Suppr超能文献

采集方法对古生态学数据集的影响:美国德克萨斯州宾夕法尼亚期 Finis 页岩原地采集与地表采集化石样本的对比。

The influence of collection method on paleoecological datasets: In-place versus surface-collected fossil samples in the Pennsylvanian Finis Shale, Texas, USA.

机构信息

Department of Geosciences & Natural Resources, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, North Carolina, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Feb 11;15(2):e0228944. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228944. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

There are multiple common methods for collecting fossil material in the field for paleoecological analyses, so it is important to determine if and how different methods may affect the similarities and differences among taxonomic samples. Here, we evaluate the influence of two fossil collection field methods (stratigraphically in-place bulk-sediment versus picking up weathered-out fossils from the ground surface) on paleoecological results, using the Pennsylvanian marine invertebrate assemblages of the Finis Shale in Texas. Based on an informal review of recent paleoecology papers, we observed that the lithology of the study material and the nature of the research question correspond to choice of field collection protocols; however, collection protocols are not always clearly explained or justified in the text of the papers. For the present case study, we collected stratigraphically equivalent samples from three outcrops using both the surface pick-up and in-place bulk sediment methods. We found a difference in the abundance and composition of paleocommunities between these two collection methods. Evidence to support this includes the significant differences between samples using PERMANOVA (p < 0.001), the clear separation in ordination space of samples clustered by sampling method, the significantly higher richness in the surface samples (p < 0.001), and the considerable variation in relative abundances of various taxa and taxonomic groups. Richness and evenness were higher among the surface-collected samples, possibly due to collector bias, weathering artifacts, or spatial and temporal variability. Paleontologists strive to do the best science possible with the material available. Often, paleoecological research methods are limited by time, funding, or the nature of the material. In such cases, we recommend examining both collection methods, even if for only a fraction of the sampling. If only one method is possible, we recommend the use in-place, bulk-collected samples.

摘要

有多种常见的方法可用于在野外采集化石材料,以进行古生态学分析,因此,确定不同的方法是否以及如何影响分类样本之间的相似性和差异性非常重要。在这里,我们使用德克萨斯州菲尼斯页岩的宾夕法尼亚纪海洋无脊椎动物组合来评估两种化石野外采集方法(地层原地批量采集与从地面采集风化化石)对古生态学结果的影响。基于对近期古生态学论文的非正式回顾,我们观察到研究材料的岩性和研究问题的性质对应于野外采集协议的选择;然而,在论文的正文中,采集协议并不总是被明确解释或证明是合理的。在本案例研究中,我们使用原地批量采集和从地面采集两种方法,从三个露头采集了地层等效的样本。我们发现这两种采集方法得到的古群落的丰度和组成存在差异。支持这一结果的证据包括:PERMANOVA 分析(p<0.001)之间存在显著差异;根据采样方法聚类的样本在排序空间中明显分离;表面样本的丰富度显著更高(p<0.001);以及各种分类群和分类群的相对丰度存在较大差异。表面采集样本的丰富度和均匀度更高,这可能是由于采集者的偏见、风化文物或空间和时间的变异性所致。古生物学家努力用现有的材料尽可能地进行最好的科学研究。通常,古生态学研究方法受到时间、资金或材料性质的限制。在这种情况下,我们建议同时检查两种采集方法,即使只对部分样本进行检查。如果只能采用一种方法,我们建议使用原地批量采集的样本。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8c40/7012410/1e555bf59d1e/pone.0228944.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验