Data from: Reconstructing geographic range size dynamics from fossil data

Ecologists and paleontologists alike are increasingly using the fossil
record as a spatial data set, in particular to study the dynamics and
distribution of geographic range sizes among fossil taxa. However, no
attempts have been made to establish how accurately range sizes and
range-size dynamics can be preserved. Two fundamental questions are: Can
common paleo range-size reconstruction methods accurately reproduce known
species’ ranges from locality (i.e., point) data? And, are some
reconstruction methods more reliable than others? Here, we develop a
methodological framework for testing the accuracy of commonly used paleo
range-size reconstruction methods (maximum latitudinal range, maximum
great-circle distance, convex hull, and alpha convex hull) in different
extinction-related biogeographic scenarios. We use the current
distribution of surface water bodies as a proxy for “preservable area,” in
which to test the performance of the four methods. We find that maximum
great-circle distance and convex-hull methods most reliably capture
changes in range size at low numbers of fossil sites, whereas convex hull
performs best at predicting the distribution of “victims” and “survivors”
in hypothetical extinction scenarios. Our results suggest that
macroevolutionary and macroecological patterns in the relatively recent
past can be studied reliably using only a few fossil occurrence sites. The
accuracy of range-size reconstruction undoubtedly changes through time
with the distribution and area of fossiliferous sediments; however, our
approach provides the opportunity to systematically calibrate the quality
of the spatial fossil record in specific environments and time intervals,
and to delineate the conditions under which paleobiologists can
reconstruct paleobiogeographical, macroecological, and macroevolutionary
patterns over critical intervals in Earth history.