The DOI matches its Crossref record.
When are leaves good thermometers? A new case for Leaf Margin Analysis
Abstract
Precise estimates of past temperatures are critical for understanding the evolution of organisms and the physical biosphere, and data from continental areas are an indispensable complement to the marine record of stable isotopes. Climate is considered to be a primary selective force on leaf morphology, and two widely used methods exist for estimating past mean annual temperatures from assemblages of fossil leaves. The first approach, Leaf Margin Analysis, is univariate, based on the positive correlation in modern forests between mean annual temperature and the proportion of species in a flora with untoothed leaf margins. The second approach, known as the Climate-Leaf Analysis Multivariate Program, is based on a modern data set that is multivariate. I argue here that the simpler, univariate approach will give paleotemperature estimates at least as precise as the multivariate method because (1) the temperature signal in the multivariate data set is dominated by the leaf-margin character; (2) the additional characters add minimal statistical precision and in practical use do not appear to improve the quality of the estimate; (3) the predictor samples in the univariate data set contain at least twice as many species as those in the multivariate data set; and (4) the presence of numerous sites in the multivariate data set that are both dry and extremely cold depresses temperature estimates for moist and nonfrigid paleofloras by about 2°C, unless the dry and cold sites are excluded from the predictor set. New data from Western Hemisphere forests are used to test the univariate and multivariate methods and to compare observed vs. predicted error distributions for temperature estimates as a function of species richness. Leaf Margin Analysis provides excellent estimates of mean annual temperature for nine floral samples. Estimated temperatures given by 16 floral subsamples are very close both to actual temperatures and to the estimates from the samples. Temperature estimates based on the multivariate data set for four of the subsamples were generally less accurate than the estimates from Leaf Margin Analysis. Leaf-margin data from 45 transect collections demonstrate that sampling of low-diversity floras at extremely local scales can result in biased leaf-margin percentages because species abundance patterns are uneven. For climate analysis, both modern and fossil floras should be sampled over an area sufficient to minimize this bias and to maximize recovered species richness within a given climate.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Community Assembly, Niche Conservatism, and Adaptive Evolution in Changing Environments
Ackerly, D. D. (2003) · International Journal of Plant Sciences · doi:10.1086/368401 · Cited by 893
Sensitivity of leaf size and shape to climate: global patterns and paleoclimatic applications
Peppe, D. J., Royer, D. L., Cariglino, B., Oliver, S. Y., Newman, S., Leight, E., Enikolopov, G., Fernandez‐Burgos, M., Herrera, F., Adams, J. M., et al. (2011) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03615.x · Cited by 616
Royer, D. L., Wilf, P., Janesko, D. A., Kowalski, E. A., & Dilcher, D. L. (2005) · American Journal of Botany · doi:10.3732/ajb.92.7.1141 · Cited by 316
Self-citationWilf, P., Johnson, K. R., & Huber, B. T. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0234701100 · Cited by 218
Self-citationExceptional continental record of biotic recovery after the Cretaceous–Paleogene mass extinction
Lyson, T. R., Miller, I. M., Bercovici, A. D., Weissenburger, K., Fuentes, A. J., Clyde, W. C., Hagadorn, J. W., Butrim, M. J., Johnson, K. R., Fleming, R. F., et al. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aay2268 · Cited by 192
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilf, P.
- Venue
- Paleobiology
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1997
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 373-390
- ISSN
- 0094-8373 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-5331
- OpenAlex
- W1889413073
- Cited by
- 402
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When are leaves good thermometers? A new case for Leaf Margin Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0094837300019746
- The paper
- Wilf, P. (1997). When are leaves good thermometers? A new case for Leaf Margin Analysis. Paleobiology. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0094837300019746
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.