Quality of the fossil record through time

Article metrics

Abstract

Does the fossil record present a true picture of the history of life1,2,3, or should it be viewed with caution4,5,6? Raup5 argued that plots of the diversification of life2 were an illustration of bias: the older the rocks, the less we know. The debate was partially resolved by the observation7 that different data sets gave similar patterns of rising diversity through time. Here we show that new assessment methods, in which the order of fossils in the rocks (stratigraphy) is compared with the order inherent in evolutionary trees (phylogeny), provide a more convincing analytical tool: stratigraphy and phylogeny offer independent data on history. Assessments of congruence between stratigraphy and phylogeny for a sample of 1,000 published phylogenies show no evidence of diminution of quality backwards in time. Ancient rocks clearly preserve less information, on average, than more recent rocks. However, if scaled to the stratigraphic level of the stage and the taxonomic level of the family, the past 540 million years of the fossil record provide uniformly good documentation of the life of the past.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: No change in fossil record quality through time.
Figure 2: Calculation of the three congruence metrics for age versus clade comparisons.

References

  1. 1

    Simpson, G. G. Tempo and Mode in Evolution (Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 1944).

  2. 2

    Valentine, J. W. Patterns of taxonomic and ecological structure of the shelf benthos during Phanerozoic time. Palaeontology 12, 684– 709 (1969).

  3. 3

    Smith, A. B. Systematics and the Fossil Record (Blackwell, Oxford, 1994).

  4. 4

    Hennig, W. Phylogenetic Systematics (Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1966).

  5. 5

    Raup, D. M. Taxonomic diversity during the Phanerozoic. Science 177, 1065–1071 (1972).

  6. 6

    Patterson, C. Significance of fossils in determining evolutionary relationships. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 12, 195–223 (1981).

  7. 7

    Sepkoski, J. J. Jr, Bambach, R. K., Raup, D. M. & Valentine, J. W. Phanerozoic marine diversity and the fossil record. Nature 293, 435–437 (1981).

  8. 8

    Sepkoski, J. J. Jr A kinetic model of Phanerozoic taxonomic diversity. III. Post-Paleozoic families and mass extinctions. Paleobiology 10, 246 –267 (1984).

  9. 9

    Benton, M. J. Diversification and extinction in the history of life. Science 268, 52–58 ( 1995).

  10. 10

    Raup, D. M. & Sepkoski, J. J. Jr Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record. Science 215, 1501–1503 (1982).

  11. 11

    Raup, D. M. & Sepkoski, J. J. Jr Periodicity of extinctions in the geologic past. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 81, 801–805 (1984).

  12. 12

    Wray, G. A., Levinton, J. S. & Shapiro, L. H. Molecular evidence for deep Precambrian divergences among metazoan phyla. Science 274, 568–573 (1996).

  13. 13

    Cooper, A. & Penny, D. Mass survival of birds across the Cretaceous–Tertiary boundary: molecular evidence. Science 275, 1109–1113 (1997).

  14. 14

    Kumar, S. & Hedges, S. B. A molecular timescale for vertebrate evolution. Nature 392, 917– 920 (1998).

  15. 15

    Ayala, F. J., Rzhetsky, A. & Ayala, F. J. Origin of metazoan phyla: molecular clocks confirm paleontological estimates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, 606–611 (1998).

  16. 16

    Foote, M., Hunter, J. P., Janis, C. M. & Sepkoski, J. J. Jr Evolutionary and preservational constraints on origins of biologic groups: divergence times of eutherian mammals. Science 283, 1310–1314 (1999).

  17. 17

    Forey, P. L. et al. Cladistics: A Practical Course in Systematics (Clarendon, Oxford, 1992).

  18. 18

    Hillis, D. M., Moritz, C. & Mable, B. K. Molecular Systematics 2nd edn (Sinauer, Sunderland, MA, 1996).

  19. 19

    Benton, M. J. & Hitchin, R. Testing the quality of the fossil record by groups and by major habitats. Historical Biol. 12, 111–157 (1996).

  20. 20

    Benton, M. J., Hitchin, R. & Wills, M. A. Assessing congruence between cladistic and stratigraphic data. Syst. Biol. 48, 581– 596 (1999).

  21. 21

    Wills, M. A. The gap excess ratio, randomization tests, and the goodness of fit of trees to stratigraphy. Syst. Biol. 48 559– 580 (1999).

  22. 22

    Siddall, M. E. Stratigraphic consistency and the shape of things. Syst. Biol. 45, 111–115 ( 1996).

  23. 23

    Wagner, P. J. in The Adequacy of the Fossil Record (eds Donovan, S. K. & Paul, C. R. C.) 165–187 (Wiley, New York, 1998).

  24. 24

    Huelsenbeck, J. P. Comparing the stratigraphic record to estimates of phylogeny. Palaeobiology 20, 470–483 (1994).

  25. 25

    Benton, M. J. & Storrs, G. W. Testing the quality of the fossil record: paleontological knowledge is improving. Geology 22, 111–114 (1994).

  26. 26

    Norell, M. A. in Extinction and Phylogeny (eds Novacek, M. J. & Wheeler, Q. D.) 89–118 (Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 1992).

  27. 27

    Paul, C. R. C. in The Adequacy of the Fossil Record (eds Donovan, S. K. & Paul, C. R. C.) 1–22 (Wiley, New York, 1998).

  28. 28

    Benton, M. J. The Fossil Record 2 (Chapman & Hall, London, 1993).

  29. 29

    Harland, W. B. et al. A Geologic Time Scale 1989 (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1993).

  30. 30

    Foote, M. & Sepkoski, J. J. Jr Absolute measures of the completeness of the fossil record. Nature 398 , 415–417 (1999).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the Leverhulme Trust and NERC for continued funding of our work, and E. Fara, M. Foote and P. N. Pearson for helpful comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Correspondence to M. J. Benton.

Supplementary information

Table data (XLS 289 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.