Testing the quality of the fossil record: Paleontological knowledge is improving

Benton, Michael J.; Storrs, Glenn W.

doi:10.1130/0091-7613(1994)022<0111:ttqotf>2.3.co;2

Cited by 143 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

101

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stratigraphic congruence metrics were also calculated for the tree using STRAP to assess the fit of the recovered tree to observed stratigraphic ranges. The stratigraphic congruence measures used were the stratigraphic consistency index (SCI; Huelsenbeck, 1994), relative completeness index (RCI; Benton and Storrs, 1994), the gap excess ratio (GER; Willis, 1999), and Manhattan stratigraphic measure* (MSM*; Siddall, 1998;Pol and Norell, 2001). For each measure, the calculated value was compared to a null model of 1,000 trees generated through Monte Carlo simulation (Fig.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogeny and morphologic evolution of the Ordovician Camerata (Class Crinoidea, Phylum Echinodermata)

Cole

2017

J. Paleontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-The subclass Camerata (Crinoidea, Echinodermata) is a major group of Paleozoic crinoids that represents an early divergence in the evolutionary history and morphologic diversification of class Crinoidea, yet phylogenetic relationships among early camerates remain unresolved. This study conducted a series of quantitative phylogenetic analyses using parsimony methods to infer relationships of all well-preserved Ordovician camerate genera (52 taxa), establish the branching sequence of early camerates, and test the monophyly of traditionally recognized higher taxa, including orders Monobathrida and Diplobathrida. The first phylogenetic analysis identified a suitable outroup for rooting the Ordovician camerate tree and assessed affinities of the atypical dicyclic family Reteocrinidae. The second analysis inferred the phylogeny of all well-preserved Ordovician camerate genera. Inferred phylogenies confirm:(1) the Tremadocian genera Cnemecrinus and Eknomocrinus are sister to the Camerata; (2) as historically defined, orders Monobathrida and Diplobathrida do not represent monophyletic groups; (3) with minimal revision, Monobathrida and Diplobathrida can be re-diagnosed to represent monophyletic clades; (4) family Reteocrinidae is more closely related to camerates than to other crinoid groups currently recognized at the subclass level; and (5) several genera in subclass Camerata represent stem taxa that cannot be classified as either true monobathrids or true diplobathrids. The clade containing Monobathrida and Diplobathrida, as recognized herein, is termed Eucamerata to distinguish its constituent taxa from more basally positioned taxa, termed stem eucamerates. The results of this study provide a phylogenetic framework for revising camerate classification, elucidating patterns of morphologic evolution, and informing outgroup selection for future phylogenetic analyses of post-Ordovician camerates.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogeny and morphologic evolution of the Ordovician Camerata (Class Crinoidea, Phylum Echinodermata)

Cole

2017

J. Paleontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even much-heralded discoveries, such as the oldest tetrapod footprints, that move the record of the group back by 18 Myr (Niedźwiedzki et al 2010), are not entirely unexpected: our experience is that fossils that are entirely out of place-such as a Miocene dinosaur or a Precambrian rabbit-are not being found. New discoveries extend temporal ranges (Benton & Storrs 1994). This intuition was borne out by a comparison of changing interpretations of the tetrapod fossil record (Maxwell & Benton 1990): whereas the diversity of tetrapods at the family level doubled between 1890 and 1987, and so the species-level diversity presumably increased by a factor of four or five, the overall pattern of diversifications and extinctions remained unchanged, except for a heightening and sharpening of mass extinctions.…”

Section: Diversification Of Life On Landmentioning

confidence: 99%

The origins of modern biodiversity on land

Benton

2010

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

136

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparative studies of large phylogenies of living and extinct groups have shown that most biodiversity arises from a small number of highly species-rich clades. To understand biodiversity, it is important to examine the history of these clades on geological time scales. This is part of a distinct 'phylogenetic expansion' view of macroevolution, and contrasts with the alternative, nonphylogenetic 'equilibrium' approach to the history of biodiversity. The latter viewpoint focuses on density-dependent models in which all life is described by a single global-scale model, and a case is made here that this approach may be less successful at representing the shape of the evolution of life than the phylogenetic expansion approach. The terrestrial fossil record is patchy, but is adequate for coarse-scale studies of groups such as vertebrates that possess fossilizable hard parts. New methods in phylogenetic analysis, morphometrics and the study of exceptional biotas allow new approaches. Models for diversity regulation through time range from the entirely biotic to the entirely physical, with many intermediates. Tetrapod diversity has risen as a result of the expansion of ecospace, rather than niche subdivision or regional-scale endemicity resulting from continental break-up. Tetrapod communities on land have been remarkably stable and have changed only when there was a revolution in floras (such as the demise of the Carboniferous coal forests, or the Cretaceous radiation of angiosperms) or following particularly severe mass extinction events, such as that at the end of the Permian.

