Paleobiology最新文献

The fossil record is spatiotemporally heterogeneous: taxon occurrence data have patchy spatial distributions, and this patchiness varies through time. Large-scale quantitative paleobiology studies that fail to account for heterogeneous sampling coverage will generate uninformative inferences at best and confidently draw wrong conclusions at worst. Explicitly spatial methods of standardization are necessary for analyses of large-scale fossil datasets, because nonspatial sample standardization, such as diversity rarefaction, is insufficient to reduce the signal of varying spatial coverage through time or between environments and clades. Spatial standardization should control both geographic area and dispersion (spread) of fossil localities. In addition to standardizing the spatial distribution of data, other factors may be standardized, including environmental heterogeneity or the number of publications or field collecting units that report taxon occurrences. Using a case study of published global Paleobiology Database occurrences, we demonstrate strong signals of sampling; without spatial standardization, these sampling signatures could be misattributed to biological processes. We discuss practical issues of implementing spatial standardization via subsampling and present the new R package divvy to improve the accessibility of spatial analysis. The software provides three spatial subsampling approaches, as well as related tools to quantify spatial coverage. After reviewing the theory, practice, and history of equalizing spatial coverage between data comparison groups, we outline priority areas to improve related data collection, analysis, and reporting practices in paleobiology.

The process of evolution and the structures it produces are best understood in the light of hierarchy theory. The biota traditionally is described by either the genealogical Linnaean hierarchy or economic hierarchies of communities or ecosystems. Here we describe the Bretskyan hierarchy—a hybrid eco-genealogical hierarchy that consists of nested sets of different-sized, usually polyphyletic communities of interacting individuals separated from other such communities in space and time at multiple scales. The Bretskyan hierarchy consists of elements that have both genealogical and economic properties and functions—situated between, and connecting the elements of, the economic hierarchies (Vernadskyan) and the genealogical (Linnaean) hierarchy. The described hierarchy at lower tiers is populated by holobionts, individuals composed of multiple polyphyletic lineages integrated by functional interactions or biotically fabricated structures, such as membranes. At larger spatial tiers and longer time scales, the members of the Bretskyan hierarchy are of a more diffuse nature, partially due to the small size and relatively short duration of us as observers of larger and longer-lasting structures, here described as geobiomes. Their individuality is externally forced and directly tied to the spatial and temporal physical structures of our planet. These are sub-bioprovinces and bioprovinces—large and effectively isolated spatiotemporal structures of biota integrated internally by coevolution and individuated externally by a hierarchy of barriers. Gaia is here understood as the largest eco-genealogical individual compartmentalized by the outer space of the Earth and integrated at long time scales by biotic interactions and plate tectonic mixing of biota. The existence of a hierarchy of barriers and multilevel allopatry suggests that geographic isolation takes part not only in individuating species lineages, but also in producing coherent complexes of separate lineages forming bioprovinces at multiple space and time scales. The sizes, configurations, and durations of Bretskyan units are directly tied to geodynamics, demonstrating the central role of the physical planet in the processes of individuation and merging of geobiomes and the control of coevolution, and all its ramifications, at multiple space and time scales. The Bretskyan hierarchy also allows the integration of previously unconnected themes—“egalitarian” major transitions in individuality (e.g., eukaryogenesis) and some of the megatrajectories in the history of life—into a single theoretical framework of spatial and temporal scaling of eco-genealogy. The pervasive scaling of geodynamical processes and the direct connection of geodynamics to the dynamics of Bretskyan units allows us to formulate conjectures on the scales and limits of spatial and temporal contingency and competitiveness of biotas in evolution.

Data compilations expand the scope of research; however, data citation practice lags behind advances in data use. It remains uncommon for data users to credit data producers in professionally meaningful ways. In paleontology, databases like the Paleobiology Database (PBDB) enable assessment of patterns and processes spanning millions of years, up to global scale. The status quo for data citation creates an imbalance wherein publications drawing data from the PBDB receive significantly more citations (median: 4.3 ± 3.5 citations/year) than the publications producing the data (1.4 ± 1.3 citations/year). By accounting for data reuse where citations were neglected, the projected citation rate for data-provisioning publications approached parity (4.2 ± 2.2 citations/year) and the impact factor of paleontological journals (n = 55) increased by an average of 13.4% (maximum increase = 57.8%) in 2019. Without rebalancing the distribution of scientific credit, emerging “big data” research in paleontology—and science in general—is at risk of undercutting itself through a systematic devaluation of the work that is foundational to the discipline.

Women are underrepresented in paleontology. Despite more women students, representation at senior levels remains low. To advance professionally, scientists must disseminate their research through peer-reviewed publications. We examine gendered authorship patterns in Paleobiology to ask whether the publishing infrastructure supports the Paleontological Society's gender-equity goals. We reviewed all papers published in Paleobiology from its inception in 1975 through 2021. For each paper, we recorded each author, the author's position in the author list, and the total number of authors on each paper. We coded gender based on a combination of personal communication and pronouns used in publicly available information. We compared author demographics with anonymized membership data from the Paleontological Society. Over the journal's run, the number of authors per paper increased due to cultural shifts toward collaborative work and acknowledging student contributions with coauthorship. These trends contribute to proportionally more women authors, beginning in the early 2000s. Despite these increases, women remain chronically underrepresented. In 2018, 2019, and 2021, the proportion of women authors in Paleobiology paralleled membership in the Paleontological Society. However, in 2020, Paleobiology published fewer women authors than expected based on society membership. This echoes declines in women's scholarly productivity in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic observed across many disciplines. We offer four recommendations: (1) practice double-anonymous peer review; (2) recruit editors from diverse backgrounds who invite reviewers with diverse backgrounds; (3) democratize manuscript review by selecting reviewers from a disaggregated reviewer database; and (4) gather and analyze demographic data for both submissions and publications.

The nature of phenotypic evolution within lineages is central to many unresolved questions in paleontology and evolutionary biology. Analyses of evolutionary time-series of ancestor-descendant populations in the fossil record are likely to make important contributions to many of these debates. However, the limited number of models that have been applied to these types of data may restrict our ability to interpret phenotypic evolution in the fossil record. Using uni- and multivariate models of trait evolution that make different assumptions regarding the dynamics of the adaptive landscape, I evaluate contrasting hypotheses to explain evolution of size in the radiolarian Eucyrtidium calvertense and armor in the stickleback Gaserosteus doryssus. Body size evolution in E. calvertense is best explained by a model where the lineage evolves as a consequence of a shift in the adaptive landscape that coincides with the initiation of neosympatry with its sister lineage. Multivariate evolution of armor traits in a stickleback lineage (Gasterosteus doryssus) show evidence of adaptation towards independent optima on the adaptive landscape at the same time as traits change in a correlated fashion. The fitted models are available in a the R package evoTS, which builds on the commonly used paleoTS framework.