Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T12:01:14.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Demise of the middle Paleozoic crinoid fauna: a single extinction event or rapid faunal turnover?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

William I. Ausich ,
Thomas W. Kammer  and
Tomasz K. Baumiller
William I. Ausich
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210
Thomas W. Kammer
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geography, West Virginia University, Post Office Box 6300, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506-6300
Tomasz K. Baumiller
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Macroevolutionary change from the Middle to the Late Paleozoic crinoid fauna was not the result of mass extinction. The presumption that the decline of the middle Paleozoic crinoid fauna was from a single mass extinction event was tested using seriation, multidimensional scaling (MDS), binomial analysis, and bootstrapping simulations on a data set which is a comprehensive revision of old faunal lists. The data for these analyses were based on temporal distributions of 214 species from 69 late Osagean and early Meramecian localities from the midcontinental United States. The time under consideration is subdivided into seven informal intervals using MDS in conjunction with biostratigraphy. Seriation of species ranges into these intervals results in a gradual pattern of faunal turnover, and sampling bias can be eliminated as a cause for this more gradual pattern. MDS analysis of the crinoid range data is similar to MDS simulations using data with continuous, monotonic species turnover and dissimilar to a simulated mass extinction. Binomial analysis and bootstrapping demonstrate that the observed number of extinctions at the putative extinction boundary were not unusually high. All methods agree that extinctions throughout this time were high but spanned several time intervals and that rapid, monotonic faunal turnover describes the data better than mass extinction. Macroevolutionary processes other than mass extinction and microevolutionary processes must have dictated the character and composition of this remarkable faunal transition among the Crinoidea.

Type
Research Article
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , Summer 1994 , pp. 345 - 361
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 1990. Systematics and phylogeny of the late Osagean and Meramecian crinoids Platycrinites and Eucladocrinus from the Mississippian stratotype region. Journal of Paleontology 64:759–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 1991a. Late Osagean and Meramecian Actinocrinites from the Mississippian stratotype region (Echinodermata: Crinoidea). Journal of Paleontology 65:485–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 1991b. Systematic revisions to Aorocrinus, Macrocrinus, Paradichocrinus, Strotocrinus, and Uperocrinus: Mississippian camerate crinoids from the stratotype region (Echinodermata). Journal of Paleontology 65:936–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 1992a. Dizygocrinus: Mississippian camerate crinoid from the midcontinental United States (Echinodermata). Journal of Paleontology 66:637–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Kammer, T. W. 1992b. Biogeography and evolution among late Osagean-early Meramecian (Lower Mississippian) crinoids in the east-central United States. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program 24:A225.Google Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Meyer, D. L. 1988. Blastoids from the late Osagean Fort Payne Formation (Kentucky and Tennessee). Journal of Paleontology 62:269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., and Meyer, D. L. 1992. Crinoidea Flexibilia (Echinodermata) from the Fort Payne Formation (Lower Mississippian; Kentucky and Tennessee). Journal of Paleontology 6:825–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausich, W. I., Kammer, T. W., and Lane, N. G. 1979. Fossil communities of the Borden (Mississippian) delta in Indiana and northern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology 53:1181–1196.Google Scholar
Baumiller, T. K. 1992. Major extinction events in the record of Paleozoic crinoids: new metrics for measuring extinction intensities. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Program 24:A95.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C. 1985. Archaeological seriation of an original data matrix. Pp. 95–108in Gradstein, F. M., ed. Quantitative stratigraphy. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland.Google Scholar
Brower, J. C., and Bussey, D. T. 1985. A comparison of five quantitative techniques for biostratigraphy. Pp. 279–306in Gradstein, F. M., ed. Quantitative stratigraphy. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland.Google Scholar
Chesnut, D. R. Jr., and Ettensohn, F. R. 1988. Hombergian (Chesterian) Echinoderm paleontology and paleoecology, south-central Kentucky. Bulletins of American Paleontology 95:1–102.Google Scholar
Collinson, C., Rexroad, C. B., and Thompson, T. L. 1971. Conodont zonation of the North American Mississippian. Geological Society of America Memoir 127:353–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, W. R., and Goldstein, M. 1984. Multivariate analysis, methods and applications. Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Donovan, S. K. 1989. The significance of the British Ordovician crinoid fauna. Modern Geology 13:243–255.Google Scholar
Eckert, J. D. 1988. Late Ordovician extinction of North American and British crinoids. Lethaia 21:147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efron, B. 1982. The jacknife, the bootstrap and other sampling plans. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Gauch, H. G. 1982. Multivariate analysis in community ecology. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1985. The paradox of the first tier: an agenda for paleobiology. Paleobiology 11:2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. 1857. On the Carboniferous limestones of the Mississippi Valley. American Association for the Advancement of Science Proceedings 10:51–69and The American Journal of Science and Arts, 2d series, 23:187–203.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1858. Report on the Geological Survey of Iowa embracing the results of investigations made during portions of the years 1855, 1856, 1857. Geological Survey of Iowa 1.Google Scholar
