Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Quality of the fossil record through time


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 options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


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.


  1. 1

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

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

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

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

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

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4

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

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5

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

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

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

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

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

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

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

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

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

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

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

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18

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

    Google Scholar 

  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).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

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

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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).

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

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

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

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

    Google Scholar 

  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).

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28

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

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29

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

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30

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

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


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



Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. J. Benton.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Benton, M., Wills, M. & Hitchin, R. Quality of the fossil record through time. Nature 403, 534–537 (2000).

Download citation

Further reading


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.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing