[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, bh480@scn.org 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
rainfall].


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.

--Nick P.