Delayed biological recovery from extinctions throughout the fossil record

Abstract

How quickly does biodiversity rebound after extinctions? Palaeobiologists have examined the temporal, taxonomic and geographic patterns of recovery following individual mass extinctions in detail1,2,3,4,5, but have not analysed recoveries from extinctions throughout the fossil record as a whole. Here, we measure how fast biodiversity rebounds after extinctions in general, rather than after individual mass extinctions, by calculating the cross-correlation between extinction and origination rates across the entire Phanerozoic marine fossil record. Our results show that extinction rates are not significantly correlated with contemporaneous origination rates, but instead are correlated with origination rates roughly 10 million years later. This lagged correlation persists when we remove the ‘Big Five’ major mass extinctions, indicating that recovery times following mass extinctions and background extinctions are similar. Our results suggest that there are intrinsic limits to how quickly global biodiversity can recover after extinction events, regardless of their magnitude. They also imply that today's anthropogenic extinctions will diminish biodiversity for millions of years to come.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: The fossil record of marine animal biodiversity.
Figure 2: Cross-correlation between extinctions and originations.
Figure 3: Effect of incomplete sampling.

References

  1. 1

    Hallam, A. Why was there a delayed radiation after the end-Palaeozoic extinctions? Hist. Biol. 5, 257–262 ( 1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Jablonski, D. Geographic variation in the molluscan recovery from the end-Cretaceous extinction. Science 279, 1327–1330 (1998).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Jablonski, D. in Extinction Rates (eds Lawton, J. H. & May, R. M.) 25– 44 (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Erwin, D. H. The end and the beginning: recoveries from mass extinctions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 344–349 (1998).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Sepkoski, J. J. Jr Rates of speciation in the fossil record. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 353, 315– 326 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Walliser, O. H. in Global Events and Event Stratigraphy in the Phanerozoic (ed. Walliser, O. H.) 7–19 (Springer, Berlin, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Kirchner, J. W. & Weil, A. No fractals in fossil extinction statistics. Nature 395, 337– 338 (1998).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Schulz, M. & Stattegger, K. SPECTRUM: Spectral analysis of unevenly spaced paleoclimatic time series. Comput. Geosci. 23, 929–945 (1997).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Agterberg, F. P. in Geostatistics (ed. Merriam, D. F.) 113– 141 (Plenum, New York, 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Bracewell, R. N. The Fourier Transform and its Applications 3rd edn (McGraw Hill, Boston, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Scargle, J. D. Studies in astronomical time series analysis. III. Fourier transforms, autocorrelation functions, and cross-correlation functions of unevenly spaced data. Astrophys. J. 343, 874–887 (1989).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Lomb, N. R. Least-squares frequency analysis of unequally spaced data. Astrophys. Space Sci. 29, 447–462 ( 1976).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Press, W. H. & Teukolsky, S. A. Search algorithm for weak periodic signals in unevenly spaced data. Comput. Phys. 2, 77–82 (1988).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Scargle, J. D. Studies in astronomical time series analysis. II. Statistical aspects of spectral analysis of unevenly spaced data. Astrophys. J. 263 , 835–853 (1982).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Sepkoski, J. J. Jr in Global Events and Event Stratigraphy in the Phanerozoic (ed. Walliser, O. H.) 35–51 (Springer, Berlin, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Sepkoski, J. J. Jr Ten years in the library: new data confirm paleontological patterns. Paleobiology 19, 43– 51 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Signor, P. W. & Lipps, J. H. Sampling bias, gradual extinction patterns, and catastrophes in the fossil record. Geol. Soc. Am. Special Paper 190, 291–296 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Gilinsky, N. L. in Analytical Paleobiology (eds Gilinsky, N. L. & Signor, P. W.) 157–174 (The Paleontological Society, Knoxville, Tennessee, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Cleveland, W. S. & McGill, R. The many faces of a scatterplot. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 79, 807–822 (1984).

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to the late J. Sepkoski for his fossil databases and his encouragement, and we thank M. Foote and D. Erwin for comments on the manuscript. Our work was supported by grants from the University of California and the NSF to J.W.K.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James W. Kirchner.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kirchner, J., Weil, A. Delayed biological recovery from extinctions throughout the fossil record . Nature 404, 177–180 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35004564

Download citation

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.

Search

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