z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
The fossil history of palms (Arecaceae) in Africa and new records from the Late Oligocene (28–27 Mya) of north‐western Ethiopia
Author(s) -
PAN AARON D.,
JACOBS BONNIE F.,
DRANSFIELD JOHN,
BAKER WILLIAM J.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
botanical journal of the linnean society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.872
H-Index - 68
eISSN - 1095-8339
pISSN - 0024-4074
DOI - 10.1111/j.1095-8339.2006.00523.x
Subject(s) - paleogene , paleontology , neogene , macrofossil , biology , taxon , biochronology , arecaceae , palm , late miocene , cretaceous , eudicots , biostratigraphy , ecology , taxonomy (biology) , holocene , physics , structural basin , quantum mechanics
The African palm fossil record is limited but the data provide an outline of palm evolution from the Late Cretaceous through the Neogene. Pollen attributed to palms is reported from the Aptian (125–112 Mya), but the earliest unequivocal record in Africa is Campanian (83.5–70.6 Mya). Palms diversified 83.5–65.5 Mya and became widespread, although most records are from the west and north African coasts. Many taxa were shared between Africa and northern South America at that time, but a few were pantropical. Extirpations occurred throughout the Palaeogene, including a notable species turnover and decline at the Eocene–Oligocene boundary (33.9 Mya), a change that resulted in the elimination of nypoid palms from Africa. The Neogene plant macrofossil record is better sampled than the Palaeogene, although few palms are documented. Thus, the low diversity of African palms today is more likely the result of Palaeogene, rather than Neogene extinctions. Newly discovered palm fossils of leaves, petioles and flowers from the Late Oligocene (27–28 Mya) of north‐western Ethiopia document the abundance and dominance of palms in some communities at that time. The fossils represent the earliest records of the extant genera Hyphaene (Coryphoideae) and Eremospatha (Calamoideae). © 2006 The Linnean Society of London, Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society , 2006, 151 , 69–81.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here