The Effect of Size and Ecology on Extinction Susceptibility

Although life on Earth first emerged as prokaryotic organisms, it eventually evolved into billions of different species. However, extinctions on Earth, especially the five mass extinctions, have decimated species. So what leads to a species survival or demise during a mass extinction? Are certain species more susceptible to extinctions based on their size and ecology? For this project, we focused on the data of marine animals. To examine the impact of size and ecology on a species's likelihood of survival, we compared the sizes and ecologies of the survivors and victims of the five mass extinctions. The ecology, or life mode, of a genus consists of the combination of tiering, motility, and feeding mechanism. Tiering refers to the animal's typical location in the water column and sediments, motility refers to its ability to move, and feeding mechanism describes the way the organism eats; together, they describe the animal's behavior. We analyzed the effect of ecology on survival using logistic regression, which compares life mode to the success or failure of a genus during each mass extinction interval. For organism size, we found the extinct organisms' mean size (both volume and length) and compared it with the average size of survivors on a graph. Our results show that while surviving genera of mass extinctions tended to be slightly larger than those that went extinct, there was no significant difference. Even though the Permian (Changhsingian) and Triassic (Rhaetian) extinctions had larger surviving species, likewise the difference was small. Ecology had a more obvious impact on the likelihood of survival; fast-moving, predatory pelagic organisms were the most likely to go extinct, while sedentary, infaunal suspension feeders had the greatest chances of survival. Overall, ecology played a greater role than size in determining the survival of a species. With this information, we can use ecology to predict which species would survive future extinctions.