Beta diversity quantifies the spatial structuring of ecological communities and is a fundamental partition of biodiversity, central to understanding many macroecological phenomena in modern biology and paleobiology. Despite its common application in ecology, studies of beta diversity in the fossil record are relatively limited at regional spatial scales that are important for understanding macroevolutionary processes. The spatial scaling of beta diversity in the fossil record is poorly understood, but has significant implications due to temporal variation in the spatial distribution of fossil collections and the large spatiotemporal scales typically employed. Here we test the spatial scaling of several common measures of beta diversity using the Cenozoic shallow-marine molluscan fossil record of New Zealand and derive a spatially standardized time series of beta diversity. To measure spatial scaling, we use and compare grid-cell occupancy based on an equal-area grid and summed minimum spanning tree length, both based on reconstructed paleocoordinates of fossil collections. We find that beta diversity is spatially dependent at local to regional scales, regardless of the metric or spatial scaling utilized, and that spatial standardization significantly changes apparent temporal trends of beta diversity and, therefore, inferences about processes driving diversity change.

The New Zealand Fossil Record File, an essentially complete compilation of New Zealand's known fossil record, with additional records from parts of Antarctica, SW Pacific, and elsewhere, is, to the best of our knowledge, unique. It has developed collaboratively, with contributions from university, government, industry, and avocational paleontologists and geologists. The distinctive Fossil Record Number has become an icon of New Zealand geological literature since inception of the original paper-based archive in the 1940s. Subsequently, the file has been digitised and currently holds >100,000 locality records and >1,000,000 individual taxonomic identifications spanning numerous plant and animal phyla. These numbers are continually growing. The database contains contextual information on geographic location, collection, stratigraphy and lithology of the fossil localities as well as taxonomic analyses that retain original identifications yet accommodate re-assignments. The data have been widely applied, initially for mapping, establishing age, depositional environment, etc., and more recently including in quantitative biostratigraphy, assessing completeness of the fossil record, understanding biodiversity history, extinction risk assessments, and climate analysis. In this paper, we provide a brief overview of the history of the Fossil Record File, indicate the general nature of the data it contains, and showcase a number of innovative applications of this most valuable resource.

Over the last 50 years, access to new data and analytical tools has expanded the study of analytical paleobiology, contributing to innovative analyses of biodiversity dynamics over Earth's history. Despite—or even spurred by—this growing availability of resources, analytical paleobiology faces deep-rooted obstacles that stem from the need for more equitable access to data and best practices to guide analyses of the fossil record. Recent progress has been accelerated by a collective push toward more collaborative, interdisciplinary, and open science, especially by early-career researchers. Here, we survey four challenges facing analytical paleobiology from an early-career perspective: (1) accounting for biases when interpreting the fossil record; (2) integrating fossil and modern biodiversity data; (3) building data science skills; and (4) increasing data accessibility and equity. We discuss recent efforts to address each challenge, highlight persisting barriers, and identify tools that have advanced analytical work. Given the inherent linkages between these challenges, we encourage discourse across disciplines to find common solutions. We also affirm the need for systemic changes that reevaluate how we conduct and share paleobiological research.

No abstract

No abstract