The Big Bugs of the Paleozoic!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 січ 2023
- Who were the biggest bugs in the fossil record? And why don’t we have big bugs living today? In this video I explore a period of time when gigantic insects and other creepy crawly bugs roamed Earth’s surface, and explore the reasons they vanished and disappeared.
Here is Matthew Clapham and Jered Karr's interesting paper:
www.jstor.org/stable/41601706
Also check out Matthew Clapham's UA-cam Channel here:
/ mattheweclapham
And while you are looking at stuff on the World Wide Web,
Check out my webpage here: www.benjamin-burger.org
I'm always looking for some support and love for my UA-cam channel. Please Consider Donating on My Patreon Page:
patreon.com/user?u=9235837
Good video- most stuff I've seen on the "Age of Insects" presents elevated O² levels as the only cause. I'd always wondered what fires would have been like during such a time!
I didn't realize that very high O2 levels (30%) continued into the early Permian. While I was looking for that, I saw that O2 levels dropped dramatically by 240 million years ago. One source said that it dropped down to 12% by the end of the Permian and might have contributed to the Permian extinction.
All of my Geology studies were done back in the Stone Age. (late 60's)
Come on the 60`s weren`t the stone age that was the 50`s.🤪
But the best period was in 1960s, when The Beatles became really big, bigger than Jesus, despite lower level of oxygen in the atmosphere
Underrated
I like BIG BUGS and I can not lie......
I really enjoy your fascinating videos. They make me wish I were a paleontologist and that you were one of my professors in college.
One thing I believe should be brought up about giant flying insects disappearing after the Capitanian and Permian-Triassic Extinctions is the drop in Oxygen levels. Now I can't conclusively say that there wasn't enough Oxygen in the atmosphere to sustain such large animals, but the very high concentration of Oxygen in the atmosphere possibly made the air thicker, therefore making it easier to take flight. This may be why we don't see the reemergence of giant flying insects in the fossil record after the Paleozoic, combined with soon to arrive competition for air control, and, of course, their sizes being too much for passive diffusion alone to handle. Personally, this is my explanation, though I have not read any papers on it and much of what I know about Paleozoic insects comes from the book 'Carboniferous Giants & Mass Extinction'. Speaking of which, what theory for the reasoning of arthropods growing so large do you believe?
From what I understand, arthropleura had already evolved in the early carboniferious, when oxygen levels might have been similar or even lower than today. And some of the very last permian griffinflies still had a 45 cm wingspan, when oxygen levels were seriously depleted. What's more, the modern rhinoceros beetle weighs almost as much as the largest griffinflies (100 grams), has a smaller wingspan but a heavy body - yet still flies (althought they're not agile fliers). There is also some fairly large crabs coming onto land today.
Now, there is probably something to the whole oxygen-bug theory, but I think there is more to it, and the correlation with the lack or presence of tetrapod 'enemies' seems stronger to me, be it on the land or in the air. Especially if you also take the late mesozoic rise of oxygen into account, where there is no correlation with increasing bug size.
I hope we'll get a clearer picture with future fossils and more detailed understanding of paleo climate and atmosphere.
Your Permian-Triassic Boundary episode in Rocks of Utah is my favorite short film in a long time. I love everything about it. Thanks for your work.
Yes, thanks, very interesting. 😀
Awesome
Great! Thank you Professor Burger!
Thank you, and thank you for a more nuanced take on the "Where did all the big bugs go?" story.
Wow I learnt something new
Like the topic, however I would like to see more pics of pre historic insects 🐞. Then the speaker 😊😊😊👏🏿👏🏿😊
Will we get another rocks of Utah video?
As soon as all that snow melts!
Huh I wonder why Trilobite exoskeletons preserve better than those of other arthropods
Because Trilobites are a marine animal. Marine animals tend to fossilize better because when they die they are immediately in an environment that is conducive to fossilization. They are buried in marine sediment relatively quickly, meaning they are fossilized more often.
Most Terrestrial arthropods tend to avoid large bodies of water due to the risk of drowning. This means that when they die, they are either exposed to the elements or quickly eaten by scavengers. This makes it hard for fossilized remains to occur.
Hope this helps!
They also are weird in having a calcite skeleton rather then chitin. The calcite does a much better job at preserving them, but presents some interesting issues with their eyes that have to look through calcite lens.
75 centimeters equals 29.5". A Bald Eagle's wingspan can reach over 7'. Just a wee bit off of the measurements mentioned. Just a wee bit.
God dam Arthropods
This presentation really 'bugged' me.
bald eagle do not have 75cm wingspans, they are between 180 and 230cm.
Arthropleura isn't an insect it's a myriapod.
Is there anything to the idea of leg evolution? Not very well put but in pelagic arthropods, they evolved their appendages from specifically gills to limbs and fin like appendix, but when the likes of pulminoscorpio turn up on land these chelicerates are stuck with no antenna, either cos they'd run out or just couldn't adapt them?! But then surely the whip scorpion contradicts that, its adapted 2 legs into extensive antenna. This also may have a bearing on Cope's rule, not over size, although sea scorpions were gigantic, (although im completely at a loss as to if or how they're related to other chelicerates, like true scorpions?!) They seem to have lost their vision as they became terrestrial, some eurypterids had upwards of 16,000 lenses (sic ed???) in their compound eyes, even some palaeozoic scorpions are thought to have had compound eyes, but now chelicerata are all lumbered with single lens, somewhat useless eyes, (and no antenna!) Why, and why???
Great lectures, thank you.
It is pretty complex and there is still lots of debate. There is lots of head scratching over tiny fossils and trying to understand if these structures are legs, gills or both. These animals can also segment very easily. It reminds me a little of the debate over the origin of the jaw in chordates. Likely detailed embryological studies might help in some of these living groups, as wells as molt grow, new micro-ct reconstructions of fossils.
Maybe it would be better to have some giant bugs as opposed to stupid little ones like mosquitoes flying around your face constantly. Or maybe that was worse also
Millipedes are not insects