Preservation of biopolymers

Most fossils represent mineralized material such as bone or shells. However, biopolymers such as chitin and collagen can sometimes leave fossils – most famously in Burgess Shale type preservation and palynomorphs. The preservation of soft tissue is not as rare as sometimes thought.[1]

What is preserved
Although chitin exoskeletons of arthropods are subject to decomposition, they often maintain shape during permineralization, especially if they are already somewhat mineralized.

Both DNA and proteins are unstable, and rarely survive more than hundreds of thousands of years before degrading.[2] Polysaccharides also have low preservation potential, unless they are highly cross-linked;[2] this interconnection is most common in structural tissues, and renders them resistant to chemical decay.[2] Such tissues include wood (lignin), spores and pollen (sporopollenin), the cuticles of plants (cutan) and animals, the cell walls of algae (algaenan),[2] and potentially the polysaccharide layer of some lichens. This interconnectedness makes the chemicals less prone to chemical decay, and also means they are a poorer source of energy so less likely to be digested by scavenging organisms.[2][3] After being subjected to heat and pressure, these cross-linked organic molecules typically 'cook' and become kerogen or short (<17 C atoms) aliphatic/aromatic carbon molecules.[2][3] Other factors affect the likelihood of preservation; for instance sclerotization renders the jaws of polychaetes more readily preserved than the chemically equivalent but non-sclerotized body cuticle.[2]

It was thought that only tough, cuticle type soft tissue could be preserved by Burgess Shale type preservation,[4] but an increasing number of organisms are being discovered that lack such cuticle, such as the probable chordate Pikaia and the shellless Odontogriphus.[5]

It is a common misconception that anaerobic conditions are necessary for the preservation of soft tissue; indeed much decay is mediated by sulfate-reducing bacteria which can only survive in anaerobic conditions.[2][3] Anoxia does, however, reduce the probability that scavengers will disturb the dead organism, and the activity of other organisms is undoubtedly one of the leading causes of soft-tissue destruction.[2]

Plant cuticle is more prone to preservation if it contains cutan, rather than cutin.[2]

Plants and algae produce the most preservable compounds, which are listed according to their preservation potential by Tegellaar (see reference).[6]

Role of clay minerals

Clay minerals can enhance the preservation of organic matter, and different clay minerals leave distinct signatures. Organic matter accompanied by clays tends to be rich in lipids and deficient in protein and lignin; kaolinite seems to enrich organic matter with polysaccharides, whereas organic matter rich in aromatic compounds preserve in association with smectites such as montmorillonite.[7]

References
  1. Briggs, D.E.G.; Kear, A.J. (1993), "Decay and preservation of polychaetes; taphonomic thresholds in soft-bodied organisms", Paleobiology, 19 (1): 107–135, Bibcode:1993Pbio...19..107B, doi:10.1017/s0094837300012343, S2CID 84073818
  2. Briggs, D.E.G. (1999), "Molecular taphonomy of animal and plant cuticles: selective preservation and diagenesis", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 354 (1379): 7–17, doi:10.1098/rstb.1999.0356, PMC 1692454
  3. Anderson, L.A. (2023), "A chemical framework for the preservation of fossil vertebrate cells and soft tissues", Earth-Science Reviews, 240: 104367, Bibcode:2023ESRv..24004367A, doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2023.104367, S2CID 257326012
  4. Butterfield, N.J. (1990), "Organic preservation of non-mineralizing organisms and the taphonomy of the Burgess Shale", Paleobiology, 16 (3): 272–286, Bibcode:1990Pbio...16..272B, doi:10.1017/s0094837300009994, JSTOR 2400788, S2CID 133486523
  5. Conway Morris, S. (2008), "A Redescription of a Rare Chordate, Metaspriggina walcotti Simonetta and Insom, from the Burgess Shale (Middle Cambrian), British Columbia, Canada", Journal of Paleontology, 82 (2): 424–430, Bibcode:2008JPal...82..424M, doi:10.1666/06-130.1, S2CID 85619898
  6. Tegelaar, E.W.; De Leeuw, J.W.; Derenne, S.; Largeau, C. (1989), "A reappraisal of kerogen formation", Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta, 53 (3): 03–3106, Bibcode:1989GeCoA..53.3103T, doi:10.1016/0016-7037(89)90191-9
  7. Wattel-Koekkoek, E.J.W; Van Genuchten, P.P.L; Buurman, P; Van Lagen, B (2001), "Amount and composition of clay-associated soil organic matter in a range of kaolinitic and smectitic soils", Geoderma, 99 (1–2): 27–49, Bibcode:2001Geode..99...27W, doi:10.1016/S0016-7061(00)00062-8
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.