Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges | Paleobiology | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

Observed stratigraphic ranges almost always underestimate true longevities. Strauss and Sadler (1987, 1989) provide a method for calculating confidence intervals on the endpoints of local stratigraphic ranges. Their method can also be applied to composite sections; confidence intervals may be placed on times of origin and extinction for entire species or lineages. Confidence interval sizes depend only on the length of the stratigraphic range and the number of fossil horizons. The technique's most important assumptions are that fossil horizons are distributed randomly and that collecting intensity has been uniform over the stratigraphic range. These assumptions are more difficult to test and less likely to be fulfilled for composite sections than for local sections.

Confidence intervals give useful baseline estimates of the incompleteness of the fossil record, even if the underlying assumptions cannot be tested. Confidence intervals, which can be very large, should be calculated when the fossil record is used to assess absolute rates of molecular or morphological evolution, especially for poorly preserved groups. Confidence intervals have other functions: to determine how rich the fossil record has to be before radiometric dating errors become the dominant source of error in estimated times of origin or extinction; to predict future fossil finds; to predict which species with fossil records should be extant; and to assess phylogenetic hypotheses and taxonomic assignments.

References

Archer, M., and Bartholomai, A. 1978. Tertiary mammals of Australia: a synoptic review. Alcheringa 2:1–19.Google Scholar

Archer, M., Flannery, T. F., Ritchie, A., and Molnar, R. E. 1985. First Mesozoic mammal from Australia an early Cretaceous monotreme. Nature 318:363–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Archer, M., Hand, S., and Godthelp, H. 1986. Uncovering Australia's Dreamtime. Surrey Beatty and Sons; Sydney.Google Scholar

Barrowclough, G. F. 1983. Biochemical studies of microevolutionary processes. Pp. 223–261. In Brush, A. H., and Clark, G. A. Jr. (eds.), Perspectives in Ornithology. Cambridge University Press; New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beverley, S. M., and Wilson, A. C. 1984. Molecular evolution in Drosophila and the higher Diptera II. A time scale for fly evolution. Journal of Molecular Evolution 21:1–13.Google Scholar

Britten, R. J. 1986. Rates of DNA sequence evolution differ between taxonomic groups. Science 231:1393–1398.Google Scholar

Cheetham, A. H. 1986. Tempo of evolution in a Neogene bryozoan: rates of morphological change within and across species boundaries. Paleobiology 12:190–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harland, W. B., Cox, A. V., Llewellyn, P. G., Pickton, C. A. G., Smith, A. G., and Walters, R. 1982. A Geologic Time Scale. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge.Google Scholar

Hayashida, H., and Miyata, T. 1983. Unusual evolutionary conservation and frequent DNA segment exchange in class I genes of the major histocompatibility complex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 80:2671–2675.Google Scholar

Helm-Bychowski, K. M., and Wilson, A. C. 1986. Rates of nuclear DNA evolution in pheasant-like birds: evidence from restriction maps. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 83:688–692.Google Scholar

Kessler, L. G., and Avise, J. C. 1985. A comparative description of mitochondrial DNA differentiation in selected avian and other vertebrate genera. Molecular Biology and Evolution 2:109–125.Google Scholar

McKinney, M. L. 1986b. How biostratigraphic gaps form. Journal of Geology 94:875–884.Google Scholar

Marshall, C. R.. The fossil record and estimating divergence times between lineages: maximum divergence times and the importance of reliable phylogenies. Journal of Molecular Evolution.Google Scholar

Mooi, R. 1989. Living and fossil genera of the Clypeasteroida (Echinoidea: Echinodermata): an illustrated key and annotated checklist. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 488:1–51.Google Scholar

Paul, C. R. C. 1982. The adequacy of the fossil record. Pp. 75–117. In Joysey, K. A., and Friday, A. E. (eds.), Problems of Phylogenetic Reconstruction. Academic Press; London.Google Scholar

Prager, E. M., and Brush, A. H., Nolan, R. A., Nakanishi, M., and Wilson, A. C. 1974. Slow evolution of transferrin and albumin in birds according to micro-complement fixation analysis. Journal of Molecular Evolution 3:243–262.Google Scholar

Ripley, B. D. 1987. Stochastic Simulation. John Wiley & Sons; New York.Google Scholar

Shaw, A. B. 1964. Time in Stratigraphy. McGraw-Hill; New York.Google Scholar

Shields, G. F., and Wilson, A. C. 1987. Calibration of mitochondrial DNA evolution in geese. Journal of Molecular Evolution 24:212–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Smith, A. B. 1984. Echinoid Paleobiology. George Allen and Unwin; London.Google Scholar

Smith, A. B. 1988. Phylogenetic relationships, divergence times, and rates of molecular evolution for camarodont sea urchins. Molecular Biology and Evolution 5:345–365.Google Scholar

Springer, M., and Lilje, A. 1988. Biostratigraphy and gap analysis: the expected sequence of biostratigraphic events. Journal of Geology 96:228–236.Google Scholar

Strauss, D., and Sadler, P. M. 1987. Confidence intervals for the ends of local taxon ranges. . Department of Statistics, University of California; Riverside, California.Google Scholar

Strauss, D., and Sadler, P. M. 1989. Classical confidence intervals and Bayesian probability estimates for ends of local taxon ranges. Mathematical Geology 21:411–427.Google Scholar

Wilson, A. C., Carlson, S. S., and White, T. J. 1977. Biochemical evolution. Annual Review of Biochemistry 46:573–639.Google Scholar

Wise, K. P. 1989. The Estimation of True Taxonomic Durations from Fossil Occurrence Data. , Harvard University; Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar

Woodburne, M. O., and Tedford, R. H. 1975. The first Tertiary monotreme from Australia. American Museum Novitates 2588:1–11.Google Scholar