Fish otoliths from the fossiliferous turbiditic sand deposits outcropping at the Borelli and Moncucco localities (Piedmont, Northern Italy) are herein analyzed. The studied section is Tortonian in age and belongs to the lower portion of the Sant'Agata Fossili Formation. The study reveals the presence of at least 90 otolith-based taxa of which 78 are identified at the species level. Two of these are named and described as new species: "Gobiida" bicornuta and "Gobiida" brioche. In addition, 19 taxa, including both still living and extinct ones, are recorded for the first time in Tortonian deposits. Among them, the still living Nansenia aff. oblita, ?Sagamichthys schnakenbecki, and Chaunax pictus are found as fossils for the first time. The high diversity of this well-preserved otolith assemblage improves the systematic knowledge of the Tortonian gobiids and other neritic taxa, which show a close affinity with the present-day Mediterranean fauna. Moreover, the stratigraphic distribution of both neritic and mesopelagic taxa, that were previously considered to enter the Mediterranean Basin in younger stratigraphic intervals, can now be extended back to the Tortonia

No abstract

No abstract

Little is known about long-term changes in coral reef fish communities. Here we present a new technique that leverages fish otoliths in reef sediments to reconstruct coral reef fish communities. We found over 5,400 otoliths in 169 modern and mid-Holocene bulk samples from Caribbean Panama and Dominican Republic mid-Holocene and modern reefs, demonstrating otoliths are abundant in reef sediments. With a specially-built reference collection, we were able to assign over 4,400 otoliths to one of 56 taxa (35 families) though mostly at genus and family level. Many otoliths were from juvenile fishes for which identification is challenging. Richness (by rarefaction) of otolith assemblages was slightly higher in modern than mid-Holocene reefs, but further analyses are required to elucidate the underlying causes. We compared the living fish communities, sampled using icthyocide, with the sediment otolith assemblages on four reefs finding the otolith assemblages faithfully capture the general composition of the living fish communities. Radiocarbon dating performed directly on the otoliths suggests that relatively little mixing of sediment layers particularly on actively accreting branching coral reefs. All otolith assemblages were strongly dominated by small, fast-turnover fish taxa and juvenile individuals, and our exploration on taxonomy, functional ecology and taphonomy lead us to the conclusion that intense predation is likely the most important process for otolith accumulation in reef sediments. We conclude that otolith assemblages in modern and fossil reef sediments can provide a powerful tool to explore ecological changes in reef fish communities over time and space.

Conservation paleobiology has coalesced over the last two decades since its formal coining, united by the goal of applying geohistorical records to inform the conservation, management, and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, the field is still attempting to form an identity distinct from its academic roots. Here, we ask a deceptively simple question: What is conservation paleobiology? To track its development as a field, we synthesize complementary perspectives from a survey of the scientific community that is familiar with conservation paleobiology and a systematic literature review of publications that use the term. We present an overview of conservation paleobiology’s research scope and compare survey participants’ perceptions of what it is and what it should be as a field. We find that conservation paleobiologists use a variety of geohistorical data in their work, although research is typified by near-time records of marine molluscs and terrestrial mammals collected over local to regional spatial scales. Our results also confirm the field’s broad disciplinary basis: survey participants indicated that conservation paleobiology can incorporate information from a wide range of disciplines spanning conservation biology, ecology, historical ecology, paleontology, and archaeology. Finally, we show that conservation paleobiologists have yet to reach a consensus on how applied the field should be in practice. The survey revealed that many participants thought the field should be more applied but that most do not currently engage with conservation practice. Reflecting on how conservation paleobiology has developed over the last two decades, we discuss opportunities to promote community cohesion, strengthen collaborations within conservation science, and align training priorities with the field’s identity as it continues to crystallize.