserved specimens from the Jurassic of the British Isles and was originally described more than 200 years ago. Museum restorations of fossil tetrapods have to be accurate because they are a group that we know well, yet many invertebrate groups are alien to the public and, if they are 'edu cated' by such grossly inaccurate restorations, so they shall remain.