Glosspoteris?

We had a discussion about the origins and classification of the Glossopteridales. The debate was whether they belonged to the Gymnosperm group or to the Pteridosperm group of plants. The web sites below show that there is a difference of opinion. You will find more references to their Pteridosperm affinities (based on the fern-like sporophyte structures on the leaves) than to their Gymnosperm affinities (based on broader characterisitcs such as overall form and structure of the bole (trunk). The distinction is beyond the level of the class, but does serve to illustrate the confusion that can arise with fossil plants of uncertain origin and with characteristics that do not fit neatly within existing classification schemes.

Brittanica:

Long considered a fern after its discovery in 1824, it was later assigned to the gymnosperms. It is regarded by some authorities as being close to the ancestral angiosperm, or flowering plant. Certain poorly preserved reproductive structures associated with the leaves may in fact be the seed-bearing capsules of Glossopteris. Glossopteris is the key plant in a fossil assemblage called the Glossopteris flora, which also includes several related fossil genera (e.g., Lidgettonia and Gangamopteris) in Late Paleozoic rocks of South Africa, India, Australia, and South America.

Wikipedia 

Long considered a fern after its discovery in 1824, it was later assigned to the gymnosperms. The genus is placed in the division Pteridospermatophyta. In reality, many of the plant groups included within this division are only distantly related to one another.

University of Berkeley 

The reproductive structures of glossopterids are as unusual as the foliage leaves. They appear to have been borne on leaves as in other pteridosperms“. Poor preservation has led to much controversy over their structure and their arrangement on living plants from which they came. At least one point has become clear: pollen and seeds were produced in different organs, attached to separate leaves, though the specifics of the organs themselves are not as clearly settled. Pollen organs have been described as anything from a modified leaf bearing stalked pollen sacs to cone-like clusters.

Week Nine

Introduction to Plants

This week we are going to look at modern plants, plant reproduction and ecology before looking at the geological evolution of plants and plant fossils next week. You can find the PowerPoint for this week by clicking on the title of this blog.

The origin and early evolution of plants

You will probably find this article hard to follow until we have gone over some of the material to be covered in class. This is an article by Paul Kenrick and Peter Crane that was published 10 years ago in the Journal Nature. Lots has happened over the last 10 years, but this is still a good introductory paper. Do not expect to understand every biological term that you come across in the paper, rather focus on the main themes.

The origin and early evolution of plants on land

Devonian Fossil Ferns

New Scientist Article

Biomarkers

This is an interesting article from the UK Science Magazine, New Scientist. It looks at the use of biomarkers or chemical fossils to tell us about the nature of the biosphere when there are few if any body fossils to help. You will see that this casts light on what we discussed in class and also on the nature of some of the “Big 5” mass extinctions that we will discuss in class.

The article makes a number of very good points and one that impresses me most is that it is good for us to remember that complex metazoans represent only a fraction of the total Biomass of the Earth and that microorganisms, including the archaebacteria and eubacteria still really rule the earth and could easily do so again in the future. “Big” life is very vulnerable and poorly adapted for significant environmental change as we shall see in future classes.

YouTube

Having broken the taboo of Wikipedia, lets make it even more iconoclastic and move on to YouTube. These is a lot of material on YouTube in the field of evolution and you can all look for yourselves if you want to explore further. Some is good science. Some is overtly atheistic and much is rooted in fundamentalist creationist theology. A good test for how you are getting on in this course will be how well you are able to critically analyze some of these vignettes, and make comment on where they depart from scientific observation and reasoning, and venture into speculation and conjecture

This is a link to some good videos on YouTube

This series of around 1 hour is presented by John Maynard Smith


Wikipedia

I hear faculty criticize Wikipedia all the time. I have to disagree. It is an excellent first stop on the way to understanding and researching topics in Earth Sciences. Students should feel free to use it, but not to reference it too many times in their papers. For this, they need to try to get closer to some original sources, many of which are freely available online through the library, and others are referenced at the end of Wikipedia articles. I encourage all students to take time and look at the Discussion Tab next to the article tab. This will let you know if the subject or any of the entries are at all controversial. Britannica is also available free to students online through the library and this is also a good option for a “first look”. Beyond encyclopedias, students should just check the library for texts on paleontology and especially Netlibrary.