Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T23:38:04.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing for faunal stability across a regional biotic transition: quantifying stasis and variation among recurring coral-rich biofacies in the Middle Devonian Appalachian Basin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

James R. Bonelli Jr. ,
Carlton E. Brett ,
Arnold I. Miller  and
J Bret Bennington
James R. Bonelli Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0013. E-mail: jbonelli@geosc.psu.edu
Carlton E. Brett
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0013. E-mail: jbonelli@geosc.psu.edu
Arnold I. Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0013. E-mail: jbonelli@geosc.psu.edu
J Bret Bennington
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, 114 Hofstra University, Hempstead, New York 11549-1140
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous observations about the stable nature of coral-rich assemblages from the Middle Devonian Hamilton Group have led some researchers to invoke the primacy of ecological controls in maintaining biofacies structure through time. However, few analyses have examined the degree to which recurring biofacies vary quantitatively, and none have assessed lateral variability as a benchmark for testing the significance of temporal variability. Thus, the extent to which Hamilton biofacies persist and the mechanism(s) responsible for their hypothesized stability remain contentious. In this study, recurring coral-rich biofacies were evaluated from two stratigraphic horizons within the Middle Devonian Appalachian Basin to examine (1) the extent to which species assemblages persisted within the basin through space and time, and (2) whether ecological interactions may be a plausible mechanism for generating the degree of stasis observed in this case.

Variations in species composition and abundance were examined across multiple spatial scales within both sampled coral-rich horizons. This permitted the establishment of a baseline against which temporal differences in biofacies composition and structure could be evaluated. Although successive coral-rich horizons remained taxonomically stable, their dominance structures changed significantly through the 1.5 Myr study interval. Moreover, additional comparisons among older Hamilton coral-rich horizons corroborate our primary results. These findings support a model in which species respond individually to fluctuations in the physical environment, as indicated by the fluidity of their relative abundances geographically and temporally.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , Winter 2006 , pp. 20 - 37
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

