[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: No Cretaceous rainforests?
In a message dated 6/28/02 10:53:55 AM Pacific Daylight Time, email@example.com writes:
Kirk Johnson's article in the new issue of Science about
an early Paleocene rainforest in the Denver region
contains a statement that surprised me: "no known
Cretaceous floras exhibit rainforest physiognomy" [i.e.,
features such as large leaf size, smooth leaf margins, and
elongate drip-tips on leaves to shed high amounts of
I can think of rainforests that do not show this physiognomy (and I'm sure Ben, as a Seattleite, can too...).
Or maybe I'm missing the point.