I’m no paleontologist but it seems like our total knowledge of certain eras comes from a few river banks collapsing on whatever lived there. That’s not going to be a great representation of all life at that time.
Imagine you are trying to infer the structure of a tree by only know the positions of its leaves. Now imagine doing the same, but only 1/100 of the leaves are above ground.
It’s only a small fraction living organisms which remain alive today. Most species and families which have ever been are extinct. And most are so old we could never do DNA work on them. Among the living, we can do some good DNA work and that’s made a huge difference. But then go back far enough and there are just massive nonconformities.
what? Sorry, what does it mean? I cheated my way trough computer science - archeology / biology are not my expertise.
I think it means we don’t know what the ancestors of those plants are/what they evolved from. They just kinda showed up in the fossil record.
Which, tbf, it’s a miracle enough of the fossil record exists as is. I’m sure there was a LOT that was lost to the sands of time
Iirc it’s reckoned most species likely aren’t known about because most places weren’t conducive to fossilisation
ehh, modern biology doesn’t construct evolutionary history from fossil records, but from genetic similarities.
It’s impossible to compare genetics from fossils and we can’t study ancient long dead species besides fossil records for the most part.
yeah that’s not what i meant. phylogenetic trees are constructed by considering the genetics of recent (living) species, not from fossils.
And this post is about ancestors of ferns which are unknown so I’m not sure what are you suggesting
He’s Fern’s uncle.
Ah, my bad
Relatively few lifeforms end up fossilizing and then some of those fossils later get eroded. The percentage that make it to the present is low.
I’m no paleontologist but it seems like our total knowledge of certain eras comes from a few river banks collapsing on whatever lived there. That’s not going to be a great representation of all life at that time.
That the fossil record is incomplete
Your mom’s record is incomplete
But she’s working on it…
It means our knowledge of their ancestry cuts off at that point. Anything else is speculation without additional information.
That is exactly what the comic says but its not true, fossil records for ferns go back to the devonian several 100 million years before the Cretaceous
https://www.ontariobeneathourfeet.com/dinosaur-salad-ancient-extant-ferns
https://www.amerfernsoc.org/about-ferns
That’s why he’s so cranky in frame 4, he’s realizing his piece of shit brain lied to him again.
Imagine you are trying to infer the structure of a tree by only know the positions of its leaves. Now imagine doing the same, but only 1/100 of the leaves are above ground.
It’s only a small fraction living organisms which remain alive today. Most species and families which have ever been are extinct. And most are so old we could never do DNA work on them. Among the living, we can do some good DNA work and that’s made a huge difference. But then go back far enough and there are just massive nonconformities.