New World Pleistocene Extinctions
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "New_World_Pleistocene_Extinctions".

The Quaternary epoch saw the extinctions of numerous predominantly larger species, many of which occurred during the transition to the Holocene epoch in what is termed the Holocene extinction event. Among the main causes hypothesized by paleontologists are the spread of disease, natural climate change, and overkill by humans, which appeared during this epoch. A variant of this last possibility is the second-order predation hypothesis, which focuses more on the indirect damage caused by overcompetition with nonhuman predators.

content

Contents

The Pleistocene or Ice Age extinction event

The Ice Age extinction event is characterised by the extinction of many large mammals weighing more than 40 kg. In North America around 33 of 45 genera of large mammals became extinct, in South America 46 of 58, in Australia 15 of 16, in Europe 7 of 23, and in Subsaharan Africa only 2 of 44. The South American extinction witnessed the aftermath of the Great American Interchange. Only in South America and Australia did the extinction occur at family taxonomic levels or higher.

There are two main hypotheses concerning the Pleistocene extinction:

  • The animals died off due to climate change: the retreat of the polar ice cap.
  • The animals were exterminated by humans: the "prehistoric overkill hypothesis" (Martin, 1967).

There are some inconsistencies between the current available data and the prehistoric overkill hypothesis. For instance, there are ambiguities around the timing of sudden extinctions of marsupial Australian megafauna. Biologists note that comparable extinctions have not occurred in Africa, where the fauna evolved with hominids. Post-glacial megafaunal extinctions in Africa have been spaced over a longer interval.

Evidence supporting the prehistoric overkill hypothesis includes the persistence of certain island megafauna for several millennia past the disappearance of their continental cousins. The giant sloth survived on Cuba, Haiti, and Puerto Rico long after North American sloths were extinct. The disappearance of the island species coincides with the habitation of these islands by humans. Similarly the disappearance of woolly mammoths on the remote Wrangel Island did not occur until 7,000 years after their mainland extinction.

An alternative to the theory of human responsibility is Alexander Tollmann's bolide theory, a more controversial hypothesis which claims that the Holocene was initiated by an extinction event caused by bolide impacts.

Major megafaunal extinctions

Europe
The Woolly Mammoth became extinct around 12,000 years ago.
The Woolly Mammoth became extinct around 12,000 years ago.

(circa 15,000 years ago)

Mediterranean Islands

(by 9000 years ago)

A Collared Peccary, surviving relative of the extinct Giant Peccary.
A Collared Peccary, surviving relative of the extinct Giant Peccary.

North America
The size of a short faced bear compared with a human.
The size of a short faced bear compared with a human.

During the last 50,000 years, including the end of the last glacial period, approximately 33 genera of large mammals have become extinct in North America. Of these, 15 genera extinctions can be reliably attributed to a brief interval of 11,500 to 10,000 radiocarbon years before present, shortly following the arrival of the Clovis people in North America. Most other extinctions are poorly constrained in time, though some definitely occurred outside of this narrow interval.[1] Contrary to this, only about half a dozen small mammals disappeared during this time. Previous North American extinction pulses had occurred at the end of glaciations, but not with such an imbalance between large mammals and small ones. The megafaunal extinctions include twelve genera of edible herbivores (H), and five large, dangerous carnivores (C). North American extinctions included


The survivors are as significant as the losses: bison, moose (recent immigrants through Beringia), elk, caribou, deer, pronghorn, muskox, bighorn sheep, mountain goat. All save the pronghorns descended from Asian ancestors that had evolved human predators.[2]

The culture that has been connected with the wave of extinctions in North America is the paleo-Indian culture associated with the Clovis people (q.v.), who were thought to use spear throwers to kill large animals. The chief opposition to the "prehistoric overkill hypothesis" has been that population of humans such as the Clovis culture were too small to be ecologically significant. Other generalized evocations of climate change fail under detailed scrutiny.

Lack of tameable megafauna was perhaps one of the reasons why Amerindian civilizations evolved differently than Old World ones.[3] Critics have disputed this by arguing that llama, vicuña, and bison were domesticated[4]

South America
An illustration of Megatherium.
An illustration of Megatherium.

At the Pleistocene-Holocene transition South America, which had remained largely unglaciated except for increased mountain glaciation in the Andes, saw an extinction wave, which carried off many large species. Today there is no wild land mammal left on this continent weighing more than a modern tapir.

Australia
See also: Australian megafauna
The Diprotodon became extinct around 50,000 years ago.
The Diprotodon became extinct around 50,000 years ago.

The sudden spate of extinctions occurred earlier than in the Americas. Most evidence points to the period immediately after the first arrival of humans — thought to be a little under 50,000 years ago — but scientific argument continues as to the exact date range. The Australian extinctions included:

  • Diprotodons (giant relatives of the wombats)
  • Zygomaturus trilobus (a large marsupial herbivore)
  • Palorchestes azael (a marsupial "tapir")
  • Macropus titan (a giant kangaroo)
  • Procoptodon goliah (a hoof-toed giant short-faced kangaroo)
  • Wonambi naracoortensis (a five-to-six-metre-long Australian constrictor snake)
  • Thylacoleo carnifex (a lioness-sized marsupial carnivore)
  • Megalania prisca (a giant monitor lizard)

Some extinct megafauna, such as the bunyip-like diprotodon, may be the sources of ancient cryptozoological legends.

Younger extinctions

New Zealand

c. AD 1500, several species became extinct after Polynesian settlers arrived, including:

Pacific, including Hawaii

Recent research, based on archaeological and paleontological digs on 70 different islands, has shown that numerous species went extinct as people moved across the Pacific, starting 30,000 years ago in the Bismarck Archipelago and Solomon Islands (Steadman & Martin 2003). It is currently estimated that among the bird species of the Pacific some 2000 species have gone extinct since the arrivial of humans (Steadman 1995). Among the extinctions were:

Madagascar

Starting with the arrival of humans c. 2000 years ago, nearly all of the island's megafauna became extinct, including:

Indian Ocean Islands

Starting c. 500 years ago, a number of species became extinct upon human settlement of the islands, including:

Hunting hypothesis

The Hunting hypothesis suggests that humans hunted megaherbivores to extinction. As a result, carnivores and scavengers that depended upon those animals became extinct from lack of prey.[5][6][7] Therefore this theory holds Pleistocene humans responsible for the megafaunal extinction. One variant, often referred to as overkill, portrays humans as hunting the megafauna to extinction within a relatively short period of time. Some of the direct evidence for this includes: fossils of megafauna found in conjunction with human remains, embedded arrows and tool cut marks found in megafaunal bones, and cave paintings that depict such hunting. Biogeographical evidence is also suggestive; the areas of the world where humans evolved currently have more of their Pleistocene megafaunal diversity (the elephants and rhinos of Asia and Africa) compared to other areas such as Australia, the Americas, Madagascar and New Zealand, areas where early humans were non-existent. Based on this evidence, a picture arises of the megafauna of Asia and Africa evolving with humans, learning to be wary of them, and in other parts of the world the wildlife appearing ecologically naive and easier to hunt. This is particularly true of island fauna, which display a dangerous lack of fear of humans.

Circumstantially, the close correlation in time between the appearance of humans in an area and extinction there provides weight to this theory. This is perhaps the strongest evidence, as it is almost impossible that it could be coincidental when science has so many data points. For example, the woolly mammoth survived on islands despite worsening climatic conditions for thousands of years after the end of the last glaciation, but they died out when humans arrived around 1700 BC. The megafaunal extinctions covered a vast period of time and highly variable climatic situations. The earliest extinctions in Australia were complete approximately 30,000 BP, well before the last glacial maximum and before rises in temperature. The most recent extinction in New Zealand was complete no earlier than 500 BP and during a period of cooling. In between these extremes megafaunal extinctions have occurred progressively in such places as North America, South America and Madagascar with no climatic commonality. The only common factor that can be ascertained is the arrival of humans.[8]

Extinctions occur in relation to human artifacts regardless of climate change in Australia, but appear linked to climate change in North America
Extinctions occur in relation to human artifacts regardless of climate change in Australia, but appear linked to climate change in North America

World wide extinctions seem to follow the migration of humans and to be most severe where humans arrived most recently and least severe where humans were originally – Africa (see figure at right). This suggests that in Africa, where humans evolved, prey animals and human hunting ability evolved together, so the animals evolved avoidance techniques. As humans migrated throughout the world and became more and more proficient at hunting, they encountered animals that had evolved without the presence of humans. Lacking the fear of humans that African animals had developed, animals outside of Africa were easy prey for human hunting techniques. It also suggests that this is independent of climate change (see figure at left).

