Editing Foraminifera (section)

== History of study ==
The earliest known reference to foraminifera comes from [[Herodotus]], who in the 5th century BCE noted them as making up the rock that forms the [[Great Pyramid of Giza]]. These are today recognized as representatives of the genus [[Nummulite|''Nummulites'']]. [[Strabo]], in the 1st Century BCE, noted the same foraminifera, and suggested that they were the remains of [[lentil]]s left by the workers who built the pyramids.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Foraminifera {{!}} Fossil Focus {{!}} Time {{!}} Discovering Geology {{!}} British Geological Survey (BGS)|url=https://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/time/Fossilfocus/foraminifera.html#folkloreAndFact|access-date=2020-07-20|website=bgs.ac.uk}}</ref>

[[Robert Hooke]] observed a foraminifera under the microscope, as described and illustrated in his 1665 book ''[[Micrographia]]:''<blockquote>I was trying several small and single Magnifying Glasses, and casually viewing a parcel of white Sand, when I perceiv'd one of the grains exactly shap'd and wreath'd like a Shell[...] I view'd it every way with a better Microscope and found it on both sides, and edge-ways, to resemble the Shell of a small Water-Snail with a flat spiral Shell[...]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Micrographia, or, Some physiological descriptions of minute bodies made by magnifying glasses ?with observations and inquiries thereupon /by R. Hooke ... : Hooke, Robert, : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming|url=https://archive.org/details/mobot31753000817897|access-date=2020-07-20|website=Internet Archive|year=1665|language=en}}</ref></blockquote>[[Antonie van Leeuwenhoek]] described and illustrated foraminiferal tests in 1700, describing them as minute cockles; his illustration is recognizable as being ''[[Elphidium]]''.<ref name=SenGupta2003>{{Citation|last=Sen Gupta|first=Barun K.|date=2003|title=Modern Foraminifera|pages=7–36|editor-last=Sen Gupta|editor-first=Barun K.|chapter=Systematics of moder Foraminifera|publisher=Springer Netherlands|language=en|doi=10.1007/0-306-48104-9_2|isbn=978-0-306-48104-8}}</ref> Early workers classified foraminifera within the genus ''[[Nautilus]]'', noting their similarity to certain [[cephalopod]]s. It was recognised by [[Lorenz Spengler]] in 1781 that foraminifera had holes in the septa, which would eventually grant the group its name.<ref name=BOUDAGHERFADEL>{{Citation|last=BOUDAGHER-FADEL|first=MARCELLE K.|title=Biology and Evolutionary History of Larger Benthic Foraminifera|date=2018|work=Evolution and Geological Significance of Larger Benthic Foraminifera|pages=1–44|edition=2|publisher=UCL Press|doi=10.2307/j.ctvqhsq3.3 |jstor=j.ctvqhsq3.3|isbn=978-1-911576-94-5}}</ref> Spengler also noted that the septa of foraminifera arced the opposite way from those of nautili and that they lacked a nerve tube.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Hansen|first=H.|date=1981-01-01|title=On Lorentz Spengler and a neotype for the foraminifer Calcarina spengleri|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242127606}}</ref>
[[File:Robert Hooke foraminifera.png|thumb|Earliest known illustration of a foraminifera shell, published by Robert Hooke in his 1665 book ''[[Micrographia]]'']]
[[Alcide d'Orbigny]], in his 1826 work, considered them to be a group of minute [[cephalopod]]s and noted their odd morphology, interpreting the pseudopodia as tentacles and noting the highly reduced (in actuality, absent) head.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=d'Orbigny|first=Alcide|date=1826|title=Tableau Méthodique de la Classe des Céphalopodes|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/28626#page/261/mode/1up|journal=Annales des Sciences Naturelles, Paris |series=Série 1|volume=7|pages=245–314|via=Biodiversity Heritage Library}}</ref> He named the group ''foraminifères'', or "hole-bearers", as members of the group had holes in the divisions between compartments in their shells, in contrast to [[Nautilus|nautili]] or [[ammonites]].<ref name=Lipps2011 />

The protozoan nature of foraminifera was first recognized by [[Félix Dujardin|Dujardin]] in 1835.<ref name=BOUDAGHERFADEL /> Shortly after, in 1852, d'Orbigny produced a classification scheme, recognising 72 genera of foraminifera, which he classified based on test shape—a scheme that drew severe criticism from colleagues.<ref name=SenGupta2003 />

[[Henry Bowman Brady|H.B. Brady]]'s 1884 monograph described the foraminiferal finds of the [[Challenger expedition|''Challenger'' expedition]]. Brady recognized 10 families with 29 subfamilies, with little regard to stratigraphic range; his taxonomy emphasized the idea that multiple different characters must separate taxonomic groups, and as such placed agglutinated and calcareous genera in close relation.

This overall scheme of classification would remain until [[Joseph Augustine Cushman|Cushman]]'s work in the late 1920s. Cushman viewed wall composition as the single most important trait in classification of foraminifera; his classification became widely accepted but also drew criticism from colleagues for being "not biologically sound".

Geologist [[Irene Crespin]] undertook extensive research in this field, publishing some ninety papers—including notable work on foraminifera—as sole author as well as more than twenty in collaboration with other scientists.<ref>{{Citation |title=Kennedy, Margaret Moore (1896–1967) |date=2018-02-06 |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/odnb/9780192683120.013.34281 |work=Oxford Dictionary of National Biography |publisher=Oxford University Press |doi=10.1093/odnb/9780192683120.013.34281 |access-date=2022-11-03|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Cushman's scheme nevertheless remained the dominant scheme of classification until Tappan and Loeblich's 1964 classification, which placed foraminifera into the general groupings still used today, based on microstructure of the test wall.<ref name="SenGupta2003" /> These groups have been variously moved around according to different schemes of higher-level classification. Pawlowski's (2013) use of molecular systematics has generally confirmed Tappan and Loeblich's groupings, with some being found as polyphyletic or paraphyletic; this work has also helped to identify higher-level relationships among major foraminiferal groups.<ref name="Pawlowski2013">{{Cite journal|last1=Pawlowski|first1=Jan|last2=Holzmann|first2=Maria|last3=Tyszka|first3=Jarosław|date=2013-04-01|title=New supraordinal classification of Foraminifera: Molecules meet morphology|url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377839813000327|journal=Marine Micropaleontology|language=en|volume=100|pages=1–10|doi=10.1016/j.marmicro.2013.04.002|bibcode=2013MarMP.100....1P|issn=0377-8398|url-access=subscription}}</ref>