Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T01:17:06.043Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optimal estimators of the position of a mass extinction when recovery potential is uniform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Steve C. Wang ,
David J. Chudzicki  and
Philip J. Everson
Steve C. Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania 19081. E-mail: scwang@swarthmore.edu
David J. Chudzicki
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania 19081. E-mail: scwang@swarthmore.edu
Philip J. Everson
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania 19081. E-mail: scwang@swarthmore.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Numerous methods have been developed to estimate the position of a mass extinction boundary while accounting for the incompleteness of the fossil record. Here we describe the point estimator and confidence interval for the extinction that are optimal under the assumption of uniform preservation and recovery potential, and independence among taxa. First, one should pool the data from all taxa into one combined “supersample.” Next, one can then apply methods proposed by Strauss and Sadler (1989) for a single taxon. This gives the optimal point estimator in the sense that it has the smallest variance among all possible unbiased estimators. The corresponding confidence interval is optimal in the sense that it has the shortest average width among all possible intervals that are invariant to measurement scale. These optimality properties hold even among methods that have not yet been discovered. Using simulations, we show that the optimal estimators substantially improve upon the performance of other existing methods. Because the assumptions of uniform recovery and independence among taxa are strong ones, it is important to assess to what extent they are satisfied by the data. We demonstrate the use of probability plots for this purpose. Finally, we use simulations to explore the sensitivity of the optimal point estimator and confidence interval to nonuniformity and lack of independence, and we compare their performance under these conditions with existing methods. We find that nonuniformity strongly biases the point estimators for all methods studied, inflates their standard errors, and degrades the coverage probabilities of confidence intervals. Lack of independence has less effect on the accuracy of point estimates as long as recovery potential is uniform, but it, too, inflates the standard errors and degrades confidence interval coverage probabilities.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , Summer 2009 , pp. 447 - 459
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

Barry, J. C., Morgan, M. E., Flynn, L. J., Pilbeam, D., Behrensmeyer, A. K., Raza, S. M., Khan, I. A., Badgley, C., Hicks, J., and Kelley, J. 2002. Faunal and environmental change in the Late Miocene Siwaliks of northern Pakistan. Paleobiology Memoir 4. Paleobiology 28(Suppl. to No. 2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casella, G., and Berger, R. L. 2002. Statistical inference, 2d ed.Duxbury, Pacific Grove, Calif.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. M., Cleveland, W. S., Kleiner, B., and Tukey, P. A. 1983. Graphical methods for data analysis. Wadsworth, Pacific Grove, Calif.Google Scholar
Filliben, J. J. 1975. The probability plot correlation coefficient test for normality. Technometrics 17:111–117.Google Scholar
Gingerich, P. D., and Uhen, M. D. 1998. Likelihood estimation of the time of origin of Cetacea and the time of divergence of Cetacea and Artiodactyla. Palaeontologia Electronica 1:45.Google Scholar
Groves, J. R., Rettori, R., Payne, J. L., Boyce, M. D., Altiner, D. 2007. End-Permian mass extinction of Lagenide foraminifers in the southern Alps (northern Italy). Journal of Paleontology 81:415–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, S. M. 1995. The stratigraphic distribution of fossils. Paleobiology 21:92–109.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M. 2000. The quality of the fossil record: a sequence stratigraphic perspective. In Erwin, D. H. and Wing, S. L., eds. Deep time: Paleobiology's perspective. Paleobiology 26(Suppl. to No. 4):148–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, S. M. 2003. Confidence limits on fossil ranges that account for facies changes. Paleobiology 29:468–479.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M., and Patzkowsky, M. E. 2002. Stratigraphic variation in the timing of first and last occurrences. Palaios 17:134–146.Google Scholar
Huelsenbeck, J. P., and Rannala, B. 1997. Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogeny using stratigraphic data. Paleobiology 23:174–180.Google Scholar
Jin, Y. G., Wang, Y., Wang, W., Shang, Q. H., Cao, C. Q., and Erwin, D. H. 2000. Pattern of marine mass extinction near the Permian-Triassic boundary in South China. Science 289:432–436.Google Scholar