Extinction through human hunting has been supported by archaeological finds of mammoths with projectile points embedded in their skeletons, by observations of modern naïve animals allowing hunters to approach easily [9][10][11] and by computer models by Mosimann and Martin,[12]and Whittington and Dyke,[13] and most recently by Alroy.[14]

Eugene S. Hunn, President of the Society of Ethnobiology, offers a dissenting view. He points out that the birthrate in hunter-gatherer societies is generally too low, that too much effort is involved in the bringing down of a large animal by a hunting party, and that in order for hunter-gatherers to have brought about the extinction of megafauna simply by hunting them to death, an extraordinary amount of meat would have had to have been wasted.[15]. It is possible that those who advocate the overkill hypothesis simply have not considered the differences in outlook between typical forager (hunter-gatherer) cultures and the present-day industrial cultures which exist in modernized human societies; waste may be tolerated and even encouraged in the latter, but is not so much in the former. It may be noted that in relatively recent human history, for instance, the Lakota of North America were known to take only as much bison as they could use, and they used virtually the whole animal--this despite having access to herds numbering in the millions.[16] Conversely, "buffalo jumps"[17] featured indiscriminate killing of a herd.

Overkill Hypothesis

The timing of extinctions follows the "March of Man"
The timing of extinctions follows the "March of Man"

The overkill hypothesis, a variant of the hunting hypothesis, was proposed 40 years ago by Paul S. Martin, now Professor of Geosciences Emeritus at the Desert Laboratory of the University of Arizona. It sparked debate which continues today. In contrast to other hunting hypothesis it explains the megafaunal extinctions within a relatively short period of time. The most convincing evidence of his theory is that 80% of the North American large mammal species disappeared within 1000 years of the arrival of humans on the Western Hemisphere continents.

Shortcomings of the Hunting Hypothesis

The major objections to the theory are as follows:

  • In predator-prey models it is unlikely that predators could over-hunt their prey since predators need their prey as food to sustain life and reproduce.[18]. This criticism has been rejected by many ecologists because humans have the widest dietary choice of any predator and are perfectly capable of switching to alternative prey or even plant foods when any prey species becomes rare. Humans have indisputably hunted numerous species to extinction, which renders any argument that human predators can never hunt prey to extinction immediately invalid.
  • There is no evidence that megafauna other than mammoths, mastodons, and bison were hunted. (Meltzer) Overkill proponents, however, say this is due to chance and the low probability of animals with low populations to be fossilized. (Martin)
  • A small number of animals that were hunted, such as a single species of bison, did not go extinct. However the surviving bison species in North America was a recent Eurasian acquisition that arrived in the Americas at approximately the same time as humans and was thus well-adapted to human hunting pressure. In contrast at least three endemic American bison species did become extinct. Bison also are r type herbivores and reproduce rapidly compared to animals that did go extinct such as proboscideans and horses.
  • The dwarfing of animals is not explained by overkill. Numerous authors however have pointed out that dwarfing of animals is perfectly well explained by humans selectively harvesting the largest animals, and have provided proof that even within the 20th century numerous animal populations have reduced in average size due to human hunting.
  • Eurasian Pleistocene megafauna went extinct in roughly same time period despite having much longer time to adapt to hunting pressure by humans.
  • Hypothesis that Clovis culture were first humans to arrive in New World has been disputed recently. (See Models of migration to the New World)

Climate change hypotheses

At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, when scientists first realized that there had been glacial and interglacial ages, and that they were somehow associated with the prevalence or disappearance of certain animals, they surmised that the termination of the Pleistocene ice age might be an explanation for the extinctions.

Critics object that since there were multiple Ice Ages in the evolutionary history of many of the megafauna, it is rather implausible that only after the last glacial would there be such extinctions.

Some evidence weighs against this theory as applied to Australia. It has been shown that the prevailing climate at the time of extinction (40,000–50,000 BP) was similar to that of today, and that the extinct animals were strongly adapted to an arid climate. The evidence indicates that all of the extinctions took place in the same short time period, which was the time when humans entered the landscape. The main mechanism for extinction was likely fire (started by humans) in a then much less fire-adapted landscape. Isotopic evidence shows sudden changes in the diet of surviving species, which could correspond to the stress they experienced before extinction.[19][20][21]

Increased temperature

The most obvious change associated with the termination of an ice age is the increase in temperature. Between 15,000 BP and 10,000 BP, a 6°C increase in global mean annual temperatures occurred. This was generally thought to be the cause of the extinctions.

According to this hypothesis, a temperature increase sufficient to melt the Wisconsin ice sheet could have placed enough thermal stress on cold-adapted mammals to cause them to die. Their heavy fur, which helps conserve body heat in the glacial cold, might have prevented the dumping of excess heat, causing the mammals to die of heat exhaustion. Large mammals, with their reduced surface area-to-volume ratio, would have fared worse than small mammals.

