Quantifying the Extent of North American Mammal Extinction Relative to the Pre-Anthropogenic Baseline

Earth has experienced five major extinction events in the past 450 million years. Many scientists suggest we are now witnessing a sixth, driven by human impacts. However, it has been difficult to quantify the real extent of the current extinction episode, either for a given taxonomic group at the continental scale or for the worldwide biota, largely because comparisons of pre-anthropogenic and anthropogenic biodiversity baselines have been unavailable. Here, we compute those baselines for mammals of temperate North America, using a sampling-standardized rich fossil record to reconstruct species-area relationships for a series of time slices ranging from 30 million to 500 years ago. We show that shortly after humans first arrived in North America, mammalian diversity dropped to become at least 15%–42% too low compared to the “normal” diversity baseline that had existed for millions of years. While the Holocene reduction in North American mammal diversity has long been recognized qualitatively, our results provide a quantitative measure that clarifies how significant the diversity reduction actually was. If mass extinctions are defined as loss of at least 75% of species on a global scale, our data suggest that North American mammals had already progressed one-fifth to more than halfway (depending on biogeographic province) towards that benchmark, even before industrialized society began to affect them. Data currently are not available to make similar quantitative estimates for other continents, but qualitative declines in Holocene mammal diversity are also widely recognized in South America, Eurasia, and Australia. Extending our methodology to mammals in these areas, as well as to other taxa where possible, would provide a reasonable way to assess the magnitude of global extinction, the biodiversity impact of extinctions of currently threatened species, and the efficacy of conservation efforts into the future

Epochs, events and episodes: Marking the geological impact of humans

Event stratigraphy is used to help characterise the Anthropocene as a chronostratigraphic concept, based on analogous deep-time events, for which we provide a novel categorization. Events in stratigraphy are distinct from extensive, time-transgressive ‘episodes’ – such as the global, highly diachronous record of anthropogenic change, termed here an Anthropogenic Modification Episode (AME). Nested within the AME are many geologically correlatable events, the most notable being those of the Great Acceleration Event Array (GAEA). This isochronous array of anthropogenic signals represents brief, unique events evident in geological deposits, e.g.: onset of the radionuclide ‘bomb-spike’; appearance of novel organic chemicals and fuel ash particles; marked changes in patterns of sedimentary deposition, heavy metal contents and carbon/nitrogen isotopic ratios; and ecosystem changes leaving a global fossil record; all around the mid-20th century. The GAEA reflects a fundamental transition of the Earth System to a new state in which many parameters now lie beyond the range of Holocene variability. Globally near-instantaneous events can provide robust primary guides for chronostratigraphic boundaries. Given the intensity, magnitude, planetary significance and global isochroneity of the GAEA, it provides a suitable level for recognition of the base of the Anthropocene as a series/epoch

The Anthropocene is a prospective epoch/series, not a geological event

The Anthropocene defined as an epoch/series within the Geological Time Scale, and with an isochronous inception in the mid-20th century, would both utilize the rich array of stratigraphic signals associated with the Great Acceleration and align with Earth System science analysis from where the term Anthropocene originated. It would be stratigraphically robust and reflect the reality that our planet has far exceeded the range of natural variability for the Holocene Epoch/Series which it would terminate. An alternative, recently advanced, time-transgressive ‘geological event’ definition would decouple the Anthropocene from its stratigraphic characterisation and association with a major planetary perturbation. We find this proposed anthropogenic ‘event’ to be primarily an interdisciplinary concept in which historical, cultural and social processes and their global environmental impacts are all flexibly interpreted within a multi-scalar framework. It is very different from a stratigraphic-methods-based Anthropocene epoch/series designation, but as an anthropogenic phenomenon, if separately defined and differently named, might be usefully complementary to it

