Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T21:49:26.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimation of Taxonomic Ranges from the Fossil Record

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2017

Charles R. Marshall
Charles R. Marshall*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles CA 90024
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many areas of paleontological enquiry, from questions of correlation to the characterization of macroevolutionary patterns, require estimates of taxonomic longevities. However, the fossil record is incomplete and biased and, as such, provides an incomplete sampling of true temporal ranges. “It is incomplete because many individuals, species, and higher taxa are not recorded as fossils. It is biased because the probability that a taxon is represented by a fossil is a function of the taxon's morphology, abundance, ecological habitat and spatial distribution, as well as the taxon's age.” (Pease, 1985, p. 272) To what extent do the inadequacies of the fossil record compromise our ability to estimate taxonomic longevities? What analytic methods exist for estimating true longevities from stratigraphic data, or for detecting situations where significant biases may be present? And perhaps most importantly, do analytic methods provide an effective way of dealing with the inadequacies of the fossil record?

Type
Research Article
Information
Short Courses in Paleontology , Volume 4: Analytical Paleobiology , 1991 , pp. 19 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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

Bottjer, D.J., and Jablonski, D. 1988. Paleoenvironmental patterns in the evolution of post-Paleozoic benthic marine invertebrates. Palaios, 3:540–560.Google Scholar
Foote, M. 1988. Survivorship analysis of Cambrian and Ordovician trilobites. Paleobiology, 14:258–271.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
Jablonski, D. 1986. Larval ecology and macroevolution in marine invertebrates. Bulletin of Marine Science, 39:568–587.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. 1987. Heritability at the species level: analysis of geographic ranges of Cretaceous mollusks. Science, 238:360–363.Google Scholar
Koch, C.F. 1987. Prediction of sample size effects on measured temporal and geographic distribution patterns of species. Paleobiology, 13:100–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, C.F., and Morgan, J.P. 1988. On the expected distribution of species' ranges. Paleobiology, 14:126–138.Google Scholar
Marshall, C.R. 1990a. The fossil record and estimating divergence times between lineages: maximum divergence times and the importance of reliable phylogenies. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 30:400–408.Google Scholar
Marshall, C.R. 1990b. Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges. Paleobiology, 16:1–10.Google Scholar
McKinney, M.L. 1986. Biostratigraphic gap analysis. Geology, 14:36–38.Google Scholar
Paul, C.R.C. 1982. The adequacy of the fossil record, p. 75–117. In Joysey, K.A. and Friday, A.E. (eds.), Problems of Phylogenetic Reconstruction. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Pease, C.M. 1985. Biases in the durations and diversities of fossil taxa. Paleobiology, 11:272–292.Google Scholar
Pease, C.M. 1988. On comparing the geologic durations of easily versus poorly fossilized taxa. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 133:255–257.Google Scholar
Russell, M.P., and Lindberg, D.R. 1988. Real and random patterns associated with molluscan spatial and temporal distributions. Paleobiology, 14:322–330.Google Scholar
Shaw, A.B. 1964. Time in Stratigraphy. McGraw-Hill, New York, 365 p.Google Scholar
Signor, P.W., and Lipps, J.H. 1982. Sampling bias, gradual extinction patterns and catastrophes in the fossil record, p. 291–296. In Silver, L.T. and Schultz, P.H. (eds.), Geological Implications of Impacts of Large Asteroids and Comets on the Earth. Geological Society of America Special Paper 190.Google Scholar
Springer, M.S. 1990. The effect of random range truncations on patterns of evolution in the fossil record. Paleobiology, 16:512–520.Google Scholar
Springer, M.S., and Lilje, A. 1988. Biostratigraphy and gap analysis: the expected sequence of biostratigraphic events. Journal of Geology, 96:228–236.Google Scholar
Stanley, S.M., Signor, P. M. III, Lidgard, S., and Karr, A.F. 1981. Natural clades differ from “random” clades: simulations and analyses. Paleobiology, 7:115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, D., and Sadler, P.M. 1989. Classical confidence intervals and Bayesian probability estimates for ends of local taxon ranges. Mathematical Geology, 21:411–427.Google Scholar
Valentine, J.W., Awramik, S.M., Signor, P.W., and Sadler, P.M. 1991. The biological explosion at the Precambrian-Cambrian boundary. Evolutionary Biology, 25:279–356.Google Scholar