Shortcomings of the Temperature Hypothesis

More recent research has demonstrated that the annual mean temperature of the current interglacial that we have seen for the last 10,000 years is no higher than that of previous interglacials, so the same large mammals survived similar temperature increases. Therefore warmer temperature alone is not a sufficient explanation.[22][23][24][25][26][27]

In addition, numerous species such as mammoths survived in human-free refugia such as Wrangel Island[28] despite changes in climate. This is precisely the opposite of what would be expected if climate change were responsible. Under normal ecological assumptions island populations should be more vulnerable to extinction due to climate change because of small populations and an inability to migrate to more favorable climes.

Increased continentality affects vegetation in time or space

Other scientists have proposed that increasingly extreme weather — hotter summers and colder winters — referred to as "continentality", or related changes in rainfall caused the extinctions. The various hypotheses are outlined below.

Vegetation changes: geographic

It has been shown that vegetation changed from mixed woodland-parkland to separate prairie and woodland.[24][25][27] This may have affected the kinds of food available. If so, herbivores might not have found the plants with which they had evolved and thus would have fallen prey to the anti-herbivory toxins in the plants that remained available. Shorter growing seasons may have caused the extinction of large herbivores and the dwarfing of many others. In this case, as observed, bison and other large ruminants would have fared better than horses, elephants and other monogastrics, because ruminants are able to extract more nutrition from limited quantities of high-fiber food and better able to deal with anti-herbivory toxins.[29][30][31] So, in general, when vegetation becomes more specialized, herbivores with less diet flexibility may be less able to find the mix of vegetation they need to sustain life and reproduce within a given area.

Rainfall changes: time

Increased continentality resulted in reduced and less predictable rainfall limiting the availability of plants necessary for energy and nutrition.[32][33][34] Axelrod[35] and Slaughter[36] have suggested that this change in rainfall restricted the amount of time favorable for reproduction. This could disproportionately harm large animals, since they have longer, more inflexible mating periods, and so may have produced young at unfavorable seasons (i.e., when sufficient food, water, or shelter was unavailable because of shifts in the growing season. In contrast, small mammals, with their shorter life cycles, shorter reproductive cycles, and shorter gestation periods, could have adjusted to the increased unpredictability of the climate, both as individuals and as species which allowed them to synchronize their reproductive efforts with conditions favorable for offspring survival. If so, smaller mammals would have lost fewer offspring and would have been better able to repeat the reproductive effort when circumstances once more favored offspring survival.[37]

Shortcomings of the continentality hypotheses

Critics have identified a number of problems with the continentality hypotheses.

  • Megaherbivores have prospered at other times of continental climate. For example, megaherbivores thrived in Pleistocene Siberia, which had and has a more continental climate than Pleistocene or modern (post-Pleistocene, interglacial) North America.[38][39][40]
  • The animals that went extinct actually should have prospered during the shift from mixed woodland-parkland to prairie, because their primary food source, grass, was increasing rather than decreasing.[41][42][40] Although the vegetation did become more spatially specialized, the amount of prairie and grass available increased, which would have been good for horses and for mammoths, and yet they went extinct.
  • Although horses went extinct in the New World, they were successfully reintroduced by the Spanish in the 16th century – into a modern post-Pleistocene, interglacial climate. Today there are feral horses still living in those same environments. They find a sufficient mix of food to avoid toxins, they extract enough nutrition from forage to reproduce effectively and the timing of their gestation is not an issue. Similarly, mammoths survived the Pleistocene Holocene transition on isolated, uninhabited islands in the Mediterranean Sea[43] and on Wrangel Island in the Siberian Arctic [44] until 4,000 to 7,000 years ago.
  • Large mammals should have been able to migrate, permanently or seasonally, if they found the temperature too extreme, the breeding season too short, or the rainfall too sparse or unpredictable.[45] Seasons vary geographically. By migrating away from the equator, herbivores could have found areas with growing seasons more favorable for finding food and breeding successfully. Modern-day African elephants migrate during periods of drought to places where there is apt to be water.[46]
  • Large animals store more fat in their bodies than do medium-sized animals[47] and this should have allowed them to compensate for extreme seasonal fluctuations in food availability.

The extinction of the megafauna could have caused the extinction of the mammoth steppe. Alaska now has low nutrient soil unable to support bison, mammoths, and horses. R. Dale Guthrie has claimed this as a cause of the extinction of the megafauna there, hoever he may be interpeting it backwards. Chapin (Chapin 1980) showed that simply adding fertilizer to the soil in Alaska could make grasses grow again like they did in the era of the mammoth steppe. Possibly, the extinction of the megafauna and the correspoding loss of dung is what led to low nutrient levels in modern day soil and therefore is why the landscape can no longer support a megafauna.

Shortcomings of both Climate Change and Overkill

Neither the Overkill sensu stricto nor Climate Change hypotheses explain several observations.

  • Browsers, mixed feeders and non-ruminant grazer species suffered most, while ruminant grazers generally survived. However a broader scope of overkill predicts this perfectly because changes in vegetation wrought by anthropogenic fire preferentially selects against browse species.
  • Many surviving mammal species were sharply diminished in size, a fact which many authors have pointed out perfectly fits the Overkill Hypothesis and is reflected in the dwarfing of many hunted species even within the 20th century.

Because of the unsatisfactory nature of the Overkill or Climate Change hypotheses alone many scientists support some combination of Climate Change and Overkill.

Hyperdisease Hypothesis

Theory

The Hyperdisease Hypothesis attributes the extinction of large mammals during the late Pleistocene to indirect effects of the newly arrived aboriginal humans.[48][49][50] The Hyperdisease Hypothesis proposes that humans or animals traveling with them (e.g., domestic dogs) introduced one or more highly virulent diseases into vulnerable populations of native mammals, eventually causing extinctions. The extinction was biased toward larger-sized species because smaller species have greater resilience because of their life history traits (e.g., shorter gestation time, greater population sizes, etc). Humans are thought to be the cause because other earlier immigrations of mammals into North America from Eurasia did not cause extinctions.[48]

Diseases imported by people have been responsible for extinctions in the recent past; for example, bringing avian malaria to Hawaii has had a major impact on the isolated birds of the island. MacPhee is searching DNA in mammoth remains from Wrangel Island in Siberia; he hopes to find evidence of infection.

If a disease was indeed responsible for the end-Pleistocene extinctions, then there are several criteria it must satisfy (see Table 7.3 in MacPhee & Marx 1997). First, the pathogen must have a stable carrier state in a reservoir species. That is, it must be able to sustain itself in the environment when there are no susceptible hosts available to infect. Second, the pathogen must have a high infection rate, such that it is able to infect virtually all individuals of all ages and sexes encountered. Third, it must be extremely lethal, with a mortality rate of c. 50–75%. Finally, it must have the ability to infect multiple host species without posing a serious threat to humans. Humans may be infected, but the disease must not be highly lethal or able to cause an epidemic.

One suggestion is that pathogens were transmitted by the expanding humans via the domesticated dogs they brought with them.citation needed Unfortunately for such a theory it can not account for several major extinction events, notably Australia and North America. Dogs did not arrive in Australia until approximately 35,000 years after the first humans arrived and approximately 30,000 years after the megafaunal extinction was complete and as such can not be implicated. In contrast numerous species including wolves, mammoths, camelids and horses had emigrated continually between Asia and North America over the past 100,000 years. For the disease hypothesis to be applicable in the case of the Americas it would require that the population remain immunologically naive despite this constant transmission of genetic and pathogenic material.

Shortcomings of the Hyperdisease Hypothesis

  • No evidence of disease has been found.
  • Generally speaking, disease has to be very virulent to kill off all the individuals in a genus or species. Even such a virulent disease as West Nile Virus is unlikely to have caused extinction.[51]
  • The disease would need to be implausibly selective while being simultaneously implausibly broad. Such a disease needs to be capable of killing of three species of bison while leaving a third very closely related species unaffected. It would need to be capable of killing off flightless birds while leaving closely related flighted species unaffected. Yet while remaining sufficiently selective to afflict only individual species within genera it must be capable of fatally infecting across such clades as birds, marsupials, placentals, testudines, and crocodilians. No disease with such a broad scope of fatal infectivity is known, much less one that remains simultaneously incapable of infecting numerous closely related species within those disparate clades.

Second-Order Predation

Combination Hypotheses: Climate Change, Overkill + Climate Change, Second-Order Predation + Climate Change
Combination Hypotheses: Climate Change, Overkill + Climate Change, Second-Order Predation + Climate Change
Overkill Hypothesis and Second-Order Predation
Overkill Hypothesis and Second-Order Predation

Scenario

The Second-Order Predation Hypothesis says that as humans entered the New World they continued their policy of killing predators, which upset the ecological balance of the continent causing overpopulation, environmental exhaustion, and environmental collapse. The hypothesis accounts for changes in animal, plant, and, human populations.

The scenario is as follows:

  • After the arrival of H. sapiens in the New World, existing predators must share the prey populations with this new predator. Because of this competition, populations of original, or first-order, predators cannot find enough food they are in direct competition with humans.
  • Second-order predation begins as humans begin to kill predators.
  • Prey populations are no longer well controlled by predation. Killing of nonhuman predators by H. sapiens reduces their numbers to a point where these predators no longer regulate the size of the prey populations.
  • Lack of regulation by first-order predators triggers boom-and-bust cycles in prey populations. Prey populations expand and consequently overgraze and over-browse the land. Soon the environment is no longer able to support them. As a result, many herbivores starve. Species that rely on the slowest recruiting food become extinct, followed by species that cannot extract the maximum benefit from every bit of their food.
  • Boom-bust cycles in herbivore populations change the nature of the vegetative environment, with consequent climatic impacts on relative humidity and continentality. Through overgrazing and overbrowsing, mixed parkland becomes grassland, and climatic continentality increases.

