The fidelity of the fossil record: the improbability of preservation

52 3 May 485 489 10.1111/j.1475-4983.2009.00872.x

PAUL, C. R. C. 2009. The fidelity of the fossil record: the improbability of preservation. Palaeontology, 52, 3, 485–489.

C. R. C. Paul The fidelity of the fossil record reflects how accurately it preserves the history of life. Since Darwin's time any mismatch between our theories and the fossil record has been attributed to the imperfections of the record. For over a century scarcity of gradual evolutionary trends was explained in this way until the punctuated equilibrium model was proposed. A null hypothesis that all morphological patterns in the fossil record are unbiased random walks can be rejected because it predicts far more apparent trends than exist. Current best estimates suggest that trends occur in at most 5% of characters. When an organism dies either it becomes fossilized or it doesn't. To be confident a species has not been preserved the probability against preservation must be significantly larger than the total number of individuals of that species that ever existed. For skeletized species preservation was the norm not the exception. Nevertheless, fossils must then avoid subsequent destruction and be discovered to be useful.
  • BOUCHET, P., DANRIGAL, F. and HUYGHENS, C. 1979. Living seashells. Molluscs of the English Channel and Atlantic Coasts. Blandford Press, Poole, Dorset, 144 pp.
  • CARRUTHERS, R. G. 1910. On the evolution of Zaphrentis delanoui in Lower Carboniferous times. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 66, 523–538.
  • DARWIN, C. 1859. The origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. John Murray, London.
  • DURHAM, J. W. 1967. The incompleteness of our knowledge of the fossil record. Journal of Paleontology, 41, 559–565.
  • ELDREDGE, N. and GOULD, S. J. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. 82–115. In SCHOPF, T. J. M. (ed.). Models in paleobiology. Freeman, Cooper, San Francisco.
  • ELLIS, A. E. 1969. British snails. A Guide to the Non-marine Gastropoda of Great Britain and Ireland Pleistocene to Recent, 2nd edn. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 298 pp.
  • FOOTE, M. 1997. Estimating taxonomic durations and preservation probability. Paleobiology, 23, 278–300.
  • FOOTE, M. and MILLER, A. I. 2007. Principles of paleontology, 3rd edn. Freeman, New York, XV + 354 pp.
  • FOOTE, M. and RAUP, D. M. 1996. Fossil preservation and the stratigraphic ranges of taxa. Paleobiology, 22, 121–140.
  • FOOTE, M. and SEPKOSKI, J. J. Jr 1999. Absolute measures of the completeness of the fossil record. Nature, 398, 415–417.
  • HAYWARD, P., NELSON-SMITH, T. and SHIELDS, C. 1996. Sea shore of Britain and Europe. HarperCollins, London, 352 pp.
  • HITCHIN, R. and BENTON, M. J. 1997. Congruence between parsimony and stratigraphy: comparisons of three indices. Paleobiology, 23, 20–32.
  • HUNT, G. 2006. Fitting and comparing models of phyletic evolution: random walks and beyond. Paleobiology, 32, 578–601.
  • HUNT, G. 2007. The relative importance of directional change, random walks, and stasis in the evolution of fossil lineages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 18404–18408.
  • MCGOWAN, A. J. and SMITH, A. B. 2008. Are global Phanerozoic diversity curves truly global? A study of the relationship between regional rock records and global Phanerozoic marine diversity. Paleobiology, 34, 80–103.
  • NEWELL, N. D. 1959. Adequacy of the fossil record. Journal of Paleontology, 33, 488–499.
  • PATTERSON, C. 1981. Significance of fossils in determining evolutionary relationships. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics, 12, 195–223.
  • PAUL, C. R. C. 1999. Selection and the fossil record. 1–13. In BINTLIFF, J. (ed.). Structure and contingency. Evolutionary processes in life and human society. Leicester University Press, London, xxii + 153 pp.
  • PETERS, S. 2005. Geologic constraints on the macroevolutionary history of marine animals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 12326–12331.
  • RAUP, D. M. 1976. Species diversity in the Phanerozoic: an interpretation. Paleobiology, 2, 289–297.
  • ROWE, A. W. 1899. An analysis of the genus Micraster, as determined by rigid zonal collecting from the zone of Rhynchonella cuvieri to that of Micraster coranguinum. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 55, 494–547.
  • SMITH, A. B. and JEFFREY, C. H. 2000. Maastrichtian and Palaeocene echinoids: a key to world faunas. Special Papers in Palaeontology, 63, 1–406.
  • SMITH, A. B. and MCGOWAN, A. J. 2007. The shape of the Palaeozoic marine diversity curve: how much can be predicted from the sedimentary rock record of Western Europe? Palaeontology, 50, 765–774.
  • SMITH, A. B., PAUL, C. R. C., GALE, A. S. and DONOVAN, S. K. 1988. Cenomanian and Lower Turonian echinoderms from Wilmington, south-east Devon, England. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Geology Series, 42, 1–245.
  • STANLEY, S. M. 2007. An analysis of the history of marine animal diversity. Paleobiology Memoir, 4, (Suppl. vol. 33, no. 4), 1–55.
  • TAVARE, S., MARSHALL, C. R., WILL, O., SOLIGO, C. and MARTIN, R. D. 2002. Using the fossil record to estimate the age of the last common ancestor of extant primates. Nature, 416, 726–729.
  • TRUEMAN, A. E. 1922. The use of Gryphaea in the correlation of the Lower Lias. Geological Magazine, 54, 256–268.
  • VALENTINE, J. W. 1989. How good was the fossil record? Clues from the Californian Pleistocene. Paleobiology, 15, 83–94.
Wiley Online Library