Search the Community

I have the opportunity to do one of these formations next year. What are the pros and cons to each?

Dear fellow forum goers, As of late, I have come across an interesting timetable on Wikipedia detailing the timeline of the far future based on predictions from fields such as astrophysics, geology, and evolutionary biology. At the 250-300 million years from now marker the article reads: "All the continents on Earth may fuse into a supercontinent. Three potential arrangements of this configuration have been dubbed Amasia, Novopangaea, and Pangaea Ultima.[40][56] This will likely result in a glacial period, lowering sea-levels and increasing oxygen levels, further lowering global temperatures". Later on, it posits that at the 400-500 million years from now mark that "The supercontinent (Pangaea Ultima, Novopangaea, or Amasia) will likely have rifted apart.[56] This will likely result in higher global temperatures, similar to the Cretaceous period.[58]" This is pretty interesting to me and I was pondering whether creatures similar to dinosaurs would evolve to fill the new evolutionary niches produced by this environment. It would be satisfying in some way for there to be a cyclic resurgence of forms of organisms on Earth based on the geological cycles that the Earth undergoes. Do you think such creatures akin to dinosaurs would reign again?

The fossil record suggests specialist species are most vulnerable to dramatic ecological shifts, whether geologic and climatic in nature. Photo by Arjen de Ruiter/Shutterstock BOULDER, Colo., Sept. 27 (UPI) -- Which species are worth saving? Which species will survive global warming? Which will thrive? Conservationists are facing hard questions and tough decisions as they anticipate a warming climate. Some scientists are looking to the fossil record for help. Recently, a team of paleontologists led by Alycia Stigall set out to mine the fossil record for clues as to the future challenges of conservation. Specifically, researchers wanted to know which species are most vulnerable to environmental shifts. To find out, scientists studied the effects of significant climatic and geologic shifts on biodiversity throughout evolutionary history. Their analysis showed ecological changes mostly benefit generalist species, while hurting specialists. Generalists are most successful among large landmasses, where they can spread out across a variety of environs and take advantage of an array of natural resources. Specialists thrive within regions with highly differentiated habitats. Through geologic time, the division of landmasses into smaller islands promoted specialization, while the adjoining of islands into larger landmasses benefited generalists. Because specialists occupy small ecological niches, competing for slices of a relatively small resource pie, their presence corresponds with more rapid speciation and greater biodiversity. The fossil record suggests shifts enabling the territorial expansion of generalists coincided with a reduction in speciation and biodiversity. Given the opportunity, generalists invade the niches of specialists and diminish biodiversity. Naturally, generalists make for the most destructive invasive species. Unfortunately, ecologists expect global warming to encourage the spread of invasive species. The new findings -- recently presented at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America -- suggest specialist species will need the most help surviving climate change. "Places that are tropical and stable, regions that have similar climate year-round, will likely be impacted the most by invasive species," Stigall explained in a news release. "Data sets for modern species are usually limited in terms of the number of species and years available when talking about biodiversity, so hopefully we can use the fossil record to expand our knowledge and use the past to make informed decisions about the future." http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2016/09/27/Fossils-are-informing-the-future-of-conservation/9631475010661/?spt=su&or=btn_fb