Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31827869›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2019

What do we know about the fossil record of pinnipeds? A historiographical investigation.

Ana Valenzuela-Toro, Nicholas D Pyenson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The Miocene sealRoyal Society open science · 2025
    Article
  4. Aquatic sloths (PeerJ · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The extinct marine megafauna of the Phanerozoic.Cambridge prisms. Extinction · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Giant baleen whales emerged from a cold southern cradle.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ana Valenzuela-ToroDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Santa Cruz, Coastal Biology Building, 130 McAllister Way, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1497-364X
Nicholas D PyensonDepartment of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, PO Box 37012, Washington, DC 20013, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4678-5782

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fossil record of pinnipeds (seals, fur seals and walruses) is globally distributed, spanning from the late Oligocene to the Holocene. This record shows a complex evolutionary history that could not otherwise be inferred from their extant relatives, including multiple radiations and iterative ecomorphological specializations among different lineages, many of which are extinct. The fossil record of pinnipeds is not uniformly represented in space and time, however, leaving some gaps in our knowledge. We performed a historiographical investigation of the published fossil record of pinnipeds based on the information available in the Paleobiology Database, with the aim to broadly characterize and evaluate it from a taxonomic, geographical and temporal perspective. We identified major trends, strengths and weaknesses of the pinniped fossil record, including potential biases that may affect our interpretations. We found that 39% of the record corresponds to extant taxa, which are essentially from the Pleistocene and Holocene. There is a larger record from the Northern Hemisphere, suggesting biases in sampling and collection effort. The record is not strongly biased by sedimentary outcrop bias. Specifically, for extinct species, nearly half of them are represented by a single occurrence and a large proportion have type specimens consisting of single isolated postcranial elements. While the pinniped fossil record may have adequate temporal and taxonomic coverage, it has a strong geographical bias and its comparability is hindered by the incompleteness of type specimens. These results should be taken into account when addressing patterns of their past diversity, evolutionary history and paleoecology.

Indexed as

biases in the fossil recordfossil recordhistoriographical revisionmarine mammalspaleobiology databasepinnipeds

Identifiers

PMID31827869
PMCPMC6894555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.