show abstract

“…However, it is worth noting that clades with poor macrofossil record, such as the asterids and monocots, might have abundant microfossil record (Muller 1981). Benton and Storrs (1994) regarded a completeness value of !10% as poor and 190% as excellent. The completeness for most of the time intervals during the Cenozoic is relatively good if only families with fossil records are considered.…”

Section: Phylogenetic Biases and Completenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Paleontologists have long recognized that the fossil record is incomplete and biased by taphonomy, sampling, eustasy, and tectonic processes (Adrain and Westrop 2003). Therefore, measuring the biases of the existing fossil record and being able to take these biases into account will improve our understanding of past diversity over long timescales (Durham 1967;Benton and Storrs 1994;Benton et al 2000;Foote et al 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These methods are based on gaps in the stratigraphic ranges of fossil taxa, on hypothetical lineages implied by estimated evolutionary trees, or on estimates of the probability of genus preservation per stratigraphic interval (Maxwell and Benton 1990;Benton and Storrs 1994;Kidwell and Flessa 1995;Foote and Sepkoski 1999;Benton et al 2000). Most previous studies have focused on various groups of vertebrates (Benton et al 2011) and insects (Karr and Clapham 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Testing the Biases in the Rich Cenozoic Angiosperm Macrofossil Record

Xing

Gandolfo

Onstein

et al. 2016

International Journal of Plant Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Premise of research: The Cenozoic fossil record is crucial for understanding the evolution of the remarkably high diversity of angiosperms. However, the quality and biases of the angiosperm fossil record remain unclear mainly due to the lack of a global database. Methodology: We introduce a new global occurrence-based database for Cenozoic angiosperm macrofossils, the Cenozoic Angiosperm Database. We test the temporal, spatial, and phylogenetic biases of the Cenozoic angiosperm macrofossil record and explore their causes. Pivotal results: The data presented here include 2478 assemblages from all Cenozoic epochs and 1961 sites from all continents, as well as representatives of 221 families (of 445 recognized) and 1859 genera, and show that the Cenozoic angiosperm macrofossil record is extraordinarily rich. However, this rich record is temporally, spatially, and phylogenetically biased: the Miocene is much better sampled than the rest of Cenozoic, the Northern Hemisphere is better sampled than the Southern Hemisphere, and the rosids are better sampled than the rest of the angiosperms. The sampling bias might be caused by collecting effort, geological history, or diverse features of the families, such as growth form and distribution. Conclusions: The Cenozoic macrofossil record of angiosperms is remarkably rich, especially of woody families found in the Northern Hemisphere. Even if there are numerous biases in these data, a judicious use of the database should be highly informative. Editor: Maria von BalthazarPremise of research. The Cenozoic fossil record is crucial for understanding the evolution of the remarkably high diversity of angiosperms. However, the quality and biases of the angiosperm fossil record remain unclear mainly due to the lack of a global database.Methodology. We introduce a new global occurrence-based database for Cenozoic angiosperm macrofossils, the Cenozoic Angiosperm Database. We test the temporal, spatial, and phylogenetic biases of the Cenozoic angiosperm macrofossil record and explore their causes.Pivotal results. The data presented here include 2478 assemblages from all Cenozoic epochs and 1961 sites from all continents, as well as representatives of 221 families (of 445 recognized) and 1859 genera, and show that the Cenozoic angiosperm macrofossil record is extraordinarily rich. However, this rich record is temporally, spatially, and phylogenetically biased: the Miocene is much better sampled than the rest of Cenozoic, the Northern Hemisphere is better sampled than the Southern Hemisphere, and the rosids are better sampled than the rest of the angiosperms. The sampling bias might be caused by collecting effort, geological history, or diverse features of the families, such as growth form and distribution.Conclusions. The Cenozoic macrofossil record of angiosperms is remarkably rich, especially of woody families found in the Northern Hemisphere. Even if there are numerous biases in these data, a judicious use of the database should be highly informative.

show abstract

Testing the quality of the fossil record: Paleontological knowledge is improving

Cited by 143 publications

References 0 publications

Phylogeny and morphologic evolution of the Ordovician Camerata (Class Crinoidea, Phylum Echinodermata)

Phylogeny and morphologic evolution of the Ordovician Camerata (Class Crinoidea, Phylum Echinodermata)

The origins of modern biodiversity on land

Testing the Biases in the Rich Cenozoic Angiosperm Macrofossil Record

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About