Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:07:05.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolutionary Paleontology and the Fossil Record: A Historical Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2017

David Sepkoski
David Sepkoski*
Affiliation:
History Department University of North Carolina, Wilmington Wilmington, NC 28403
Get access

Abstract

From the beginning of paleontology's existence as a distinct professional community in the early 20th century, paleontologists have argued about ‘where’ the discipline fits among the natural sciences. Long told that paleontologists ought to be content with a subsidiary role as mere documenters of evolutionary change or as stratigraphical ‘handmaidens' to geology, over the past hundred years many paleontologists have actively resisted restrictive pigeonholing and attempted to establish paleontology as an autonomous discipline with status equal to its cousins biology and geology. This essay will survey some of the efforts at paleontological ‘activism’ over the past century, focusing particularly on institutional placement, intellectual contributions, and the use of arguments about the adequacy of the fossil record to bolster claims for disciplinary status.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Paleontological Society Papers , Volume 14: From Evolution to Geobiology: Research Questions Driving Paleontology at the Start of a New Century , October 2008 , pp. 41 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © by 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

Bassler, R. S. 1910. Adequacy of the fossil record. Popular Science, 67(3)586–589.Google Scholar
Benton, M. J. 2003. The quality of the fossil record, p. 66–90. In Donoghue, P. C. J. and Smith, M. P. (eds.), Telling the Evolutionary Time: Molecular Clocks and the Fossil Record. Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
Bowler, P. J. 1983. The Eclipse of Darwinism: Anti-Darwinian Evolution Theories in the Decades around 1900. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 291 p.Google Scholar
Bowler, P. J. 1996. Life's Splendid Drama: Evolutionary Biology and the Reconstruction of Life's Ancestry, 1860–1940. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 525 p.Google Scholar
Calvin, S. 1910. Adequacy of the Fossil Record. Popular Science, 76(3):582–586.Google Scholar
Coleman, W. 1971. Biology in the Nineteenth Century: Problems of Form, Function, and Transformation. Wiley, New York, 204 p.Google Scholar
Cooper, G. A. 1958. The science of paleontology. Journal of Paleontology, 35:1010–1018.Google Scholar
Cushman, J. A. 1938. The future of paleontology. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 49(3):359–366.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. 1964. On the Origin of Species. Facsimile reprint of first edition (1859). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 502 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. 1987. Charles Darwin's Notebooks, 1836–1844: Geology, Transmutation of Species, Metaphysical Enquiries, Paul, P. J. G., Barrett, H., Herbert, S., Kohn, D., Smith, S. (eds.). British Museum of Natural History, London, 747 p.Google Scholar
Dunbar, C. O. 1959. A half century of paleontology. Journal of Paleontology, 33:909–914.Google Scholar
Foote, M., and Sepkoski, J. J. 1999. Absolute measures of the completeness of the fossil record. Nature, 398(6726):415–417.Google Scholar
Herbert, S. 2005. Charles Darwin, Geologist. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 485 p.Google Scholar
Howell, B. F. 1945. Paleontology in the post-war world. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 56:371–384.Google Scholar
Huxley, T. H. 1894. Man's Place in Nature, and Other Anthropological Essays. D. Appleton, New York, 328 p.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D., Kaustuv, R., Valentine, J. W., Price, R. M., and Anderson, P. S. 2003. The impact of the pull of the recent on the history of marine diversity. Science, 300(5622): 1133–1135.Google Scholar
Kelley, P. H. 2008. The view from the top: A century of presidents' perspectives on the Paleonotological Society and paleontology, p. 1–15. In Kelley, P. H. and Bambach, R. K. (eds.), From Evolution to Geobiology: Research Questions Driving Paleontology at the Start of a New Century, Paleontological Society Papers, Volume 14.Google Scholar
Knight, J. B. 1947. Paleontologist or Geologist. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 58:281–286.Google Scholar
Lyell, C. Sir. 1830–33. Principles of Geology; Being an Attempt to Explain the Former Changes of The Earth's Surface, by Reference to Causes Now in Operation, 3 vol., J. Murray, London, 1239 p.Google Scholar
Matthew, W.D. 1923. Recent Progress and Trends in Vertebrate Paleontology. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 34(3):401–418.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D. Papers. American Museum of Natural History Archives.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D. 1959. Adequacy of the fossil record. Journal of Paleontology, 33:488–499.Google Scholar
Newell, N. D., and Colbert, E. H. 1948. Paleontologist—biologist or geologist. Journal of Paleontology 22:264–267.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. 1860. Life on the Earth; Its Origin and Succession. Macmillan and Co, London, 224 p.Google Scholar
Rainger, R. 1982. The Understanding of the Fossil Past: Paleontology and Evolution Theory, 1850–1910. Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, 465 p.Google Scholar
Rainger, R. 1986. Just before Simpson: William Diller Matthew's Understanding of Evolution. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 130:453–474.Google Scholar
Rainger, R. 1988. Vertebrate Paleontology as Biology: Henry Fairfield Osborn and the American Museum of Natural History, p. 219–256. In Rainger, R. (ed.), The American Development of Biology, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Rainger, R. 1991. An Agenda for Antiquity : Henry Fairfield Osborn and Vertebrate Paleontology at the American Museum Of Natural History, 1890–1935. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, 360 p.Google Scholar
Rainger, R. 1993. Biology, geology, or neither, or both: vertebrate paleontology at the University of Chicago, 1892–1950. Perspectives on Science, 1(3):478–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rainger, R. 1997. Everett C. Olson and the development of vertebrate paleoecology and taphonomy. Archives of Natural History, 24:373–396.Google Scholar
Rainger, R. 2001. Subtle agents for change: the Journal of Paleontology, J. Marvin Weller, and shifting emphases in invertebrate paleontology, 1930–1965. Journal of Paleontology, 75:1058–1064.Google Scholar
Schopf, T. J. M. 1980. Presidential Addresses of the Paleontological Society. Arno Press, New York, of 24 p. and 47 reprinted addresses.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C. 1910. Biologic principles of paleogeography. Popular Science, 76:591–600.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1944. Tempo and Mode in Evolution. Columbia University Press, New York, 237 p.Google Scholar
Stephenson, L. W. 1942. Paleontology—an appraisal. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 53:373–380.Google Scholar
Teichert, C. 1956. How many fossil species? Journal of Paleontology, 30:967–969.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W., Jablonski, D., Kidwell, S., and Kaustuv, R. 2006. Assessing the fidelity of the fossil record by using marine bivalves. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(17):6599–6604.Google Scholar
Weller, J. M. 1947. Relations of the invertebrate paleontologist to geology. Journal of Paleontology 21:570–575.Google Scholar
Whewell, W. 1847. The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded upon Their History. J.W. Parker, London, 708 p.Google Scholar