Submit a preprint

289

Identification of the mode of evolution in incomplete carbonate successionsuse asterix (*) to get italics
Niklas Hohmann, Joel R. Koelewijn, Peter Burgess, Emilia JarochowskaPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2024
<p><strong>Background:</strong> The fossil record provides the unique opportunity to observe evolution over millions of years, but is known to be incomplete. While incompleteness varies spatially and is hard to estimate for empirical sections, computer simulations of geological processes can be used to examine the effects of the incompleteness <em>in silico</em>. We combine simulations of different modes of evolution (stasis, (un)biased random walks) with deposition of carbonate platforms strata to examine how well the mode of evolution can be recovered from fossil time series, and how test results vary between different positions in the carbonate platform and multiple stratigraphic architectures generated by different sea level curves.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> Stratigraphic architecture and position along an onshore-offshore gradient has only a small influence on the mode of evolution recovered by statistical tests. For simulations of random walks, support for the correct mode decreases with time series length. Visual examination of trait evolution in lineages shows that rather than stratigraphic incompleteness, maximum hiatus duration determines how much fossil time series differ from the original evolutionary process. Gradual directional evolution is more susceptible to stratigraphic effects, turning it into punctuated evolution. In contrast, stasis remains unaffected.</p> <p><strong>Conclusions:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Fossil time series favor the recognition of both stasis and complex, punctuated modes of evolution.</li> <li>Not stratigraphic incompleteness, but the presence of rare, prolonged gaps has the largest effect on trait evolution. This suggests that incomplete sections with regular hiatus frequency and durations can potentially preserve evolutionary history without major biases. Understanding external controls on stratigraphic architectures such as sea level fluctuations is crucial for distinguishing between stratigraphic effects and genuine evolutionary process.</li> </ul>
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZBPWAYou should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10390266You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10390266You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Paleontology, Stratigraphy, Trait evolution, Paleobiology, Carbonate Platform, Mode of Evolution, Time Series, Fossil Record.
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Evolutionary biology, Evolutionary patterns and dynamics, Fossil record, Methods, Sedimentology
Steven Holland [stratum@uga.edu] suggested: Katharine Loughney <kloughney@murraystate.edu>, Steven Holland [stratum@uga.edu] suggested: Pedro Monarrez <pmonarrez@epss.ucla.edu>, Steven Holland [stratum@uga.edu] suggested: Mark Patzkowsky <mep12@psu.edu>, Anieke Brombacher [anieke.brombacher@yale.edu] suggested: Chloe Jones (c.l.c.jones@soton.ac.uk), Anieke Brombacher [anieke.brombacher@yale.edu] suggested: Lorna Kearns (lorna.kearns@austin.utexas.edu)
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
No need for them to be recommenders of PCIPaleo. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
2023-12-19 08:10:00
Melanie Hopkins