Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Paleobiology Email Content Delivery
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paleobiology; May 2009; v. 35; no. 2; p. 190-208; DOI: 10.1666/07062.1
© 2009 Paleontological Society
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harnik, P. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Unveiling rare diversity by integrating museum, literature, and field data

Paul G. Harnik1

1 Paul G. Harnik. Committee on Evolutionary Biology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637. pharnik{at}uchicago.edu

Estimates of taxonomic richness and abundance are complicated by sampling biases. The failure to sample rare taxa is most often attributed to inadequate sampling and to removal during the process of sample-size standardization. Here I present two methods for unveiling rare diversity by integrating species presence/absence data from museum collections and the literature with quantitative estimates of species richness and abundance gathered from field-based bulk samples. Combining museum, literature, and field data can provide a more comprehensive estimate of taxonomic richness and abundance without substantial increase in current sampling effort. First, in a given bulk sample, the lowest proportional abundance value observed can be used to estimate the maximum abundance of rare species known to have occurred at the locality at least once but not recorded in the current sample. Second, a model-selection approach can be used, in which a set of relative abundance distribution models are fit to the bulk-sample abundance data and the parameter estimates for the best model used to calculate the abundance distribution for all species known from the locality. The Paleogene marine fossil record of the U.S. Gulf Coastal Plain is suitable for applying these methods, because (1) the molluscan fauna is well represented in museum collections and the literature, (2) the molluscan fauna has been taxonomically standardized, and (3) many classic localities remain accessible for standardized bulk sampling. I introduce these methods by applying them to a single locality and then, using the faunas of the Gosport, Moodys Branch, and Red Bluff Formations, I demonstrate how the model-fitting approach can be used to compare taxonomic richness among multiple localities. A substantial fraction of the molluscan richness known from each locality is not captured in bulk samples and much of this unobserved richness may be attributed to the rarity of species. The multiple-locality comparison suggests that the greatest Paleogene decline in standing richness occurred in the middle Eocene and that the recovery of richness following the Eocene-Oligocene extinction was quite rapid despite substantial loss of taxa. These analyses underscore the magnitude of veiled diversity in marine fossil assemblages and the potential of existing sources of data to unveil rare taxa, allowing them to be incorporated into quantitative diversity studies.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
PaleobiologyHome page
C. Simpson and P. G. Harnik
Assessing the role of abundance in marine bivalve extinction over the post-Paleozoic
Paleobiology, December 1, 2009; 35(4): 631 - 647.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Paleontological Society