Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:44:36.601Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: a tabulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

David M. Raup*
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Rochester; Rochester, New York 14627

Abstract

On the basis of about 70,000 species citations in the Zoological Record, it is estimated that about 190,000 fossil invertebrate species were described and named through 1970. The true figure may be higher because of incompleteness of the Zoological Record or lower because the estimate does not account for synonymy.

About 70% of the species were described from USSR, Europe, and North America. About 42% are Paleozoic, 28% Mesozoic, and 30% Cenozoic. In the Cambrian part of the sample, 75% of the species are trilobites. In the Mesozoic and Cenozoic, about 70% are either molluscs or protozoans.

When the data are normalized for absolute time, diversity (species per million years) shows a Paleozoic high in the Devonian which is approximately four-tenths of the Cenozoic level.

Type
Research Article
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

Bambach, R. K. 1975. What is the pattern of change in species diversity with time? Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. with Prog. 7:987988.Google Scholar
Boucot, A. J. 1975. Evolution and Extinction Rate Controls. 427 pp. Scientific Publ. Co.; Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Durham, J. W. 1967. The incompleteness of our knowledge of the fossil record. J. Paleontol. 41:559565.Google Scholar
Easton, W. H. 1960. Invertebrate Paleontology. 701 pp. Harper & Brothers, Publ.; New York.Google Scholar
Gregory, J. T. 1955. Vertebrates in the geologic timescale. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 62:593608.Google Scholar
Lambert, R. St. J. 1971. The pre-Pleistocene Phanerozoic time-scale—a review. pp. 931. In: Harland, W. B. and Francis, E. H., eds. The Phanerozoic Time-scale, A Supplement (Part 1). Geol. Soc. London. Spec. Publ. 5.Google Scholar
Levine, N. D. 1962. Protozoology today. J. Protozool. 9:16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loeblich, A. R. Jr. and Tappan, H. 1964. Foraminiferal facts, fallacies, and frontiers. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 75:367392.Google Scholar
Muller, S. W. and Campbell, A. 1954. The relative number of living and fossil species of animals. Syst. Zool. 3:168170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, N. D. 1959a. Adequacy of the fossil record. J. Paleontol. 33:488499.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D. 1959b. The nature of the fossil record. Am. Philos. Soc. Proc. 103:264285.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1972. Taxonomic diversity during the Phanerozoic. Science. 177:10651071.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1975. Taxonomic diversity estimation using rarefaction. Paleobiology. 1:333342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1976. Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: an interpretation. Paleobiology. 2:289297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schopf, T. J. M. 1967. The literature of the phylum Ectoprocta: 1555–1963. Syst. Zool. 16:318327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. and Rex, M. A. 1974. Distribution of freshwater mussels: coastal rovers as biogeographic islands. Syst. Zool. 23:165188.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1960. The history of life. pp. 117180. In: Tax, S., ed. Evolution After Darwin. Vol. 1. Univ. Chicago Press; Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1956. How many fossil species? J. Paleontol. 30:967969.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W. 1970. How many marine invertebrate fossil species? J. Paleontol. 44:410415.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W. 1973. Evolutionary Paleoecology of the Marine Biosphere. 511 pp. Prentice-Hall, Inc.; Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar