10.5061/DRYAD.8TS3P
Lloyd, Graeme T.
Natural History Museum
Pearson, Paul N.
Young, Jeremy R.
University College London
Smith, Andrew B.
Natural History Museum
Data from: Sampling bias and the fossil record of planktonic foraminifera
on land and in the deep sea
Dryad
dataset
2012
Foraminifera
sampling bias
rock record
2012-04-24T20:18:40Z
2012-04-24T20:18:40Z
en
https://doi.org/10.1666/11041.1
528116 bytes
1
CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication
Large-scale trends in planktonic foraminiferal diversity have so far been
based on utilization of synoptic biostratigraphic range charts. Although
this approach ensures the taxonomic consistency and quality of the data
being used, it takes no formal account of any sampling biases that might
exist in the fossil record. We demonstrate that the occurrence data of
planktonic foraminifera, as recorded in the primary literature, are
strongly biased by sampling. We do this by demonstrating that raw
diversity curves derived from the land-based and deep-sea records are
strikingly different, but that they each correlate with the intensity of
sampling in their respective environments, and thus are ultimately
controlled by the structure of the geological record in each setting.
Because sampling of the Mesozoic record is best in our land record whereas
sampling of the Cenozoic is best in our deep-sea record, we combine the
two to generate the best-supported estimates of species and genus
diversity over time from these data. We correct for sampling bias using
shareholder quorum subsampling and a modeling approach. The data are then
transformed to generate a range-through plot of species richness that is
compared with two earlier estimates of the diversity history where
comparable species-in-bin data can be recovered. No robust statistical
correlation is found among the three estimates. Although differences in
amplitude are to be expected, differences in the actual shape of the curve
are surprising. We conclude that these differences stem from the nature of
the data themselves, namely the taxonomic scheme adopted and the taxonomic
coverage used.
Supplementary Table1List of planktonic foraminifera species recorded from
Atlantic deep‐sea cores included in this study for each time bin. Note
that only those species that can be unambiguously dated to within a time
bin are included. Columns give the time interval covered in millions of
years.Supplementary Table2List of planktonic foraminifera species recorded
from land‐based sections included in this study for each time bin. Note
that only those species that can be unambiguously dated to within a time
bin are included.Supplementary Table3List of planktonic foraminifera
species recorded from Atlantic deep‐sea cores and land based sections
included in this study for each time bin. Note that only those species
that can be unambiguously dated to within a time bin.rev lloyd 11041
supplCorrelations between different species richness estimates for
planktonic foraminfera (see Fig. 5 of main paper). Values in bold are
statistically significant correlations.