Support

This has been supported by a computer model, the Pleistocene Extinction Model (PEM), which, using the same assumptions and values, compares hypotheses with Second-Order Predation. The findings are that Second Order-Predation is more consistent with extinction than is Overkill[52] (results graph at left). The PEM was run to test combination hypotheses by artificially introducing sufficient climate change to cause extinction. When Overkill and Climate Change are combined they balance each other out. Climate Change reduces the number of plants, Overkill removes animals, therefore fewer plants are eaten. Second-Order Predation combined with Climate Change exacerbates the extinction[53] (results graph at right).

Second-Order Predation and other theories

  • Climate Change: Second-Order Predation accounts for the changes in vegetation, which in turn may account for the increase in continentality. Since the extinction is due to destruction of habitat it accounts for the loss of animals not hunted by humans. Second-Order Predation accounts for the dwarfing of animals as well as extinctions since animals that could survive and reproduce on less food would be selectively favored.
  • Hyperdisease: The reduction of carnivores could have been from distemper or other carnivore disease carried by domestic dogs.
  • Overkill: The observation that extinctions follow the introduction of humans is supported by the Second-Order Predation hypothesis.

Shortcomings of the Second-Order Predation Hypothesis

  • No evidence of humans hunting predators has been found in the New World though it has been found in Siberia.[54]
  • Like all climate-based theories, the model predicts large extinctions in response to climate change and without human hunting, so it is unable to explain why these extinctions did not occur during numerous deglaciations of equal intensity, or why they did not occur at high latitudes in Eurasia.
  • It assumes decreases in vegetation due to climate change, but deglaciation doubled the habitable area of North America.
  • Climate change had little effect on vegetation or the distribution of small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians throughout the southern half of the United States, not to mention tropical regions throughout the Americas that also suffered catastrophic extinctions.
  • Any vegetational changes that did occur failed to cause almost any extinctions of small vertebrates, and they are more narrowly distributed on average.
  • The model specifically assumes high extinction rates in grasslands, but most extinct species ranged across numerous vegetation zones, historical population densities of ungulates were very high in the Great Plains, these environments support high ungulate diversity throughout Africa, and extinction intensity was equally severe in forested environments.
  • It is unable to explain why large herbivore populations were not regulated by surviving carnivores such as grizzly bears, wolves, pumas, and jaguars whose populations would have increased rapidly in response to the loss of competitors.
  • It does not explain why almost all extinct carnivores were large herbivore specialists such as sabre toothed cats and short faced bears, but most hypocarnivores and generalized carnivores survived.
  • There is no historical evidence of boom and bust cycles causing even local extinctions in regions where large mammal predators have been driven extinct by hunting. The recent hunting out of remaining predators throughout most of the United States has not caused massive vegetational change or dramatic boom and bust cycles in ungulates.
  • It is not spatially explicit and does not track predator and prey species separately, whereas the multispecies overkill model does both.
  • The multispecies model produces a mass extinction through indirect competition between herbivore species: small species with high reproductive rates subsidize predation on large species with low reproductive rates.[14] The fact that all prey species are lumped in the Pleistocene Extinction Model explains why it performs poorly without adding extra assumptions about climate change and cascade effects.
  • Everything explained by this model also is explained by the multispecies model, but with less assumptions, so this one is not parsimonious.

