Cover Image

PAPERBACK
$19.95



View/Hide Left Panel

of the angiosperms. His use of the fossil record of angiosperms as a model in his evolutionary synthesis was hampered because in the 1940s the paradigm in angiosperm paleobotany was to match fossils, especially leaves, to extant genera (Dilcher, 1974). The successes of the angiosperm paleobotanists (e.g., D. Axelrod, H. Becker, E. W. Berry, R. Brown, R. Chaney, and H. MacGinitie, and many others for 100 years before them) were judged by their ability to match a high percentage of fossils to living genera (Fig. 1). Once the identifications were made to living genera, their focus was on questions of phytogeography and paleoclimate. This meant that almost no fossil angiosperms were recognized as extinct; it was quite impossible to focus questions of plant evolution on the fossil record of the angiosperms in 1950 as George Gaylord Simpson had done with the fossil vertebrate record in his classic Tempo and Mode in Evolution in 1944 (Simpson, 1944).

FIGURE 1. Selected floras published from the late 1800s to the 1960s, ranging in time from the Lower Cretaceous to the Upper Eocene (Fontaine, 1889; Lesquereux, 1891; Newberry, 1898; Berry, 1924; Bell, 1957; Brown, 1962; Axelrod, 1966; MacGinitie, 1969). The open area represents percent of the species in the flora that were given extant generic names. The shaded area represents the percent of species in the flora that were given fossil generic names based on a modern genus to which they were perceived to be similar. The short fall, less than 100% for each flora, represent genera perceived to be truly extinct.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement