Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T13:48:48.956Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The measurement of taxonomic evolution: preservational consequences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Howard R. Lasker
Howard R. Lasker*
Affiliation:
Department of the Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago; Chicago, Illinois 60637
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The accuracy of numerical summaries of data from the fossil record has been hotly contested in recent years. In this paper I present a computer simulation which mimics the process of preservation and the resultant loss of data in survivorship records. The simulation accepts as its input data a hypothetical “original” record and a time dependent model of preservational loss. These parameters are used to generate a “preserved” record, and the “original” and “preserved” data sets are then compared. Eleven hypothetical original records having different patterns of diversity and turnover were “preserved” in this manner. Indices of diversity, origination, extinction, turnover, and longevity were evaluated for each of five different models of preservational bias. All of the indices behaved in a single characteristic fashion. Taxonomic data that contained large fluctuations (of the order 100%) were preserved accurately. Similarly the large scale changes in preserved records matched original distributions. Records with small fluctuations (30%) were variably preserved and when such fluctuations were present in the preserved record they did not always correlate with events in the original record. Longevities were more accurately preserved than were other forms of taxonomic data. The results are believed to reflect the levels of accuracy obtainable from generic and familial data and suggest ways in which data sets warranting more detailed study may be singled out.

Type
Research Article
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , Spring 1978 , pp. 135 - 149
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

Cutbill, J. L. and Funnell, B. M. 1976. Numerical analysis of the Fossil Record. Pp. 791–820. In: Harland, W. B. et al., eds. The Fossil Record. Geol. Soc. London.Google Scholar
Dixon, W. J. and Massey, F. W. Jr. 1969. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. 3rd ed.638 pp. McGraw-Hill Book Co.; New York.Google Scholar
Harper, C. W. Jr. 1975. Standing diversity of fossil groups in successive intervals of geologic time: a new measure. J. Paleontol. 49:752–757.Google Scholar
Kier, P. M. 1974. Evolutionary trends and their functional significance in the post Paleozoic echinoids. Paleontol. Soc. Mem. 5. 96 pp.Google Scholar
Lasker, H. 1976. Effects of differential preservation on the measurement of taxonomic diversity. Paleobiology. 2:84–93.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1972. Taxonomic diversity during the Phanerozoic. Science. 177:1065–1071.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1976. Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: an interpretation. Paleobiology. 2:289–297.Google Scholar
Schopf, T. J. M. 1978. The role of biogeographic provinces in regulating marine faunal diversity thru geologic time. In: Boucot, A. J. and Gray, J., eds. Historical Biogeography, Plate Tectonics and the Changing Environment. 37th Biol. Colloq. Oregon State Univ. In press.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1975. Stratigraphic biases in the analysis of taxonomic survivorship. Paleobiology. 1:343–345.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1976. Species diversity on the Phanerozoic: species-area effects. Paleobiology. 2:298–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1953. The Major Features of Evolution. 412 pp. Columbia Univ. Press; New York.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1960. The history of life. Pp. 117–180. In: Tax, S., ed. The Evolution of Life. Univ. Chicago Press; Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Tasch, Paul. 1965. Communications theory and the fossil record of invertebrates. Trans. Kans. Acad. Sci. 68:322–329.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. 1973a. A new evolutionary law. Evol. Theory. 1:1–30.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. 1973b. Are categories in different phyla comparable? Taxon. 22:333–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S. D. 1969. Extinction-origination equilibrea in Late Cenozoic land mammals of North America. Evolution. 23:688–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, J. W. 1956. Scleractinia. Pp. F328–F443. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part F, Coelenterata. Univ. Kans. Press and Geol. Soc. Am.; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar