No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Relative abundance of Sepkoski's evolutionary faunas in Cambrian-Ordovician deep subtidal environments in North America
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 April 2016
Abstract
The relative proportions of Sepkoski's Cambrian, Paleozoic, and Modern evolutionary faunas in Cambrian-Ordovician benthic marine assemblages from mixed carbonate-shale and shale lithofacies deposited below normal wave base (herein, deep subtidal) in North America are strongly positively correlated with global relative genus richness in Sepkoski's global compendium. The correlation between local and global faunal proportions is robust regardless of how proportions are calculated, including when local proportions are based on number of specimens. Like the global pattern, the transition between the Cambrian and Paleozoic evolutionary faunas appears to occur gradually, in that Lower Arenigian (Ibexian) deep subtidal assemblages contain approximately equal proportions of Cambrian and Paleozoic faunal elements. In agreement with previous work, an onshore-offshore differentiation of faunas is evident both within Ordovician deep subtidal communities and across a larger environmental gradient.
Within the deep subtidal assemblages studied here, the Paleozoic fauna tends to have a greater proportion of individuals for a given proportion of genera than the Cambrian fauna, although both tend to accrue genera at similar rates with increasing relative abundance. The Modern evolutionary fauna appears to accrue genera more rapidly with increasing local relative abundance. The extent to which these differences reflect ecological factors such as biomass, metabolic requirements or larval recruitment patterns, taxonomic practices stemming from variable morphospace saturation, or taphonomy-related counting biases remains unclear, but it suggests the possibility that Sepkoski's evolutionary faunas may share ecological characteristics that influence both local relative abundance and global rates of taxonomic evolution.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Paleontological Society
References
Literature Cited
Adrain, J. M., and Westrop, S. R. 2000. An empirical assessment of taxic paleobiology. Science 289:110–112.Google Scholar
Adrain, J. M., Fortey, R. A., and Westrop, S. R. 1998. Post-Cambrian trilobite diversity and evolutionary faunas. Science 280:1922–1925.Google Scholar
Adrain, J. M., Westrop, S. R., Chatterton, B. D. E., and Ram-sköld, L. 2000. Silurian trilobite alpha diversity and the end-Ordovician mass extinction. Paleobiology 26:625–646.Google Scholar
Allison, P. A., and Briggs, D. E. G. 1993. Paleolatitudinal sampling bias, Phanerozoic species-diversity, and the End-Permian extinction. Geology 21:65–68.Google Scholar
Alroy, J. 2004. Are Sepkoski's evolutionary faunas dynamically coherent? Evolutionary Ecology Research 6:1–32.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I. and Bottjer, D. J. 1982. Tiering in suspension-feeding communities on soft substrata during the Phanerozoic. Science 216:173–174.Google Scholar
Babin, C. 2000. Ordovician to Devonian diversification of the Bivalvia. American Malacological Bulletin 15:167–178.Google Scholar
Bambach, R. K. 1985. Classes and adaptive variety: the ecology of diversification in marine faunas through the Phanerozoic. Pp. 191–253in Valentine, J. W., ed. Phanerozoic diversity patterns: profiles in macroevolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Bambach, R. K. 1993. Seafood through time: changes in biomass, energetics, and productivity in the marine ecosystem. Paleobiology 19:372–397.Google Scholar
Best, M. M. R., and Kidwell, S. M. 2000. Bivalve taphonomy in tropical mixed siliciclastic-carbonate settings. I. Environmental variation in shell condition. Paleobiology 26:80–102.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, C. E., and Baird, G. C. 1986. Comparative taphonomy: a key to paleoenvironmental interpretation based on fossil preservation. Palaios 1:207–227.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., Speyer, S. E., and Baird, G. C. 1986. Storm-generated sedimentary units: tempestite proximality and event stratification in the Middle Devonian Hamilton Group of New York. New York State Museum Bulletin 457:129–156.Google Scholar
Cherns, L., and Wright, V. P. 2000. Missing mollusks as evidence of large-scale, early skeletal aragonite dissolution in a Silurian sea. Geology 28:791–794.Google Scholar
Droser, M. L., and Finnegan, S. 2003. The Ordovician radiation: follow-up to the Cambrian explosion. Integrative and Comparative Biology 43:178–184.Google Scholar
Droser, M. L., Fortey, R. A., and Li, X. 1996. The Ordovician radiation. American Scientist 84:122–131.Google Scholar
Ellingsen, K. E. 2002. Soft-sediment benthic biodiversity on the continental shelf in relation to environmental variability. Marine Ecology Progress Series 232:15–27.Google Scholar
Erwin, D. H., and Wing, S. L., eds. 2000. Deep time: Paleobiology's perspective. Paleobiology 26 (Suppl. To No. 4).Google Scholar
Foote, M. 2000. Origination and extinction components of taxonomic diversity: general problems. Pp. 74–102in Erwin, and Wing, 2000.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., and Calloway, C. B. 1980. Clams and brachiopods —ships that pass in the night. Paleobiology 6:383–396.Google Scholar
Hayek, L., and Buzas, M. A. 1997. Surveying natural populations. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Hill, G. W., Roberts, K. A., Kindinger, J. L., and Wiley, G. D. 1982. Geobiologic study of the south Texas outer continental shelf. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper P1238.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. 1986. Larval ecology and macroevolution in marine-invertebrates. Bulletin of Marine Science 39:565–587.Google Scholar
Jeffery, C. H. 2001. Heart urchins at the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary: a tale of two clades. Paleobiology 27:140–158.Google Scholar
Kidwell, S. M. 1986. Models for fossil concentrations: paleobiologic implications. Paleobiology 12:6–24.Google Scholar
Li, X., and Droser, M. L. 1997. Nature and distribution of Cambrian shell concentrations: evidence from the Basin and Range Province of the western United States (California, Nevada, and Utah). Palaios 12:111–126.Google Scholar
Li, X., and Droser, M. L. 1999. Lower and Middle Ordovician shell beds from the Basin and Range Province of the western United States (California, Nevada, and Utah). Palaios 14:215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lidgard, S., McKinney, F. K., and Taylor, P. D. 1993. Competition, clade replacement, and a history of cyclostome and cheilostome bryozoan diversity. Paleobiology 19:352–371.Google Scholar
Lockley, M. G. 1983. Brachiopod dominated palaeocommunities from the type Ordovician. Palaeontology 26:111–145.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I. 1989. Spatio-temporal transitions in Paleozoic Bivalvia: a field comparison of Late Ordovician and upper Paleozoic bivalve-dominated fossil assemblages. Historical Biology 2:227–260.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I. 1997. Dissecting global diversity patterns: examples from the Ordovician radiation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 28:85–104.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I., and Connolly, S. 2001. Substrate affinities of higher taxa and the Ordovician Radiation. Paleobiology 27:768–778.Google Scholar
Novack-Gottshall, P. M., and Miller, A. I. 2003. Comparative geographic and environmental diversity dynamics of gastropods and bivalves during the Ordovician Radiation. Paleobiology 29:576–604.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. R. 1998. A proposed nomenclature for stages and series for the Cambrian of Laurentia. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 35:323–328.Google Scholar
Patzkowsky, M. E. 1995. Gradient analysis of Middle Ordovician brachiopod biofacies: biostratigraphic, biogeographic, and macroevolutionary implications. Palaios 10:154–179.Google Scholar
Patzkowsky, M. E., and Holland, S. M. 1993. Biotic response to a Middle Ordovician paleoceanographic event in eastern North America. Geology 21:619–622.Google Scholar
Peters, S. E. 2004. Evenness in Cambrian-Ordovician benthic marine communities in North America. Paleobiology 30:325–346.Google Scholar
Peters, S. E., and Foote, M. 2001. Biodiversity in the Phanerozoic: a reinterpretation. Paleobiology 27:583–601.Google Scholar
Peters, S. E., and Foote, M. 2002. Determinants of extinction in the fossil record. Nature 416:420–424.Google Scholar
Powell, E. N., Parsons, H. K. M., Russell, C. W., Staff, G. M., Gilbert, G. T., Brett, C. E., Walker, S. E., Raymond, A., Carlson, D. D., White, S., and Heise, E. A. 2002. Taphonomy on the continental shelf and slope: two-year trends—Gulf of Mexico and Bahamas. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 184:1–35.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1976. Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: an interpretation. Paleobiology 2:289–297.Google Scholar
Sánchez, T. M., and Babin, C. 2003. Distribution paléogéographique des mollusques bivalves durant l'Ordovicien. Geodiversitas 25:243–259.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1979. A kinetic model of Phanerozoic taxonomic diversity. II. Early Phanerozoic families and multiple equilibria. Paleobiology 5:222–251.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1981. A factor analytic description of the Phanerozoic marine fossil record. Paleobiology 7:36–53.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1984. A kinetic model of Phanerozoic taxonomic diversity. III. Post-Paleozoic families and mass extinctions. Paleobiology 10:246–267.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1988. Alpha, beta, gamma: where does all the diversity go? Paleobiology 14:221–234.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1991. A model of onshore-offshore change in faunal diversity. Paleobiology 17:68–77.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1996. Competition in macroevolution: the double wedge revisited. Pp. 211–255in Jablonski, D., Erwin, D. H., and Lipps, J. H., eds. Evolutionary paleobiology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 2002. A compendium of fossil marine animal genera. Bulletins of American Paleontology 363, 560 p.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr., and Miller, A. I. 1985. Evolutionary faunas and the distribution of Paleozoic benthic communities in space and time. Pp. 393–396in Valentine, J. W., ed. Phanerozoic diversity patterns. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr., and Sheehan, P. M. 1983. Diversification, faunal change, and community replacement during the Ordovician radiations. Pp. 673–718in Tevesz, M. J. S. and McCall, P. L., eds. Biotic interactions in Recent and fossil benthic communities. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr., McKinney, F. K., and Lidgard, S. 2000. Competitive displacement among post-Paleozoic cyclostome and cheilostome bryozoans. Paleobiology 26:7–18.Google Scholar
Smith, A. B. 2001. Large-scale heterogeneity of the fossil record: implications for Phanerozoic biodiversity studies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 356:351–367.Google Scholar
Vermeij, G. 1977. The Mesozoic marine revolution: the evidence from snails, predators, and grazers. Paleobiology 3:245–258.Google Scholar
Webby, B. D. 1998. Steps towards a global standard for Ordovician stratigraphy. Newsletters on Stratigraphy 36:1–33.Google Scholar
Westrop, S. R., and Adrain, J. M. 1998. Trilobite alpha diversity and the reorganization of Ordovician benthic marine communities. Paleobiology 24:1–16.Google Scholar
Westrop, S. R., and Adrain, J. M. 2001. Sampling at the species level: impacts of spatial biases on diversity gradients. Geology 29:903–906.Google Scholar
Westrop, S. R., Tremblay, J. V., and Landing, E. 1995. Declining importance of trilobites in Ordovician nearshore paleocommunities: dilution or displacement? Palaios 10:75–79.Google Scholar
Wing, S. L., Hickey, L. J., and Swisher, C. C. 1993. Implications of an exceptional fossil flora for Late Cretaceous vegetation. Nature 363:342–344.Google Scholar
Wright, P., Cherns, L., and Hodges, P. 2003. Missing mollusks: field testing taphonomic loss in the Mesozoic through early large-scale aragonite dissolution. Geology 31:211–214.Google Scholar