Baird, G. C., and Brett, C. E. 1983. Regional variation and paleontology of two coral beds in the Middle Devonian Hamilton Group of western New York. Journal of Paleontology 57:417–446.Google Scholar
Baird, G. C., and Brett, C. E. 2003. Shelf and off-shelf deposits of the Tully Formation in New York and Pennsylvania: Faunal incursions, eustasy, and tectonics. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg 239:1–16.Google Scholar
Bambach, R. K. 1994. The null hypothesis for community stability and recurrence—environmental selection of adapted organisms. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 26:A519.Google Scholar
Bennington, J B. 2003. Transcending patchiness in the comparative analysis of paleocommunities: a test case from the Upper Cretaceous of New Jersey. Palaios 18:22–33.Google Scholar
Bennington, J B., and Bambach, R. K. 1996. Statistical testing for paleocommunity recurrence: are similar fossil assemblages ever the same? Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 127:107–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennington, J B., and Rutherford, S. D. 1999. Precision and reliability in paleocommunity comparisons based on cluster-confidence intervals: how to get more statistical bang for your sampling buck. Palaios 14:506–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonuso, N., Newton, C. R., Brower, J. C., and Ivany, L. C. 2002. Does coordinated stasis yield taxonomic and ecologic stability? Middle Devonian Hamilton Group of central New York. Geology 30:1055–1058.Google Scholar
Bray, J. R., and Curtis, J. T. 1957. An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 27:325–349.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E. 1998. Sequence stratigraphy, paleoecology, and evolution: biotic clues and responses to sea-level fluctuations. Palaios 13:241–262.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., and Baird, G. C. 1985. Carbonate-shale cycles in the Middle Devonian of New York: an evaluation of models for the origin of limestones in terrigenous shelf sequences. Geology 13, 324–327.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brett, C. E., and Baird, G. C. 1986. Symmetrical and upward shallowing cycles in the Middle Devonian of New York State and their implications for the punctuated aggradational cycle hypothesis. Paleoceanography 1:431–435.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., and Baird, G. C. 1994. Depositional sequences, cycles, and foreland basin dynamics in the late Middle Devonian (Givetian) of the Genesee Valley and western Finger Lakes region. In Brett, C. E. and Scatterday, J., eds. New York State Geological Association, 66th Meeting Guidebook, pp. 505–586.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., and Baird, G. C. 1995. Coordinated stasis and & evolutionary ecology of Silurian to Middle Devonian faunas in the Appalachian Basin. Pp. 285–315 in Erwin, D. H. and Anstey, R. L., eds. New approaches to speciation in the fossil record. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., and Baird, G. C. 1996. Middle Devonian sedimentary cycles and sequences in the northern Appalachian Basin. In Witzke, B. J., Ludvigson, G. A., and Day, J., eds. Paleozoic sequence stratigraphy: views from the Northern American Craton. Geological Society of America Special Publication 306:213–241.Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., Baird, G. C., Gray, L. M., and Savarese, M. 1983. Middle Devonian (Givetian) coral associations of western and central New York State. Pp. 65–107 in Sorauf, J. E. and Oliver, W. A., eds. Silurian and Devonian corals and stromatoporoids of New York. Guidebook, Fourth International Symposium on Fossil Cnidarian. SUNY, Binghamton, N.Y. Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., Miller, K. B., and Baird, G. C. 1990. A temporal hierarchy of paleoecologic processes within a Middle Devonian epeiric sea. In Miller, W. III, ed. Paleocommunity temporal dynamics: the long-term development of multispecies assemblages. Paleontological Society Special Publication 5:178–209. Knoxville, Tenn. Google Scholar
Brett, C. E., Ivany, L. C., and Schopf, K. M. 1996. Coordinated stasis: an overview. Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 127:1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brower, J. C., and Nye, O. B. 1991. Quantitative analysis of paleocommunities in the lower part of the Hamilton Group near Cazanovia, New York. New York State Museum Bulletin 469:37–73.Google Scholar
Buzas, M. A. 1968. On the spatial distribution of foraminifera. Contributions from the Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal Research 19:1–11.Google Scholar
Buzas, M. A. 1990. Another look at confidence limits for species proportions. Journal of Paleontology 68:1–35.Google Scholar
Cisne, J. L., and Rabe, B. D. 1978. Coenocorrelation; gradient analysis of fossil communities and its applications in stratigraphy. Lethaia 11:341–364.Google Scholar
Clarke, K. R. 1993. Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology 18:117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, K. R., and Warwick, R. M. 1994. Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. National Environmental Research Council, Bournemouth, U.K. Google Scholar
Cleland, H. F. 1903. A study of the fauna of the Hamilton Formation of the Cayuga Lake section in central New York. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 206:1–112.Google Scholar
Cooper, G. A. 1933. Stratigraphy of the Hamilton Group of eastern New York, Part I. American Journal of Science 26:537–551.Google Scholar
Cooper, G. A. 1934. Stratigraphy of the Hamilton Group of eastern New York, Part II. American Journal of Science 27:1–12.Google Scholar
Cooper, G. A., and Williams, J. S. 1935. Tully Formation of New York. Geological Society of America Bulletin 46:781–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costanzo, G. V., and Kaesler, R. L. 1987. Changes in Permian marine ostracode faunas during regression, Florena shale, Northeastern Kansas. Journal of Paleontology 61:1204–1215.Google Scholar
Cummins, H., Powell, E. N., Newton, H. J., Stanton, R. J., and Staff, G. 1986. Assessing transportation by the covariance of species with comments on contagious and random distributions. Lethaia 19:1–22.Google Scholar
Elton, C. 1933. The ecology of animals. Reprint, Science Paperbacks and Methuen, London, 1966.Google Scholar
Faith, D. P., Minchin, P. R., and Belbin, L. 1987. Compositional dissimilarity as a robust measure of ecological distance. Vegetatio 69:57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, L. 2001. Stability of Late Pleistocene Reef Mollusks from San Salvador Island, Bahamas. Palaios 16:372–386.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilinsky, N. L., and Bennington, J B. 1994. Estimating the numbers of whole individuals from collections of body parts: a taphonomic limitation of the paleontological record. Paleobiology 20:245–258.Google Scholar
Gleason, H. 1926. The individualistic concept of the plant association. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 53:1–20.Google Scholar
Gower, J. C. 1987. Introduction to ordination techniques: Pp. 3–64 in Legendre, P. and Legendre, L., eds. Developments in numerical ecology. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Grabau, A. W. 1898. The geology and paleontology of Eighteen Mile Creek and Lake Shore sections of Erie County, New York. Buffalo Society of Natural Science Bulletin 6.Google Scholar
Hayek, L. C., and Buzas, M. A. 1997. Surveying natural populations. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Heckel, P. H. 1973. Nature, origin, and significance of the Tully limestone: an anomalous unit in the Catskill Delta, Devonian of New York. Geological Society of America Special Paper 138.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M., and Patzkowsky, M. E. 2004. Ecosystem structure and stability: middle Upper Ordovician of central Kentucky. Palaios 19:316–331.Google Scholar
Holterhoff, P. F. 1996. Crinoid biofacies in Upper Carboniferous cyclothems, midcontinent North America: faunal tracking and the role of regional processes in biofacies recurrence. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 127:47–81.Google Scholar
House, M. R. 1992. Devonian microrhythms and a Givetian timescale. Proceedings of the Ussher Society 7:392–395.Google Scholar
House, M. R. 1995. Devonian precession and other signatures for establishing a Givetian timescale. In House, M. R. and Gale, A. S., eds. Orbital forcing timescales and cyclostratigraphy. Geological Society of London Publication 85:37–49.Google Scholar
Ivany, L. C. 1996. Coordinated stasis or coordinated turnover? Exploring intrinsic vs. extrinsic controls on pattern. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 127:239–256.Google Scholar
Ivany, L. C. 1999. So… Now what? Thoughts and ruminations about coordinated stasis. Palaios 14:1–4.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D., and Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1996. Paleobiology, community ecology, and scales of ecological pattern. Ecology 77:1367–1378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kruskal, J. B. 1964. Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a non-parametric hypothesis. Psychometrika 29:1–27.Google Scholar
Lafferty, A. G., Miller, A. I., and Brett, C. E. 1994. Comparative spatial variability in faunal composition along two Middle Devonian paleoenvironmental gradients. Palaios 9:224–236.Google Scholar
Linsley, D. M. 1994. Devonian paleontology of New York. Paleontological Research Institution Special Publication 21.Google Scholar
McCune, B., and Grace, J. B. 2002. Analysis of ecological communities. MJM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, Ore.Google Scholar
McKinney, M. L., Lockwood, J. L., and Frederick, D. R. 1996. Does ecosystem and evolutionary stability include rare species? Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 127:191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, A. I. 1988. Spatial resolution in subfossil molluscan remains: implications for paleobiological analysis. Paleobiology 14:91–103.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I. 1997a. Coordinated stasis or coincident relative stability? Paleobiology 23:155–164.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I. 1997b. Counting fossils in a Cincinnatian storm bed: spatial resolution in the fossil record. Pp. 57–72 in Brett, C. E. and Baird, G. C., eds. Paleontological events: stratigraphic, ecological, and evolutionary implications. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Minchin, P. R. 1987. An evaluation of the relative robustness of techniques for ecological ordination. Vegetatio 69:89–107.Google Scholar
Morris, P. J., Ivany, L. C., Schopf, K. M., and Brett, C. E. 1995. The challenge of paleoecological stasis: reassessing sources of evolutionary stability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 92:11,269–11,273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newman, W. B., Brower, J. C., and Newton, C. R. 1992. Quantitative paleoecology of Hamilton Group localities in central New York. In April, R. H., ed. New York State Geological Association, 64th Annual Meeting Guidebook, pp. 170–199.Google Scholar
Olszewski, T. D., and Patzkowsky, M. E. 2001. Measuring recurrence of marine biotic gradients: a case study from the Pennsylvania-Permian mid-continent. Palaios 16:444–460.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandolfi, J. M. 1996. Limited membership in Pleistocene reef coral assemblages from the Huon Peninsula, Papua New Guinea: constancy during global change. Paleobiology 22:152–176.Google Scholar
Patzkowsky, M. E. 1995. Gradient analysis of Middle Ordovician brachiopod biofacies: biostratigraphic, biogeographic, and macroevolutionary implications. Palaios 10:154–179.Google Scholar
Patzkowsky, M. E., and Holland, S. M. 1997. Patterns of turnover in Middle and Upper Ordovician brachiopods of the eastern United States: a test of coordinated stasis. Paleobiology 23:420–433.Google Scholar
Sessa, J. A., Miller, A. I., and Brett, C. E. 2002. The dynamics of a rapid asynchronous biotic turnover in the Middle Devonian Appalachian Basin of New York. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 34:A117.Google Scholar
Shi, G. R. 1993. Multivariate data analysis in palaeoecology and palaeobiogeography—a review. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 105:199–234.Google Scholar
Springer, D. A., and Bambach, R. K. 1985. Gradient versus cluster analysis of fossil assemblages: a comparison from the Ordovician of southwestern Virginia. Lethaia 18:181–198.Google Scholar
Webber, A. J. 2005. The effects of spatial patchiness on the stratigraphic signal of biotic composition (type Cincinnatian Series, Upper Ordovician). Palaios 20:37–50.Google Scholar
Willard, B. 1937. Tully Limestone and fauna in Pennsylvania. Geological Society of America Bulletin 48:1237–1256.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Bonelli et al. supplementary material

Appendix

Download Bonelli et al. supplementary material(File)
File 60.4 KB