Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:28:40.257Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rarefaction analysis of morphological and taxonomic diversity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Mike Foote
Mike Foote*
Affiliation:
Museum of Paleontology and Department of Geological Sciences, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Our assessment of morphological diversity is influenced by morphological extremes and therefore depends on sample size (taxonomic richness). Rarefaction predicts the morphological diversity that would probably be observed in a sample of reduced size, thereby allowing both compensation for differences in sample size that may be strictly preservational, and analysis of diversity structure, that is, the relationship between morphological and taxonomic diversity. Middle and Late Cambrian trilobites exhibit a diversity structure characterized by many variations on a few morphological themes. In contrast, Middle and Late Ordovician trilobites occupy a larger range of morphospace per unit of species richness. Diversity structure in the Devonian is similar to that in the Middle and Late Ordovician, but the magnitude of morphological diversity is lower in the Devonian, as many fewer species are observed. For blastoids, different aspects of morphological diversity (range of morphospace occupied, number of character states possessed, and number of different regions in morphospace occupied) exhibit different relationships to taxonomic richness. In all cases Permian blastoids are characterized by a diversity structure in which morphological diversity per unit of taxonomic richness is greater than for Devonian blastoids. Changes in morphological diversity in fissiculate blastoids appear to reflect evolution of continuous variation in thecal morphology more than changes in the number of character states. Saunders and Swan's data on Namurian ammonoids illustrate some significant differences in diversity structure among stratigraphic levels, but many apparent differences in morphological diversity are consistent with the possibility that they reflect the sampling of different numbers of species from the same underlying diversity structure. Rarefaction curves are also presented for idealized increases and decreases in diversity, and these are compared to some of the observed changes in trilobites, blastoids, and ammonoids.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , Winter 1992 , pp. 1 - 16
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

Ashton, J. H., and Rowell, A. J. 1975. Environmental stability and species proliferation in Late Cambrian trilobite faunas: a test of the niche-variation hypothesis. Paleobiology 1:161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Bottjer, D. J. 1982. Tiering in suspension feeding communities on soft substrata throughout the Phanerozoic. Science (Washington, D.C.) 216:173–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bambach, R. K. 1983. Ecospace utilization and guilds in marine communities through the Phanerozoic. Pp. 719–746in Tevesz, M.J.S. and McCall, P. M., eds. Biotic interactions in Recent and fossil benthic communities. Plenum, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bambach, R. K. 1985. Classes and adaptive variety: the ecology of diversification in marine faunas through the Phanerozoic. Pp. 191–243In Valentine, J. W., ed. Phanerozoic diversity patterns: profiles in macroevolution. Princeton University Press and Pacific Division, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Princeton, New Jersey and San Francisco.Google Scholar
Bottjer, D. J., and Ausich, W. I. 1986. Phanerozoic development of tiering in soft substrata suspension-feeding communities. Paleobiology 12:400–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breimer, A., and Macurda, D. B. Jr. 1972. The phylogeny of the fissiculate blastoids. Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeling Natuurkunde, Erste Reeks 26:1–390.Google Scholar
Broadhead, T. W. 1984. Macurdablastus, a middle Ordovician blastoid from the southern Appalachians. University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, Paper 110:1–10.Google Scholar
Droser, M. L., and Bottjer, D. J. 1989. Ordovician increase in extent and depth of bioturbation: implications for understanding early Paleozoic ecospace utilization. Geology 17:850–852.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erwin, D. H. 1990. Carboniferous-Triassic gastropod diversity patterns and the Permo-Triassic mass extinction. Paleobiology 16:187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1986. Progress in organismal design. Pp. 99–117In Raup, D. M. and Jablonski, D., eds. Patterns and processes in the history of life. Springer, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foote, M. 1989. Perimeter-based Fourier analysis: a new morphometric method applied to the trilobite cranidium. Journal of Paleontology 63:880–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foote, M. 1991a. Morphologic patterns of diversification: examples from trilobites. Palaeontology 34:461–485.Google Scholar
Foote, M. 1991b. Morphological and taxonomic diversity in a clade's history: the blastoid record and stochastic simulations. Contributions from the Museum of Paleontolgy, University of Michigan 28:101–140.Google Scholar
Fortey, R. A., and Owens, R. M. 1990. Trilobites. Pp. 121–142In McNamara, K. J., ed. Evolutionary trends. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1988. Trends as changes in variance: a new slant on progress and directionality in evolution. Journal of Paleontology 62:319–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, J.B.S. 1949. Suggestions as to the quantitative measurement of rates of evolution. Evolution 3:51–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harland, W. B., Armstrong, R. L., Cox, A. V., Craig, L. E., Smith, A. G., and Smith, D. G. 1990. A geologic time scale 1989. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Harrington, H. J. 1959. Classification. Pp.O145-O170 In Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, Part O, Arthropoda 1. The Geological Society of America and The University of Kansas Press, Boulder, Colorado and Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Jackson, J.B.C., and McKinney, F. K. 1990. Ecological processes and progressive macroevolution of marine clonal benthos. Pp. 173–209In Ross, R. M. and Allmon, W. D., eds. Causes of evolution: a paleontological perspective. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1975. Taxonomic diversity estimation using rarefaction. Paleobiology 1:333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1976. Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: a tabulation. Paleobiology 2:279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1978. Rarefaction. Pp. 80–89In Raup, D. M. and Schopf, T.J.M.Species as particles in space and time. Proceedings of a workshop held at the U.S. National Museum, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., June 5-16, 1978.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M., and Gould, S. J. 1974. Stochastic simulation and evolution of morphology—towards a nomothetic paleontology. Systematic Zoology 23:305–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runnegar, B. 1987. Rates and modes of evolution in the Mollusca. Pp. 39–60in Campbell, K.S.W. and Day, M. F., eds. Rates of evolution. Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Sanders, H. L. 1968. Marine benthic diversity: a comparative study. American Naturalist 102:243–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, W. B., and Swan, A.R.H. 1984. Morphology and morphologic diversity of mid-Carboniferous (Namurian) ammonoids in time and space. Paleobiology 10:195–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R. R., and Rohlf, F. J. 1981. Biometry. Second edition. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. 1979. Macroevolution: pattern and process. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Swan, A.R.H., and Saunders, W. B. 1987. Function and shape in late Paleozoic (mid-Carboniferous) ammonoids. Paleobiology 13:297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valentine, J. W. 1969. Patterns of taxonomic and ecological structure of the shelf benthos during Phanerozoic time. Palaeontology 12:684–709.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. 1974. Multivariate structural statistics in natural history. Journal of Theoretical Biology 45:235–247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, P. 1980. Comparative shell shape distributions in Jurassic-Cretaceous ammonites and Jurassic-Tertiary nautilids. Paleobiology 6:32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, J. A. 1988. The evolutionary palaeoecology of the Blastoidea. Pp. 215–233in Paul, C.R.C. and Smith, A. B., eds. Echinoderm phylogeny and evolutionary biology. Clarendon, Oxford.Google Scholar
Whittington, H. B. 1966. Phylogeny and distribution of Ordovician trilobites. Journal of Paleontology 40:696–737.Google Scholar