Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:04:03.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sources of variation in extinction rates, turnover, and diversity of marine invertebrate families during the Paleozoic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

James D. Nichols ,
Richard W. Morris ,
Cavell Brownie  and
Kenneth H. Pollock
James D. Nichols
Affiliation:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland 20708
Richard W. Morris
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University, Department of Statistics, Box 8203, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-8203
Cavell Brownie
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University, Department of Statistics, Box 8203, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-8203
Kenneth H. Pollock
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University, Department of Statistics, Box 8203, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-8203
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We have recently shown how capture-recapture models can be used in conjunction with stratigraphic range data to estimate taxonomic extinction rates and taxonomic diversity. Here we present a new method that can be used to estimate taxonomic turnover (defined here as the proportion of taxa extant at time i, that originated in the interval i – 1 to i). We used these methods in conjunction with stratigraphic range data for families in five phyla of Paleozoic marine invertebrates. We estimated fossil encounter probabilities, extinction rates, diversity, and turnover and used these estimates to test hypotheses about variation among phyla and geologic series. Encounter probabilities varied among taxa and showed evidence of a decrease over time for the geologic series examined. The number of families varied substantially among the five phyla and showed some evidence of an increase over the series examined. There was no evidence of variation in extinction probabilities among the phyla. Although there was evidence of temporal variation in extinction probabilities within phyla, there was no evidence of a linear decrease in extinction probabilities over time, as has been reported by others. We did find evidence of high extinction probabilities for the two intervals that had been identified by others as periods of mass extinction. We found no evidence of variation in turnover among the five phyla. There was evidence of temporal variation in turnover, with greater turnover occurring in the older series.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , Fall 1986 , pp. 421 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Brownie, C., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., and Robson, D. S. 1978. Statistical inference from band recovery data: a handbook. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., Resour. Publ. 131. 212 pp.Google Scholar
Brownie, C. and Pollock, K. H. 1985. Analysis of multiple capture-recapture data using band-recovery methods. Biometrics. 41:411–420.Google Scholar
Carothers, A. D. 1973. The effects of unequal catchability on Jolly-Seber estimates. Biometrics. 29:79–100.Google Scholar
Conover, W. J. and Iman, R. L. 1981. Rank transformations as a bridge between parametric and nonparametric statistics. Am. Statist. 35:124–133.Google Scholar
Conroy, M. J. and Nichols, J. D. 1984. Testing for variation in taxonomic extinction probabilities: a suggested methodology and some results. Paleobiology. 10:328–337.Google Scholar
Conroy, M. J. and Williams, B. K. 1984. A general methodology for maximum likelihood inference from band-recovery data. Biometrics. 40:739–748.Google Scholar
Gilbert, R. O. 1973. Approximations of the bias in the Jolly-Seber capture-recapture model. Biometrics. 29:501–526.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., Raup, D. M., Sepkoski, J. J. Jr., Schopf, T. J. M., and Simberloff, D. S. 1977. The shape of evolution: a comparison of real and random clades. Paleobiology. 3:23–40.Google Scholar
Holman, E. W. 1985. Gaps in the fossil record. Paleobiology. 11:221–226.Google Scholar
Jolly, G. M. 1965. Explicit estimates from capture-recapture data with both death and immigration-stochastic model. Biometrika. 52:225–247.Google Scholar
Jolly, G. M. and Dickson, J. M. 1983. The problem of unequal catchability in mark-recapture estimation of small mammal populations. Can. J. Zool. 61:922–927.Google Scholar
Lasker, H. 1976. Effects of differential preservation on the measurement of taxonomic diversity. Paleobiology. 2:84–93.Google Scholar
Nichols, J. D. and Pollock, K. H. 1983a. Estimating taxonomic diversity, extinction rates, and speciation rates from fossil data using capture-recapture models. Paleobiology. 9:150–163.Google Scholar
Nichols, J. D. and Pollock, K. H. 1983b. Estimation methodology in contemporary small mammal capture-recapture studies. J. Mammal. 64:253–260.Google Scholar
Nichols, J. D., Stokes, S. L., Hines, J. E., and Conroy, M. J. 1982. Additional comments on the assumption of homogeneous survival rates in modern bird banding estimation models. J. Wildl. Manage. 46:953–962.Google Scholar
Novacek, M. J. and Norell, M. A. 1982. Fossils, phylogeny, and taxonomic rates of evolution. Syst. Zool. 31:366–375.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1972. Taxonomic diversity during the Phanerozoic. Science. 177:1065–1071.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1975. Taxonomic diversity estimation using rarefaction. Paleobiology. 1:333–342.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1976. Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: an interpretation. Paleobiology. 2:289–297.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1977. Probabilistic models in evolutionary paleobiology. Amer. Sci. 65:50–57.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1979. Biases in the fossil record of species and genera. Bull. Carnegie Mus. Hist. 13:85–91.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1983. On the early origins of major biologic groups. Paleobiology. 9:107–115.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. and Gould, S. J. 1974. Stochastic simulation and the evolution of morphology—towards a nomothetic paleontology. Syst. Zool. 23:305–322.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M., Gould, S. J., Schopf, T. J. M., and Simberloff, D. S. 1973. Stochastic models of phylogeny and the evolution of diversity. J. Geol. 81:525–542.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. and Marshall, L. G. 1980. Variation between groups in evolutionary rates: a statistical test of significance. Paleobiology. 6:9–23.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. and Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1982. Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record. Science. 215:1501–1503.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. and Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1984. Periodicity of extinction in the geologic past. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 81:801–805.Google Scholar
Schopf, T. J. M. 1979. Evolving paleontological views on deterministic and stochastic approaches. Paleobiology. 5:337–352.Google Scholar
Seber, G. A. F. 1965. A note on the multiple-recapture census. Biometrika. 52:249–259.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1975. Stratigraphic biases in the analysis of taxonomic survivorship. Paleobiology. 1:343–355.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1982. A compendium of fossil marine families. Milwaukee Pub. Mus. Contr. Biol. Geol. 51. 125 pp.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr., Bambach, R. K., Raup, D. M., and Valentine, J. W. 1981. Phanerozoic marine diversity and the fossil record. Nature. 293:435–437.Google Scholar
Sheehan, P. M. 1977. Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: a reflection of labor by systematists? Paleobiology. 3:325–329.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1944. Tempo and Mode in Evolution. 237 pp. Columbia Univ. Press; New York.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1953. The Major Features of Evolution. 434 pp. Columbia Univ. Press; New York.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1980. Statistical Methods. 507 pp. Iowa State Univ. Press; Ames.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. 1979. Macroevolution. 332 pp. W. H. Freeman; San Francisco.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M., Signor, P. W. III, Lidgard, S., and Karr, A. F. 1981. Natural clades differ from “random” clades: simulations and analyses. Paleobiology. 7:115–127.Google Scholar
Strathmann, R. R. and Slatkin, M. 1983. The improbability of animal phyla with few species. Paleobiology. 9:97–106.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. 1973. A new evolutionary law. Evol. Theory. 1:1–30.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. M. 1984. A resetting of Phanerozoic community evolution. Nature. 307:50–52.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. M. 1985. How constant is extinction? Evol. Theory. 7:93–106.Google Scholar
Wei, K.-Y. and Kennett, J. P. 1983. Nonconstant extinction rates of Neogene planktonic foraminifera. Nature. 305:218–220.Google Scholar