Search for: All records

Two of the traits most often observed to correlate with extinction risk in marine animals are geographical range and body size. However, the relative effects of these two traits on extinction risk have not been investigated systematically for either background times or during mass extinctions. To close this knowledge gap, we measure and compare extinction selectivity of geographical range and body size of genera within five classes of benthic marine animals across the Phanerozoic using capture–mark–recapture models. During background intervals, narrow geographical range is strongly associated with greater extinction probability, whereas smaller body size is more weakly associated with greater extinction probability. During mass extinctions, the association between geographical range and extinction probability is reduced in every class and fully eliminated in some, whereas the association between body size and extinction probability varies in strength and direction across classes. While geographical range is universally the stronger predictor of survival during background intervals, variation among classes during mass extinction suggests a fundamental shift in extinction processes during these global catastrophes. 

Abstract Larger body size has long been assumed to correlate with greater risk of extinction, helping to shape body-size distributions across the tree of life, but a lack of comprehensive size data for fossil taxa has left this hypothesis untested for most higher taxa across the vast majority of evolutionary time. Here we assess the relationship between body size and extinction using a data set comprising the body sizes, stratigraphic ranges, and occurrence patterns of 9408 genera of fossil marine animals spanning eight Linnaean classes across the past 485 Myr. We find that preferential extinction of smaller-bodied genera within classes is substantially more common than expected due to chance and that there is little evidence for preferential extinction of larger-bodied genera. Using a capture–mark–recapture analysis, we find that this size bias of extinction persists even after accounting for a pervasive bias against the sampling of smaller-bodied genera within classes. The size bias in extinction also persists after including geographic range as an additional predictor of extinction, indicating that correlation between body size and geographic range does not provide a simple explanation for the association between size and extinction. Regardless of the underlying causes, the preferential extinction of smaller-bodied genera across many higher taxa and most of geologic time indicates that the selective loss of large-bodied animals is the exception, rather than the rule, in the evolution of marine animals. 

Abstract The taxonomic and ecologic composition of Earth's biota has shifted dramatically through geologic time, with some clades going extinct while others diversified. Here, we derive a metric that quantifies the change in biotic composition due to extinction or origination and show that it equals the product of extinction/origination magnitude and selectivity (variation in magnitude among groups). We also define metrics that describe the extent to which a recovery (1) reinforced or reversed the effects of extinction on biotic composition and (2) changed composition in ways uncorrelated with the extinction. To demonstrate the approach, we analyzed an updated compilation of stratigraphic ranges of marine animal genera. We show that mass extinctions were not more selective than background intervals at the phylum level; rather, they tended to drive greater taxonomic change due to their higher magnitudes. Mass extinctions did not represent a separate class of events with respect to either strength of selectivity or effect. Similar observations apply to origination during recoveries from mass extinctions, and on average, extinction and origination were similarly selective and drove similar amounts of biotic change. Elevated origination during recoveries drove bursts of compositional change that varied considerably in effect. In some cases, origination partially reversed the effects of extinction, returning the biota toward the pre-extinction composition; in others, it reinforced the effects of the extinction, magnifying biotic change. Recoveries were as important as extinction events in shaping the marine biota, and their selectivity deserves systematic study alongside that of extinction.