References

  1. ^ Anthony D. Barnosky, Paul L. Koch, Robert S. Feranec, Scott L. Wing, Alan B. Shabel (2004). "Assessing the Causes of Late Pleistocene Extinctions on the Continents". Science 306 (5693): 70–75. doi:10.1126/science.1101476. PMID 15459379. 
  2. ^ MacPhee, RDE (1999). Extinctions in Near Time: Causes, Contexts, and Consequences. Kluwer Academic Publishers. ISBN 0306460920. 
  3. ^ Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. WW Norton. ISBN 978-0393061314. 
  4. ^ Pielou, EC (1992). After the Ice Age: the return of life to glaciated North America. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0226668123. 
  5. ^ Martin P. S. (1963). The last 10,000 years: A fossil pollen record of the American Southwest. Tucson, AZ: Univ. Ariz. Press. ISBN 0-8165-1759-2. 
  6. ^ Martin P. S. (1967). Prehistoric overkill. In Pleistocene extinctions: The search for a cause (ed. P.S. Martin and H.E. Wright). New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. ISBN 0-300-00755-8. 
  7. ^ Martin P. S. (1989). Prehistoric overkill: A global model. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 354–404. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  8. ^ Martin, Paul S. Twilight of the Mammoths: Ice Age Extinctions and the Rewilding of America. 2005.
  9. ^ Flannery, T (1995). The future eaters: an ecological history of the Australasian lands and people. NY: George Braziller. ISBN 0-8021-3943-4. 
  10. ^ Diamond, J. (1984). Historic extinctions: a Rosetta stone for understanding prehistoric extinctions. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 824–62. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  11. ^ Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel; the fates of human societies. New York: Norton. ISBN 0-393-31755-2. 
  12. ^ Mossiman, J. E., and Martin, P. S. (1975). "Simulating Overkill by Paleoindians". American Scientist 63: 304–13. 
  13. ^ Whittington, S. L. & Dyke, B. (1984). Simulating overkill: experiment with the Mossiman and Martin model. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 451–66. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  14. ^ a b Alroy, J. (2001). "A multispecies overkill simulation of the end-Pleistocene megafaunal mass extinction". Science 292: 1893. doi:10.1126/science.1059342. 
  15. ^ Nadasdy, Paul. "Transcending the Debate over the Ecologically Noble Indian: Indigenous Peoples and Environmentalism." Duke University Press, 2006.
  16. ^ Svenson, Sally. "Bison." South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, 1995.
  17. ^ "Buffalo Jump." Wikipedia.
  18. ^ May, R. M. (2001). Stability and complexity in model ecosystems. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press. ISBN 0-691-08861-6. 
  19. ^ Willis, Paul; Bryce, Clay; Searle, Mike. "Thylacoleo - The Beast of the Nullarbor." Catalyst, August 17, 2006.
  20. ^ Gavin J. Prideaux et al. "An Arid-Adapted Middle Pleistocene Vertebrate Fauna from South-Central Australia." Nature, 25 August 2006.
  21. ^ Richard G. Roberts et al. "New Ages for the Last Australian Megafauna: Continent-Wide Extinction About 46,000 Years Ago." Science, 8 June 2001.
  22. ^ Andersen, S. T (1973). The differential pollen productivity of trees and its significance for the interpretation of a pollen diagram from a forested region. In Quaternary plant ecology: the 14thsymposium of the British Ecological society, University of Cambridge, 28–30 March 1972 (ed. Birks, H. J. B. and West, R. G). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Pubs. ISBN 0-632-09120-7. 
  23. ^ Ashworth, C.A. (1980). "Environmental implications of a beetle assemblage from the Gervais formation (Early Wisconsinian?), Minnesota". Quat. Res. 13: 200–12. doi:10.1016/0033-5894(80)90029-0. 
  24. ^ a b Birks, H. H. (1973). Modern macrofossil assemblages in lake sediments in Minnesota. In Quaternary plant ecology: the 14thsymposium of the British Ecological Society, University of Cambridge, 28–30 March 1972 (ed. H. J. B. Birks, and R. G. West). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Pubs. ISBN 0-632-09120-7. 
  25. ^ a b Birks, H. J. B. & Birks, H. H. (1980). Quaternary paleoecology. Baltimore: Univ. Park Press. ISBN 1-930665-56-3. 
  26. ^ Bradley, R. S. (1985). Quaternary Paleoclimatology: Methods of Paleoclimatic Reconstruction. Winchester, MA: Allen & Unwin. ISBN 0-04-551068-7. 
  27. ^ a b Davis, M. B. (1976). Pleistocene biogeography of temperate deciduous forests. In Geoscience and man: ecology of the Pleistocene, vol.13. Baton Rouge: School of Geoscience, Louisiana State Univ.. 
  28. ^ Vartanyan, S.L., Arslanov, K.A., Tertychnaya, T.V. & Chernov, S.B. (1995). "Radiocarbon dating evidence for mammoths on Wrangel Island, Arctic Ocean, until 2000 BC". Radiocarbon 37: 1–6. 
  29. ^ Guthrie, R. D. (1988). Frozen Fauna of the Mammoth Steppe: The Story of Blue Babe. University Of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-31122-8. 
