Abstract
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?
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference21 articles.
1. 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.
2. On comparing the geologic durations of easily versus poorly fossilized taxa
3. Biases in the durations and diversities of fossil taxa
4. Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges
5. On the expected distribution of species' ranges
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献