The Impact of the Species–Area Relationship on Estimates of Paleodiversity

Estimates of paleodiversity patterns through time have relied on datasets that lump taxonomic occurrences from geographic areas of varying size per interval of time. In essence, such estimates assume that the species–area effect, whereby more species are recorded from larger geographic areas, is negligible for fossil data. We tested this assumption by using the newly developed Miocene Mammal Mapping Project database of western North American fossil mammals and its associated analysis tools to empirically determine the geographic area that contributed to species diversity counts in successive temporal bins. The results indicate that a species–area effect markedly influences counts of fossil species, just as variable spatial sampling influences diversity counts on the modern landscape. Removing this bias suggests some traditionally recognized peaks in paleodiversity are just artifacts of the species–area effect while others stand out as meriting further attention. This discovery means that there is great potential for refining existing time-series estimates of paleodiversity, and for using species–area relationships to more reliably understand the magnitude and timing of such biotically important events as extinction, lineage diversification, and long-term trends in ecological structure

The Great Acceleration is real and provides a quantitative basis for the proposed Anthropocene Series/Epoch

The Anthropocene was conceptualized in 2000 to reflect the extensive impact of human activities on our planet, and subsequent detailed analyses have revealed a substantial Earth System response to these impacts beginning in the mid-20th century. Key to this understanding was the discovery of a sharp upturn in a multitude of global socio-economic indicators and Earth System trends at that time; a phenomenon termed the ‘Great Acceleration’. It coincides with massive increases in global human-consumed energy and shows the Earth System now on a trajectory far exceeding the earlier variability of the Holocene Epoch, and in some respects the entire Quaternary Period. The evaluation of geological signals similarly shows the mid-20th century as representing the most appropriate inception for the Anthropocene. A recent mathematical analysis has nonetheless challenged the significance of the original Great Acceleration data. We examine this analytical approach and reiterate the robustness of the original data in supporting the Great Acceleration, while emphasizing that intervals of rapid growth are inevitably time-limited, as recognised at the outset. Moreover, the exceptional magnitude of this growth remains undeniable, reaffirming the centrality of the Great Acceleration in justifying a formal chronostratigraphic Anthropocene at the rank of series/epoch

Response to Merritts et al. (2023): The Anthropocene is complex. Defining it is not

Merritts et al. (2023) misrepresent Paul Crutzen’s Anthropocene concept as encompassing all significant anthropogenic impacts, extending back many millennia. Crutzen's definition reflects massively enhanced, much more recent human impacts that transformed the Earth System away from the stability of Holocene conditions. His concept of an epoch (hence the ‘cene’ suffix) is more consistent with the strikingly distinct sedimentary record accumulated since the mid-20th century. Waters et al. (2022) highlighted a Great Acceleration Event Array (GAEA) of stratigraphic event markers that are indeed diverse and complex but also tightly clustered around 1950 CE, allowing ultra-high resolution characterization and correlation of a clearly recognisable Anthropocene chronostratigraphic base. The ‘Anthropocene event’ offered by Merritts et al., following Gibbard et al. (2021, 2022), is a highly nuanced concept that obfuscates the transformative human impact of the chronostratigraphic Anthropocene. Waters et al. (2022) restricted the meaning of the term ‘event’ in geology to conform with usual Quaternary practice and improve its utility. They simultaneously recognized an evidence-based Anthropogenic Modification Episode that is more explicitly defined than the highly interpretive interdisciplinary ‘Anthropocene event’ of Gibbard et al. (2021, 2022). The advance of science is best served through clearly developed concepts supported by tightly circumscribed terminology; indeed, improvements to stratigraphy over recent decades have been achieved through increasingly precise definitions, especially for chronostratigraphic units, and not by retaining vague terminology

The geological cycle of plastics and their use as a stratigraphic indicator of the Anthropocene