  30. ^ Guthrie, R. D. (1989). Mosaics, allochemics, and nutrients: an ecological theory of Late Pleistocene megafaunal extinctions. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 259–99. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  31. ^ Hoppe, P. P. (1978), Rumen fermentation in African ruminants. Proceedings of the 13th Annual Congress of Game Biologists, Atlanta 
  32. ^ Bryson, R. A., Baerreis, D. A. & Wendland, W. M. (1970). The character of late-glacial and post-glacial climatic changes. Pleistocene and recent environments of the central Great Plains (ed. W. Dort, Jr. and J. K. Jones, Jr., Dept. Geol., Univ. Kan. Spec. Pub. 3). Lawrence: Univ. Press Kan. ISBN 0-7006-0063-9. 
  33. ^ Graham, R.W. & Lundelius, E.L. (1989). Coevolutionary disequilibrium and Pleistocene extinctions. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 354–404. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  34. ^ King, J. E. and Saunders, J. J. (1989). Environmental insularity and the extinction of the American mastodont. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 354–404. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  35. ^ Axelrod, D. I. (1967). "Quaternary extinctions of large mammals". University of California Publications in Geological Sciences 74: 1–42. ASIN B0006BX8LG. 
  36. ^ Slaughter, B. H. (1967). Animal ranges as a clue to late-Pleistocene extinction. In Pleistocene extinctions: The search for a cause (ed. P.S. Martin and H.E. Wright). New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. ISBN 0-300-00755-8. 
  37. ^ Kilti, R. A. (1988). Seasonality, gestation time, and large mammal extinctions. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 354–404. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  38. ^ Flereov, C. C. (1967). On the origin of the mammalian fauna of Canada. In The Bering Land Bridge (ed. D.M. Hopkins). Palo Alto: Stanford Univ. Press, 271–80. ISBN 0-8047-0272-1. 
  39. ^ Frenzel, B. (1968). "The Pleistocene vegetation of northern Eurasia". Science 161: 637–49. doi:10.1126/science.161.3842.637. 
  40. ^ a b McDonald, J. (1989). The reordered North American selection regime and late Quaternary megafaunal extinctions. In Quaternary extinctions: A prehistoric revolution (ed. P.S. Martin and R.G. Klein). Tucson, AZ: Univ. Arizona Press, 354–404. ISBN 0-8165-1100-4. 
  41. ^ Birks, H. J. B. and West, R. G. (1973). Quaternary plant ecology: the 14th symposium of the British Ecological society, University of Cambridge, 28–30 March 1972. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Pubs. ISBN 0-632-09120-7. 
  42. ^ McDonald, J. (1981). North American Bison: Their classification and evolution.. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press. ISBN 0-520-04002-3. 
  43. ^ Burney, D. A. (1993). "Recent animal extinctions: recipes for disaster". American Scientist 81 (6): 530–41. 
  44. ^ Vartanyan, S.L., Garutt, V. E. and Sher, A.V. (1993). "Holocene dwarf mammoths from Wangel Island in the Siberian Arctic". Nature 362: 337–40. doi:10.1038/362337a0. 
  45. ^ Pennycuick, C.J. (1979). Energy costs of locomotion and the concept of "Foraging radius." In Serengetti: Dynamics of an Ecosystem (ed. A.R.E. Sinclair and M. Norton-Griffiths). Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 164–85. ISBN 0-226-76029-4. 
  46. ^ Wing, L.D. & Buss, I.O. (1970). "Elephants and Forests". Wildl. Mong. (19). 
  47. ^ Owen-Smith, R.N. (1992). Megaherbivores: The influence of very large body size on ecology. Cambridge studies in ecology.. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. ISBN 0-521-42637-5. 
  48. ^ a b MacFee, R.D.E. & Marx, P.A. (1997). Humans, hyperdisease and first-contact extinctions. In Natural Change and Human Impact in Madagascar (eds S. Goodman & B.D. Patterson). Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Press, 169–217. ISBN 1-56098-683-2. 
  49. ^ MacFee, R.D.E. & Marx, P.A. (1998). "Lightning Strikes Twice: Blitzkrieg, Hyperdisease, and Global Explanations of the Late Quaternary Catastrophic Extinctions". American Museum of Natural History.
  50. ^ MacPhee, Ross D.E.; Preston Marx (1997). "The 40,000-year Plague: Humans, Hyperdisease, and First-Contact Extinctions". Natural Change and Human Impact in Madagascar: 169-217, Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. 
  51. ^ Lyons, K, Smith, F.A., Wagner, P.J., White, E.P., and Brown, J.,H. (2004). "Was a 'hyperdisease' responsible for the late Pleistocene megafaunal extinction?" (dead link – Scholar search). Ecology 7: 859–68. 
  52. ^ Whitney-Smith, E. (2004). Late Pleistocene extinctions through second-order predation. In Settlement of the American Continents: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Human Biogeography (eds C. M. Barton, G. A. Clark, D. R. Yesner). Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press. ISBN 0-8165-2323-1.