Macellari, C. E. 1986. Late Campanian-Maastrichtian ammonite fauna from Seymour Island (Antarctic Peninsula). Paleontological Society Memoir 18. Journal of Paleontology 60(Suppl. to No. 2).Google Scholar
Marshall, C. R. 1990. Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges. Paleobiology 16:1–10.Google Scholar
Marshall, C. R. 1994. Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges: partial relaxation of the assumption of a random distribution of fossil horizons. Paleobiology 20:459–469.Google Scholar
Marshall, C. R. 1995. Distinguishing between sudden and gradual extinctions in the fossil record: predicting the position of the Cretaceous-Tertiary iridium anomaly using the ammonite fossil record on Seymour Island, Antarctica. Geology 23:731–734.Google Scholar
Marshall, C. R. 1997. Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges with nonrandom distributions of fossil horizons. Paleobiology 23:165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, C. R., and Ward, P. D. 1996. Sudden and gradual molluscan extinctions in the latest Cretaceous in western European Tethys. Science 274:1360–1363.Google Scholar
Meldahl, K. H. 1990. Sampling, species abundance, and the stratigraphic signature of mass extinction: a test using Holocene tidal flat molluscs. Geology 18:890–893.Google Scholar
Paul, C. R. C. 1982. The adequacy of the fossil record. In Joysey, K. A. and Friday, A. E., eds. Problems of phylogenetic reconstruction. Systematics Association Special Volume 21:75–117. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Payne, J. L. 2003. Applicability and resolving power of statistical tests for instantaneous extinction events in the fossil record. Paleobiology 29:37–51.Google Scholar
Pearson, D. A., Schaefer, T., Johnson, K. R., and Nichols, D. J. 2001. Palynologically calibrated vertebrate record from North Dakota consistent with abrupt dinosaur extinction at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary. Geology 29:36–39.Google Scholar
Signor, P. W., and Lipps, J. H. 1982. Sampling bias, gradual extinction patterns, and catastrophes in the fossil record. In Silver, L. T. and Schultz, P. H., eds. Geological implications of large asteroids and comets on the Earth. Geological Society of America Special Paper 190:291–296.Google Scholar
Solow, A. R. 1996. Tests and confidence intervals for a common upper endpoint in fossil taxa. Paleobiology 22:406–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, A. R. 2003. Estimation of stratigraphic ranges when fossil finds are not randomly distributed. Paleobiology 29:181–185.Google Scholar
Solow, A. R. 2005. Inferring extinction from a sighting record. Mathematical Biosciences 195:47–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solow, A. R., and Smith, W. K. 2000. Testing for a mass extinction without selecting taxa. Paleobiology 26:647–650.Google Scholar
Solow, A. R., Roberts, D. L., and Robbirt, K. M. 2006. On the Pleistocene extinctions of Alaskan mammoths and horses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 103:7351–7353.Google Scholar
Springer, M. S. 1990. The effect of random range truncations on patterns of evolution in the fossil record. Paleobiology 16:512–520.Google Scholar
Springer, M. S., 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. 1989. Classical confidence intervals and Bayesian probability estimates for ends of local taxon ranges. Mathematical Geology 21:411–427.Google Scholar
Vogel, R. M., Hosking, J. R. M., Elphick, C. S., Roberts, D. L., and Reed, J. M. 2009. Goodness of fit of probability distributions for sightings as species approach extinction. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 71:701–719.Google Scholar
Wagner, P. J. 2000. Likelihood tests of hypothesized durations: determining and accommodating biasing factors. Paleobiology 26:431–449.Google Scholar
Wang, S. C., and Everson, P. J. 2007. Confidence intervals for pulsed mass extinction events. Paleobiology 33:324–336.Google Scholar
Wang, S. C., and Marshall, C. R. 2004. Improved confidence intervals for estimating the position of a mass extinction boundary. Paleobiology 30:5–18.Google Scholar
Ward, P. D., Botha, J., Buick, R., de Kock, M. O., Erwin, D. H., Garrison, G. H., Kirschvink, J. L., and Smith, R. 2005. Abrupt and gradual extinction among Late Permian land vertebrates in the Karoo Basin, South Africa. Science 307:709–713.Google Scholar
Wilf, P., and Johnson, K. R. 2004. Land plant extinction at the end of the Cretaceous: a quantitative analysis of the North Dakota megafloral record. Paleobiology 30:347–368.Google Scholar
Wilson, G. P. 2005. Mammalian faunal dynamics during the last 1.8 million years of the Cretaceous in Garfield County, Montana. Journal of Mammalian Evolution 12:53–76.Google Scholar