The rise of plastics since the mid-20th century, both as a material element of modern life and as a growing environmental pollutant, has been widely described. Their distribution in both the terrestrial and marine realms suggests that they are a key geological indicator of the Anthropocene, as a distinctive stratal component. Most immediately evident in terrestrial deposits, they are clearly becoming widespread in marine sedimentary deposits in both shallow- and deep-water settings. They are abundant and widespread as macroscopic fragments and virtually ubiquitous as microplastic particles; these are dispersed by both physical and biological processes, not least via the food chain and the ‘faecal express’ route from surface to sea floor. Plastics are already widely dispersed in sedimentary deposits, and their amount seems likely to grow several-fold over the next few decades. They will continue to be input into the sedimentary cycle over coming millennia as temporary stores – landfill sites – are eroded. Plastics already enable fine time resolution within Anthropocene deposits via the development of their different types and via the artefacts (‘technofossils’) they are moulded into, and many of these may have long-term preservation potential when buried in strata

The Searsville Lake Site (California, USA) as a candidate Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point for the Anthropocene Series

Cores from Searsville Lake within Stanford University’s Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve, California, USA, are examined to identify a potential GSSP for the Anthropocene: core JRBP2018-VC01B (944.5 cm-long) and tightly correlated JRBP2018-VC01A (852.5 cm-long). Spanning from 1900 CE ± 3 years to 2018 CE, a secure chronology resolved to the sub-annual level allows detailed exploration of the Holocene-Anthropocene transition. We identify the primary GSSP marker as first appearance of 239,240Pu (372–374 cm) in JRBP2018-VC01B and designate the GSSP depth as the distinct boundary between wet and dry season at 366 cm (6 cm above the first sample containing 239,240Pu) and corresponding to October-December 1948 CE. This is consistent with a lag of 1–2 years between ejection of 239,240Pu into the atmosphere and deposition. Auxiliary markers include: first appearance of 137Cs in 1958; late 20th-century decreases in δ15N; late 20th-century elevation in SCPs, Hg, Pb, and other heavy metals; and changes in abundance and presence of ostracod, algae, rotifer, and protozoan microfossils. Fossil pollen document anthropogenic landscape changes related to logging and agriculture. As part of a major university, the Searsville site has long been used for research and education, serves users locally to internationally, and is protected yet accessible for future studies and communication about the Anthropocene. PLAIN WORD SUMMARY: The Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) for the proposed Anthropocene Series/Epoch is suggested to lie in sediments accumulated over the last ~120 years in Searsville Lake, Woodside, California, USA. The site fulfills all of the ideal criteria for defining and placing a GSSP. In addition, the Searsville site is particularly appropriate to mark the onset of the Anthropocene, because it was anthropogenic activities–the damming of a watershed–that created a geologic record that now preserves the very signals that can be used to recognize the Anthropocene worldwide

The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene

Human activity is leaving a pervasive and persistent signature on Earth. Vigorous debate continues about whether this warrants recognition as a new geologic time unit known as the Anthropocene. We review anthropogenic markers of functional changes in the Earth system through the stratigraphic record. The appearance of manufactured materials in sediments − including aluminum, plastics and concrete − coincides with global spikes in fallout radionuclides and particulates from fossil-fuel combustion. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus cycles have been substantially modified over the last century. Rates of sea-level rise, and the extent of human perturbation of the climate system, exceed Late Holocene changes. Biotic changes include species invasions worldwide and accelerating rates of extinction. These combined signals render the Anthropocene stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene and earlier epochs

Colonization of the Americas, 'Little Ice Age' climate, and bomb-produced carbon: their role in defining the Anthropocene

A recently published analysis by Lewis and Maslin (Lewis SL and Maslin MA (2015) Defining the Anthropocene. Nature 519: 171–180) has identified two new potential horizons for the Holocene−Anthropocene boundary: 1610 (associated with European colonization of the Americas), or 1964 (the peak of the excess radiocarbon signal arising from atom bomb tests). We discuss both of these novel suggestions, and consider that there is insufficient stratigraphic basis for the former, whereas placing the latter at the peak of the signal rather than at its inception does not follow normal stratigraphical practice. Wherever the boundary is eventually placed, it should be optimized to reflect stratigraphical evidence with the least possible ambiguity