Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40078672›Full record

ReviewCambridge prisms. Extinction2023

Selectivity of mass extinctions: Patterns, processes, and future directions.

Jonathan L Payne, Jood A Al Aswad, Curtis Deutsch, Pedro M Monarrez, Justin L Penn, Pulkit Singh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cambridge prisms. Extinction, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Jonathan L PayneDepartment of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9601-3310
Jood A Al AswadDepartment of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4360-7665
Curtis DeutschDepartment of Geosciences, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3923-0797
Pedro M MonarrezDepartment of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4221-0693
Justin L PennDepartment of Geosciences, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1352-7410
Pulkit SinghDepartment of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8588-5650

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central question in the study of mass extinction is whether these events simply intensify background extinction processes and patterns versus change the driving mechanisms and associated patterns of selectivity. Over the past two decades, aided by the development of new fossil occurrence databases, selectivity patterns associated with mass extinction have become increasingly well quantified and their differences from background patterns established. In general, differences in geographic range matter less during mass extinction than during background intervals, while differences in respiratory and circulatory anatomy that may correlate with tolerance to rapid change in oxygen availability, temperature, and pH show greater evidence of selectivity during mass extinction. The recent expansion of physiological experiments on living representatives of diverse clades and the development of simple, quantitative theories linking temperature and oxygen availability to the extent of viable habitat in the oceans have enabled the use of Earth system models to link geochemical proxy constraints on environmental change with quantitative predictions of the amount and biogeography of habitat loss. Early indications are that the interaction between physiological traits and environmental change can explain substantial proportions of observed extinction selectivity for at least some mass extinction events. A remaining challenge is quantifying the effects of primary extinction resulting from the limits of physiological tolerance versus secondary extinction resulting from the loss of taxa on which a given species depended ecologically. The calibration of physiology-based models to past extinction events will enhance their value in prediction and mitigation efforts related to the current biodiversity crisis.

Indexed as

biodiversityclimateecologyextinctionPhysiology

Identifiers

PMID40078672
PMCPMC11895734

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.