Why the fossil record may be misleading when explaining mass extinctions

a ff z
Image credit: Tarique Sani

Paleontologists are able to determine when a species went extinct based on its last appearance in theĀ fossil record. Any variations in the fossil record had been assumed to be down to either random chance, or the incompleteness of that record.

However, previous computer models have suggested that this might not be the case, and that a species’ ecological preference – what kind of habitat it prospers in – could affect their placement in the fossil record, not because they died off, but becauseĀ climatic change had altered their environment.

To put this to the test, researchers from the Florida Museum of Natural History, writing inĀ Proceedings of the Royal Society B,Ā analyzed 130-foot (39.6-meter) deep cores drilled in Po Plain, which is a large river valley that runs into the Adriatic Sea off the east coast of Italy. The scientists, led by Michal Kowalewski and Rafal Nawrot, searched for mollusks.

…

Because the various species of mollusk have not gone extinct yet, their fossils should be found in the uppermost layers of the cores, where they would have been recently deposited. However, they were instead found to be more widely spread throughout the cores, giving the impression that there had been multiple mass extinctions over time.

…

This was incorrect; those species of sea life still exist in the Adriatic today, but what has changed is their local environment.

Read full, original post:Ā Does the fossil record tell the true story about mass extinctions?

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-10_15_14-AM
Viewpoint—A hard look at the Fauci diaries: Do they change what we know about COVID’s origins?
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpointā€”ā€œMiracle moleculeā€ debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-12_42_58-PM
Viewpoint: Fact-checking CNN interview with RFK, Jr. underscores the depth of his disinformation delusions
Picture1
Hiroshima at 81: America’s new nuclear bomb, a buried Iranian target, and a question no one wants to ask
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-17-2026-09_50_27-AM
Viewpoint: How disease tracking and prevention has cratered under the Kennedy-Trump administration
Screenshot-2026-07-17-at-1.34.59-PM
Poll: Vaccine hesitancy soars when patients distrust health providers and turn to social media
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-07_52_00-PM
No liability for scientific due diligence: California Supreme Court rejects bizarre lawsuit faulting Gilead for fully evaluating HIV drug before release
png livestock cow cattle a
Consumer skepticism about gene-edited milk is neither fixed nor particularly high—and falls even more if it’s priced lower
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-09_31_50-AM-2
Viewpoint: Could the U.S. become dependent on China to develop critical new genetic and drug therapies?
ChatGPT-Image-Aug-4-2026-02_05_46-PM
Does Congress have the guts to successfully challenge Trump’s politicization of science funding?
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 06_26_01 PM 2
Facts & Fallacies podcast: Organic food myths make a comeback on Instagram, with Dr. Kevin Folta
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 09_08_15 AM 2
The retreat of environmental extremism: Why activist NGOs are losing favor
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 10_17_59 AM
Viewpoint: What does it mean when critics of conventional agriculture say many fruits and vegetables are ā€œlinkedā€ to pesticide poisoning?
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.