ArticlePloS one2024
Quantifying the effects of exceptional fossil preservation on the global availability of phylogenetic data in deep time.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A new Cretaceous family illuminates the early evolutionary history of True Sawflies (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinoidea).Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society · 2026Article
- New monstersaur specimens from the Kaiparowits Formation of Utah reveal unexpected richness of large-bodied lizards in Late Cretaceous North America.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- The spatiotemporal distribution of Mesozoic dinosaur diversity.Biology letters · 2024Review
- Compound osteoderms preserved in amber reveal the oldest known skink.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Thalattosauria in time and space: a review of thalattosaur spatiotemporal occurrences, presumed evolutionary relationships and current ecological hypotheses.Swiss journal of palaeontology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fossil deposits with exceptional preservation ("lagerstätten") provide important details not typically preserved in the fossil record, such that they hold an outsized influence on our understanding of biodiversity and evolution. In particular, the potential bias imparted by this so-called "lagerstätten effect" remains a critical, but underexplored aspect of reconstructing evolutionary relationships. Here, we quantify the amount of phylogenetic information available in the global fossil records of 1,327 species of non-avian theropod dinosaurs, Mesozoic birds, and fossil squamates (e.g., lizards, snakes, mosasaurs), and then compare the influence of lagerstätten deposits on phylogenetic information content and taxon selection in phylogenetic analyses to other fossil-bearing deposits. We find that groups that preserve a high amount of phylogenetic information in their global fossil record (e.g., non-avian theropods) are less vulnerable to a "lagerstätten effect" that leads to disproportionate representation of fossil taxa from one geologic unit in an evolutionary tree. Additionally, for each taxonomic group, we find comparable amounts of phylogenetic information in lagerstätten deposits, even though corresponding morphological character datasets vary greatly. Finally, we unexpectedly find that ancient sand dune deposits of the Late Cretaceous Gobi Desert of Mongolia and China exert an anomalously large influence on the phylogenetic information available in the squamate fossil record, suggesting a "lagerstätten effect" can be present in units not traditionally considered lagerstätten. These results offer a phylogenetics-based lens through which to examine the effects of exceptional fossil preservation on biological patterns through time and space, and invites further quantification of evolutionary information in the rock record.
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.