Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cope’s Rule and the Dynamics of Body Mass estimates were based on published lower
first molar (m1) measurements, which have
Evolution in North American Fossil Mammals been related precisely to body mass in living
mammals (13–17). Data were available for
John Alroy 1534 species, represented by 15,281 mea-
sured specimens from 2875 fossil popula-
Body mass estimates for 1534 North American fossil mammal species show that new tions. The data encompass those of some
species are on average 9.1% larger than older species in the same genera. This within- earlier studies (3, 6, 7, 11) but are at least an
lineage effect is not a sampling bias. It persists throughout the Cenozoic, accounting for order of magnitude more plentiful.
the gradual overall increase in average mass (Cope’s rule). The effect is stronger for larger The appearance dates were based on a
mammals, being near zero for small mammals. This variation partially explains the recent time-scale analysis (18, 19) of a com-
unwavering lower size limit and the gradually expanding mid-sized gap, but not the prehensive faunal database for North
sudden large increase in the upper size limit, at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary. American fossil mammals (18, 20, 21).
These data include 4015 taxonomic lists for
individual fossil localities, which have been
standardized taxonomically by referring to a
Shortly after Cope described the first im- robust phylogenetic method. But, as dis- companion database that flags 2692 invalid
portant Paleocene faunas from North cussed below, it is highly conservative, sim- species names and 1197 invalid genus-spe-
America, he realized that the average size of ilar to more sophisticated methods that are cies combinations. The corrected lists doc-
mammals has increased dramatically during widely accepted, and based on seemingly ument occurrences of 3181 valid species.
the Cenozoic (1). He attributed this pattern uncontroversial assumptions. Furthermore, Instead of using the traditional system of
to a tendency for new groups to evolve at a specially designed bootstrapping test North American land mammal ages, I con-
small sizes, combined with a persistent in- shows that the main result could not have verted the raw data directly into numerical
nate drive toward larger size. The idea that been obtained unless the species-to-species age-range estimates by subjecting the lists
evolutionary increases in body size are com- comparisons did contain a large amount of to multivariate ordination and calibrated
mon has been recast in more Darwinian phylogenetic signal. the results to numerical time using 152
terms and termed “Cope’s rule.” Despite a Studying body mass trends requires not independent estimates of geochronological
long history of research (2), most modern just an approximate phylogeny but both age (21).
studies have found little evidence to sup- robust mass estimates and precise dates of For each new species, one potential an-
port this rule (3–5), dismissed it as context- first and last appearance (Fig. 1). The mass cestor was selected from the other species in
dependent (6), or explained it with the the same genus that appeared before it did.
statistical argument that means will rise If some of these older species were still
passively as a group founded by small spe- extant at this time, one was selected at
cies diffuses through a bounded morpho- random; if not, then the older species that
space (7–12). Even actively driven trends last went extinct was selected. Like several
have been attributed to convergence on an new methods that incorporate temporal in-
optimal body size, not to a general tendency formation into phylogenetics (22), this pro-
toward size increase (7, 8). Here I show that cedure tends to minimize the number of
there is an active within-lineage trend implied ghost lineages. In order to test for
in the fossil record of North American trends, the difference in log body mass was
mammals that is consistent with Cope’s computed for each older-younger species
prediction. pair. This is similar to the widely used phy-
Earlier studies of Cope’s rule have fo- logenetic contrast procedure (23), in which
cused on short-term trends (3, 5, 8), ana- measured characters are transformed into
lyzed small sets of species (3, 4, 6, 8), dis- differences between putative sister species.
covered patterns to be sampling biases (9), Admittedly, the proxy ancestor method
or failed to make direct comparisons of does not directly examine character data
potential ancestor-descendant species pairs and therefore is oversimplistic and error
(5, 10, 11). However, direct comparisons prone. However, its assumptions are justi-
Fig. 1. Temporal distribution of Cenozoic mam-
make it possible to distinguish within-lin- fied. First, because the mammalian fossil
malian species across the body mass spectrum.
eage processes (for example, selection) from Age ranges were based on a multivariate ordina-
record is well sampled, ancestor-descendant
among-lineage processes (for example, dif- tion of faunal lists (18–21). Mass estimates were species should be observed with great fre-
ferential extinction or origination), two fac- computed with the use of published regression quency regardless of the assumed evolution-
tors that have been conflated in earlier coefficients for mass against m1 length 3 width ary model (24). Second, there is a correla-
analyses of the overall size ranges of indi- [Carnivora, Insectivora, Primates, and Rodentia tion of age rank and clade rank in many
vidual clades (5) or of clade-subclade pairs (13)] or against m1 length [Artiodactyla and Peris- mammalian groups (25): The relative ages
(11). sodactyla (14)]. Coefficients for Primates were of fossil species do correspond with the
I analyzed species ranging in age from also used for Plesiadapiformes (15); coefficients relative sequences of evolutionary splitting
Campanian (late Cretaceous) to late Pleis- for Carnivora were also used for Mesonychia (16). implied by phylogenies. Third, errors in
Proboscidean m1’s are rarely described, and their
tocene by using generic assignment and rel- identifying ancestor-descendant pairs will
lower cheek teeth all are relatively large; mass
ative age as indicators of potential ancestor- estimates based on m2 area measurements and push the average size difference toward zero,
descendant relationships. This is not a very the all-mammal regression for combined p4-m2 which should obscure anything less than
area agreed with earlier literature (17). The all- the strongest within-lineage trends. There
Department of Paleobiology, Smithsonian Institution, mammal m1 area regression was used for all re- are many possible errors: Older species
MRC 121, Washington, DC 20560, USA. maining mammals. might be closely related but not directly