[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: paleoartists in general
Yes, pollen is plant species specific, which is one reason palynologist
use them in stratigraphy. The diversity of pollen is given in Litwein,
R. et al. 1998. Palynological evidence on the age of the Morrison
Formation, Western Interior, U.S. Modern Geology 22:297-319. This is
vol. 1 of the Morrison Symposium.
Kenneth Carpenter, Ph.D.
Curator of Lower Vertebrate Paleontology/
Department of Earth Sciences
Denver Museum of Nature & Science
2001 Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO 80205
for PDFs of some of my publications, as well as information of the Cedar
From: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu [mailto:owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu] On Behalf
Of Michael Habib
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: paleoartists in general
> Also, ground cover IS extensive today and there is evidence of that
> for the past as well: e.g., over 400 types of fern pollen from the
> Morrison alone. Why then, show barren ground (and this goes beyond
> just Henderson's art)?
That is quite an impressive showing of pollen diversity. Certainly, it
would seem that ground cover must have been common in many locations
(and I would actually say that Doug Henderson's illustrations depict a
great deal of ground cover in many cases, though some of his more well
known works are 'bare ground' terrain). However, I am curious how much
ground cover we should expect in some of the depositional environments
that are reconstructed. My paleobotanical knowledge is limited so I am
curious to what extent pollen diversity records are thought to correlate
with living biomass.
Also on the general note of paleobotanical records, I am curious whether
or not there is any fossil evidence for significant epiphytic biomass
during any portions of the Mesozoic. (There is, after all, at least one
epiphytic cycad living today, so perhaps the Jurassic included more such