5 Marine Vertebrate Paleontology of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains (Posters)

Thursday, 28 March 2019
8:00 AM - 12:00 PM
Carolina Ballroom


META-ANALYSIS OF FIELD-BASED FOSSIL COLLECTION METHODS

Paper number: 5-5
Program: Theme Sessions
Time: 8:00 AM – 12:00 PM


Authors


Abstract

Different methods of fossil collection (e.g., point counting from slabs, bulk sediment collection) require different levels of effort and may yield different results. Here, we conduct a meta-analysis to determine what factors influence choice of collection method. We examined articles from Palaios, Paleobiology (Pb), and Palaeogeography, Palaeoecology, Palaeoclimatology (P3). In Palaios and Pb, we examined research articles in all volumes dating since 2014. For P3, we covered only paleontology research articles from all 2018 volumes, to obtain data from approximately the same number of articles from each journal.

We focused on articles that 1) used aquatic macroinvertebrates (i.e., not terrestrial, vertebrate, plant, microbe, or microfossils); and 2) were based on fossil material (i.e., not death assemblages, living organisms, or simulations) that 3) was field-collected by the authors for the study at hand (i.e., not museum collections, databases, or literature). The topics were categorized as community paleoecology, biotic interactions, taphonomy/preservation, and “other” topics. Fossil collection method was categorized as “pickup” (hand-picked from ground or outcrop surface), slab/section (methodically counted on hard surfaces or stratigraphic sections), or bulk sediment (from volumes of disaggregated sediment).

We tabulated 703 articles, 93 of which used field-collected, fossil aquatic macroinvertebrates. Slab/section was the most common method (33%), followed by pickup (25%), then bulk sediment (23%). Some articles used more than one method. In 30% of articles, the method was not clearly described. When these “uncertain” articles were assigned a method (from context clues), the distribution changed: pickup 43%, slab/section 47%, bulk 25%.

By topic, 50% of community paleoecology papers used slab/section, followed by pickup (36%) and bulk (32%). Taphonomy/preservation was similar, with 52% slab/section, 36% pickup, but fewer bulk (24%). In biotic interactions, 50% used pickup, 36% bulk, and only 14% slab/section. “Other” papers used more slab/section (56%) and pickup (50%), with only 16% bulk.


Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 51, No. 3

doi: 10.1130/abs/2019SE-326890

© Copyright 2019 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to the author(s) of this abstract to reproduce and distribute it freely, for noncommercial purposes. Permission is hereby granted to any individual scientist to download a single copy of this electronic file and reproduce up to 20 paper copies for noncommercial purposes advancing science and education, including classroom use, providing all reproductions include the complete content shown here, including the author information. All other forms of reproduction and/or transmittal are prohibited without written permission from GSA Copyright Permissions.