Harland, W. B., Armstrong, R. L., Cox, A. V., Craig, L. E., Smith, A. G., and Smith, D. G. 1989. A geologic time scale 1989. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haugh, B. N. 1978. Biodynamic and phyletic paradigms for sensory organs in camerate crinoids. Lethaia 11:145–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirt, D. S. 1991. Mississippian brachiopod biostratigraphy and the Osagean-Meramecian boundary in south-central Indiana. Journal of Paleontology 65:912–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hohn, M. E. 1976. Binary coefficients: a theoretical and empirical study. Mathematical Geology 8:137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, A. E., and Gilinsky, N. L. 1992. Mass extinctions as statistical phenomena: an examination of evidence using tests and bootstrapping. Paleobiology 18:148–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jablonski, D. 1986. Causes and consequences of mass extinctions: a comparative approach. Pp. 183–229in Elliott, D. K., ed. Dynamics of extinction. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1987. Aerosol suspension feeding and current velocities: distributional controls for late Osagean crinoids. Paleobiology 13:379–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1992. Advanced cladid crinoids from the middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: primitive-grade calyces. Journal of Paleontology 66:461–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1993. Advanced cladid crinoids from the middle Mississippian of east-central United States: intermediate-grade calyces. Journal of Paleontology 67:614–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., and Ausich, W. I. 1994. Advanced cladid crinoids from the middle Mississippian of the east-central United States: Advanced-grade calyces. Journal of Paleontology 68:339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammer, T. W., Brenckle, P. L., Carter, J. L., and Ausich, W. I. 1990. Redefinition of the Osagean-Meramecian boundary in the Mississippian stratotype region. Palaios 5:414–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1971. Crinoids and reefs. North American Paleontological Convention Proceedings, part J:1430–1443.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G. 1972. Synecology of Middle Mississippian (Carboniferous) crinoid communities in Indiana. Twenty-fourth International Geological Congress, Comptes Rendues Section 7:89–94.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G., and Sevastopulo, G. D. 1987. Stratigraphic distribution of Mississippian camerate crinoid genera from North America and western Europe. Courier Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg 98:199–206.Google Scholar
Lane, N. G., and Sevastopulo, G. D. 1990. Biogeography of Lower Carboniferous crinoids. Pp. 333–338in McKerrow, W. S. and Scotese, C. R., eds. Palaeozoic palaeogeography and biogeography. Geological Society of London Memoir.Google Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1948. Osage-Meramec contact. Journal of Geology 56:288–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laudon, L. R. 1973. Stratigraphic crinoid zonation in Iowa Mississippian rocks. Iowa Academy of Science Proceedings 80:288–302.Google Scholar
McGhee, G. R. Jr. 1989. Catastrophes in the history of life. Pp. 26–50in Allen, K. C. and Briggs, D. E. G., eds. Evolution and the fossil record. Belhaven Press, London.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1992. Large-body impact and extinction in the Phanerozoic, Paleobiology 18:80–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raup, D. M., and Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1982. Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record. Science 215:1501–1503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rexroad, C. B., and Collinson, C. 1965. Conodonts from the Keokuk, Warsaw, and Salem formations (Mississippian) of Illinois. Illinois State Geological Survey Circular 388.Google Scholar
Rexroad, C. B., and Scott, A. J. 1964. Conodont zones in the Rockford Limestone and the lower part of the New Providence Shale (Mississippian) in Indiana. Indiana Geological Survey Bulletin 30.Google Scholar
Rohlf, F. J. 1985. Numerical taxonomy system of multivariate statistical programs: manual. State University of New York, Stony Brook.Google Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1982. Mass extinctions in the Phanerozoic oceans: a review. Geological Society of America Special Paper 190:283–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaver, R. H., coordinator. 1985. Midwestern basin and arches region: correlation of stratigraphic units of North America (COSUNA) Project. American Association of Petroleum Geologists.Google Scholar
Signor, P. W., and Lipps, J. H. 1982. Sampling bias, gradual extinction patterns, and catastrophes in the fossil record. Pp. 291–296in Silver, L. T. and Schultz, P. H., eds. Geological implications of impacts of large asteroids and comets on the Earth. Geological Society of America Special Paper 190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Termier, G., and Termier, H. 1950. Paléontologie Marocaine II. Invertébres de l'Ere Primaire. Morocco Geological Survey Notes and Memoirs 69, 391 p.Google Scholar
Wanner, J. 1914-1929. Paläontologie von Timor (16 volumes). Erwin Nagele, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Waters, J. A., and Maples, C. G. 1991. Mississippian pelmatozoan community reorganization: a predation-mediated faunal change. Paleobiology 17:400–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1987. Permian crinoids from the type-section of the Callytharra Formation, Callytharra Springs, Western Australia. Alcheringa 11:95–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1990. New Permian crinoids from Australia. Palaeontology 33:49–74.Google Scholar
Welch, J. R., and Lane, N. G. 1977. A new crinoid fauna from the Harrodsburg Limestone (Mississippian) of southern Indiana. Indiana Academy of Sciences Proceedings 86:285–289.Google Scholar
Weller, J. M., et al. 1948. Correlation of the Mississippian formations of North America. Geological Society of America Bulletin 59:91–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar