Revisiting the Phanerozoic rock–diversity relationship

IF 2 3区 地球科学 Q3 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Geological Magazine Pub Date : 2023-12-12 DOI:10.1017/s0016756823000742
Lin Na, Qijian Li, Cristina Krause, Minghang Zhu, Wolfgang Kiessling
{"title":"Revisiting the Phanerozoic rock–diversity relationship","authors":"Lin Na, Qijian Li, Cristina Krause, Minghang Zhu, Wolfgang Kiessling","doi":"10.1017/s0016756823000742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The congruence between rock quantity and biodiversity through the Phanerozoic has long been acknowledged. Rock record bias and common cause are the most discussed hypotheses: the former emphasizes that the changes in diversity through time fully reflect rock availability; the latter posits that the correlation between rock and fossil records is driven by a common cause, such as sea-level changes. Here, we use the Geobiodiversity Database (GBDB), a large compilation of the rock and fossil records, to test the rock bias hypothesis. In contrast to other databases on fossil occurrences, the section-based GBDB also records unfossiliferous units. Our multiple regression analysis shows that 85% of the variation in sampled diversity can be attributed to the rock record, meaning that major peaks and drops in observed diversity are mainly due to the rock record. Our results support a strong covariation between the number of unfossiliferous units and sampled diversity, indicating a genuine rock bias that arose from sampling effort that is independent of fossil content. This provides a compelling argument that the rock record bias is more prominent than common cause in explaining large-scale variations in sampled diversity. Our study suggests that (1) no single proxy can fully represent rock record bias in predicting biodiversity, (2) rock bias strongly governs sampled diversity in both marine and terrestrial communities, and (3) unfossiliferous strata contain critical information in predicting diversity of marine and terrestrial animals.</p>","PeriodicalId":12612,"journal":{"name":"Geological Magazine","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geological Magazine","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0016756823000742","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The congruence between rock quantity and biodiversity through the Phanerozoic has long been acknowledged. Rock record bias and common cause are the most discussed hypotheses: the former emphasizes that the changes in diversity through time fully reflect rock availability; the latter posits that the correlation between rock and fossil records is driven by a common cause, such as sea-level changes. Here, we use the Geobiodiversity Database (GBDB), a large compilation of the rock and fossil records, to test the rock bias hypothesis. In contrast to other databases on fossil occurrences, the section-based GBDB also records unfossiliferous units. Our multiple regression analysis shows that 85% of the variation in sampled diversity can be attributed to the rock record, meaning that major peaks and drops in observed diversity are mainly due to the rock record. Our results support a strong covariation between the number of unfossiliferous units and sampled diversity, indicating a genuine rock bias that arose from sampling effort that is independent of fossil content. This provides a compelling argument that the rock record bias is more prominent than common cause in explaining large-scale variations in sampled diversity. Our study suggests that (1) no single proxy can fully represent rock record bias in predicting biodiversity, (2) rock bias strongly governs sampled diversity in both marine and terrestrial communities, and (3) unfossiliferous strata contain critical information in predicting diversity of marine and terrestrial animals.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新审视新生代岩石多样性关系
岩石数量与新生代生物多样性之间的一致性早已得到公认。岩石记录偏差和共同原因是讨论最多的假说:前者强调多样性随时间的变化完全反映了岩石的可用性;后者认为岩石和化石记录之间的相关性是由共同原因(如海平面变化)驱动的。在这里,我们利用地质生物多样性数据库(GBDB)--一个岩石和化石记录的大型汇编--来检验岩石偏差假说。与其他化石分布数据库不同的是,基于剖面的 GBDB 还记录了无化石单元。我们的多元回归分析表明,采样多样性变化的 85% 可归因于岩石记录,这意味着观测到的多样性的主要峰值和下降主要是由岩石记录造成的。我们的研究结果表明,无化石单元的数量与采样多样性之间存在很强的协变关系,这表明采样工作确实产生了与化石含量无关的岩石偏差。这提供了一个令人信服的论据,即在解释取样多样性的大规模变化时,岩石记录偏差比共同原因更为突出。我们的研究表明:(1) 在预测生物多样性时,没有任何单一的代用指标可以完全代表岩石记录的偏差;(2) 岩石偏差对海洋和陆地群落的采样多样性都有很大的影响;(3) 无化石地层包含了预测海洋和陆地动物多样性的关键信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Geological Magazine
Geological Magazine 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Geological Magazine, established in 1864, is one of the oldest and best-known periodicals in earth sciences. It publishes original scientific papers covering the complete spectrum of geological topics, with high quality illustrations. Its worldwide circulation and high production values, combined with Rapid Communications and Book Review sections keep the journal at the forefront of the field. This journal is included in the Cambridge Journals open access initiative, Cambridge Open Option.
期刊最新文献
Diversification inside a lamprophyric dyke and cone sheet complex converging onto a hidden carbonatite centre (Frederikshåbs Isblink, SW Greenland) The affinity of microcontinents in northern East Gondwana in the Silurian: Hainan Island response to the closure of the Proto-Tethys Ocean Towards a refined Norian (Upper Triassic) conodont biostratigraphy of the western Tethys: revision of the recurrent ‘multidentata-issue’ Late Silurian event stratigraphy and facies of South Wales and the Welsh Borderland, United Kingdom The onset of Neo-Tethys subduction in the Early Jurassic: evidence from the eclogites of the North Shahrekord Metamorphic Complex (Sanandaj-Sirjan Zone, W Iran)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1