Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-l4t7p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-24T13:03:29.373Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparative spatial paleoecology: assessing niche competition between Eocene North American multituberculates and rodents regarding forest resources to elucidate the cause of multituberculate extinction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2025

Benjamin John Burger*
Affiliation:
Department of Geoscience, Utah State University , Uintah Basin Campus, Vernal, Utah 84078, U.S.A.
*
Corresponding author: Benjamin John Burger; Email: benjamin.burger@usu.edu

Abstract

Multituberculate extinction is often cited as a classic case of competitive exclusion, coinciding with the first rodent arrivals in the late Paleocene. Analyzing 124 North American multituberculate last occurrence records during the Eocene from 56 to 34 million years ago, this study aimed to differentiate Eocene multituberculate and coeval rodent floral associations through geographic spatial analysis to understand niche overlap between the two groups. If competitive exclusion with rodents was a factor in multituberculate extinction, both multituberculates and rodents would be predicted to share similar forest habitat preferences and have competed for similar ecological niches regarding their forest associations. Using spatial analysis, this study found that Eocene rodents and multituberculates did not overlap in their forest associations. The findings indicate that multituberculates were unique in inhabiting a specific type of ancient forest habitat, favoring forests composed of Metasequoia, Glyptostrobus, and Alnus, and thus thrived in wetter northern temperate forest communities during the Eocene. Metasequoia and Glyptostrobus declined significantly in North America during the later Cenozoic, coinciding with multituberculate decline and extinction as the global climate shifted toward colder and drier climates around the Eocene/Oligocene boundary. In contrast, the success of rodents is attributed to their much broader forest affinity. These preferences align with the widespread distribution of rodents today, contributing to their modern success. The absence of any similar reconstructed forest habitat preferences between rodents and multituberculates suggests that changing forest structure, rather than competitive exclusion, drove multituberculate extinction.

Information

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Paleontological Society
Figure 0

Figure 1. Map of plotted Eocene fossil localities and constructed polygon shapes used in the study.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Graphic explanation of the four parameters measured in the study as illustrated by hypothetical point locality of fossil mammal and plant data. Plant fossil localities are depicted as green dots, and fossil mammal localities as brown dots. A, Number of occurrences in the polygon (NOP): the percentage of fossil plant occurrences within each mammal polygon shape. For example, there is 1 plant locality within the mammal polygon, out of a total of 5 plant localities, thus the NOP value would be 1/5 or 20%. B, Centroid ellipsoid distance (CED): the distance between the two calculated centroid points of each polygon shape. In this example, the value would be 20 km. C, Non-overlap of areas (NOLA): the percentage of the area of non-overlap between the mammal and plant polygon shapes. In this example, the value would be 90%, the area not overlapped by the plant polygon. D, Ellipsoid distance ratio function (EDRF): a calculated function of the ratio of the distances between similar localities, mammal-to-mammal and plant-to-plant distances, as compared with opposite localities, mammal-to-plant distances. This was calculated using the Ellipsoid-Distance-Ratio-Function.py python script provided in the Supplementary Files.

Figure 2

Figure 3. A, Map of terrestrial Eocene fossil locality density and modeled fossil preservation spatial decay curves used to calculate the expected occurrence numbers for each fossil group. Grids with more than 1000 localities are shaded purple; between 999 and 100, shaded red; between 99 and 10, shaded orange; 9 to 1 shaded yellow; and white represents no known fossil terrestrial Eocene localities within grid. B, Exponential preservation decay curve from spatial distribution of all fossil localities. C, Log fit calculation of preservation decay curve, where a can be adjusted to match the curve for predicted the model of fossil group occurrences in each grid region.

Figure 3

Figure 4. The graphical results comparing multituberculate mammals with various fossil plants across the four measured parameters, A–D: NOP, number of occurrences in the polygon; NOLA, non-overlap of areas; CED, centroid ellipsoid distance; EDRF, ellipsoid distance ratio function. E, The total rank score of each plant association. Abbreviations of plant groups can be found in Appendix S2A, and calculated ranked data can be found in Supplementary Files: Summary of Results (Supplementary Table S1). Image of Ectypodus modified from Sloan (1979). Red bars highlighted with the arrow indicate plants most closely associated with multituberculates with the lowest score. An asterisk (*) indicates value within nonsignificance regarding association or avoidance within the probabilistic null model.

