ReviewNational science review2024
The great catastrophe: causes of the Permo-Triassic marine mass extinction.
Review in National science review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coupled Hg isotope dynamics reveal eruption pulses across the Permian-Triassic mass extinction.Nature communications · 2026Article
- The timing and nature of marine ecosystem recovery following the Permian-Triassic mass extinction.npj biodiversity · 2026Review
- Deep-time mass extinction helps understand the current biotic crisis.National science review · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The marine losses during the Permo-Triassic mass extinction were the worst ever experienced. All groups were badly affected, especially amongst the benthos (e.g. brachiopods, corals, bryozoans, foraminifers, ostracods). Planktonic populations underwent a fundamental change with eukaryotic algae being replaced by nitrogen-fixing bacteria, green-sulphur bacteria, sulphate-reducing bacteria and prasinophytes. Detailed studies of boundary sections, especially those in South China, have resolved the crisis to a ∼55 kyr interval straddling the Permo-Triassic boundary. Many of the losses occur at the beginning and end of this interval painting a picture of a two-phase extinction. Improved knowledge of the extinction has been supported by numerous geochemical studies that allow diverse proposed extinction mechanisms to be studied. A transition from oxygenated to anoxic-euxinic conditions is seen in most sections globally, although the intensity and timing shows regional variability. Decreased ocean ventilation coincides with rapidly rising temperatures and many extinction scenarios attribute the losses to both anoxia and high temperatures. Other kill mechanisms include ocean acidification for which there is conflicting support from geochemical proxies and, even less likely, siltation (burial under a massive influx of terrigenous sediment) which lacks substantive sedimentological evidence. The ultimate driver of the catastrophic changes at the end of the Permian was likely Siberian Trap eruptions and their associated carbon dioxide emissions with consequences such as warming, ocean stagnation and acidification. Volcanic winter episodes stemming from Siberian volcanism have also been linked to the crisis, but the short-term nature of these episodes (<decades) and the overwhelming evidence for rapid warming during the crisis makes this an unlikely cause. Finally, whilst the extinction is well studied in equatorial latitudes, a different history is found in northern Boreal latitudes including an earlier crisis which merits further study in order to fully understand the course and cause of the Permo-Triassic extinctions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.