The effects of taxonomic standardization on sampling-standardized estimates of historical diversity.

Abstract

Occurrence-based databases such as the Palaeobiology database (PBDB) provide means of accommodating the heterogeneities of the fossil record when evaluating historical diversity patterns. Although palaeontologists have given ample attention to the effects of taxonomic practice on diversity patterns derived from synoptic databases (those using first and last appearances of taxa), workers have not examined the effects of taxonomic error on occurrence-based diversity studies. Here, we contrast diversity patterns and diversity dynamics between raw data and taxonomically vetted data in the PBDB to evaluate the effects of taxonomic errors. We examine three groups: Palaeozoic gastropods, Jurassic bivalves and Cenozoic bivalves. We contrast genus-level diversity patterns based on: (i) all occurrences assigned to a genus (i.e. both species records and records identifying only the genus), (ii) only occurrences for which a species is identified, and (iii) only occurrences for which a species is identified, but after vetting the genus to which the species is assigned. Extensive generic reassignments elevate origination and extinction rates within Palaeozoic gastropods and origination rates within Cenozoic bivalves. However, vetting increases generic richness markedly only for Cenozoic bivalves, and even then the increase is less than 10%. Moreover, the patterns of standing generic richness are highly similar under all three data treatments. Unless our results are unusual, taxonomic standardization can elevate diversity dynamics in some cases, but it will not greatly change inferred richness over time.