Figure 4

Figure 5. The graphical results comparing ischyromyid rodents with various fossil plants across the four measured parameters, A-D: NOP, number of occurrences in the polygon; NOLA, non-overlap of areas; CED, centroid ellipsoid distance; EDRF, ellipsoid distance ratio function. E, The total rank score of each plant association. Abbreviations of plant groups can be found in Appendix S2B, and calculated ranked data can be found in Supplementary Files: Summary of Results (Supplementary Table S2). Image of Ischyromys based on USNM V16828. Blue bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with ischyromyid rodents with the lowest score, while red bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with multituberculates. An asterisk (*) indicates value within nonsignificance regarding association or avoidance within the probabilistic null model.

Figure 5

Figure 6. The graphical results comparing cylindrodontid rodents with various fossil plants across the four measured parameters, A-D: NOP, number of occurrences in the polygon; NOLA, non-overlap of areas; CED, centroid ellipsoid distance; EDRF, ellipsoid distance ratio function. E, The total rank score of each plant association, with red bars indicating multituberculate plant associations. Abbreviations of plant groups can be found in Appendix S2C, and calculated ranked data can be found in Supplementary Files: Summary of Results (Supplementary Table S3). Image of the cylindrodontid rodent Adrynomys based on Korth and Tabrum (2016). Blue bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with cylindrodontid rodents with the lowest score, while red bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with multituberculates. An asterisk (*) indicates value within non-significance regarding association or avoidance within the probabilistic null model.

Figure 6

Figure 7. The graphical results comparing sciuravid rodents with various fossil plants across the four measured parameters, A-D: NOP, number of occurrences in the polygon; NOLA, non-overlap of areas; CED, centroid ellipsoid distance; EDRF, ellipsoid distance ratio function. E, The total rank score of each plant association, with red bars indicating multituberculate plant associations. Abbreviations of plant groups can be found in Appendix S2D, and calculated ranked data can be found in Supplementary Files: Summary of Results (Supplementary Table S4). Image of Sciuravus based on Matthew (1910). Blue bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with sciuravid rodents with the lowest score, while red bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with multituberculates. An asterisk (*) indicates value within nonsignificance regarding association or avoidance within the probabilistic null model.

Figure 7

Figure 8. The graphical results comparing eutypomyid rodents with various fossil plants across the four measured parameters, A-D: NOP, number of occurrences in the polygon; NOLA, non-overlap of areas; CED, centroid ellipsoid distance; EDRF, ellipsoid distance ratio function. E, The total rank score of each plant association, with red bars indicating multituberculate plant associations. Abbreviations of plant groups can be found in Appendix S2E, and calculated ranked data can be found in Supplementary Files: Summary of Results (Supplementary Table S5). Image of Eutypomys based on Korth (1994). Blue bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with eutypomoyid rodents with the lowest score, while red bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with multituberculates. An asterisk (*) indicates value within nonsignificance regarding association or avoidance within the probabilistic null model.

Figure 8

Figure 9. The graphical results comparing eomyid rodents with various fossil plants across the four measured parameters, A-D: NOP, number of occurrences in the polygon; NOLA, non-overlap of areas; CED, centroid ellipsoid distance; EDRF, ellipsoid distance ratio function. E, The total rank score of each plant association, with red bars indicating multituberculate plant associations. Abbreviations of plant groups can be found in Appendix S2F, and calculated ranked data can be found in Supplementary Files: Summary of Results (Supplementary Table S6). Image of Protadjidaumo based on Wahlert (1978). Blue bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with eomyid rodents with the lowest score, while red bars on the graph indicate plants most closely associated with multituberculates. An asterisk (*) indicates value within nonsignificance regarding association or avoidance within the probabilistic null model.