CORRECTION: Dimetrodons (pelycosaurs) were 'reptile shaped' (reptilomorphs) but did NOT evolve from reptiles. Two major groups evolved from the earliest amniotes: sauropsids (which evolved into reptiles & birds) and synapsids (which evolved into mammals). Because pelycosaurs were synapsids, they actually never evolved 'from' reptiles, they just shared a close ancestor with them (the earliest amniotes). These earliest amniotes were called reptilomorpha (reptile-shaped animals). The classification of 'reptiles' underwent some modification a couple decades ago and apparently my textbook had not adopted that change even though it was written relatively recently, so I apologize for any confusion! Please thank my loyal follower, Ted Etienne, for catching this mistake! ;D
@@tedetienne7639 Thank me? No thank YOU Ted! These are kind of things that makes me so happy to have such a knowledgeable audience. I am only human so I am bound to make mistakes, but when you catch them and help me out, that is really awesome! ;D
@@GEOGIRL Thanks for the clarification up date. This is all good stuff .Consensus agreement can change very quickly but some of us will unfortunately continue with what we know already. Also today's mistakes sometimes provoke tomorrow's new knowledge.
Hey I just found your channel and I love it!! I've always been interested in earth's past. I have so many books on prehistory and books on dinosaurs as well as many hours reading the wiki. Glad to see someone teaching others and getting them interested in the beauty of our past.
I'm going to be honest with you, I've never actually wondered what wacky creatures were running around before the dinosaurs but the algorithm has decided it's about damn time I learned
I read a hypothesis recently that speculated that the Carboniferous may not have been swampy. The reason we find such massive coal deposits from that period may be that pulp eating fungi had not yet appeared. Hence, the accumulation of forest debris that we now find as coal. I thought that was interesting, if it turns out to be correct. Fascinating presentation. Thanks!
Yes, fungi and other destruents have not developed yet on land, nothing could dissolve the lingin. It must have been surreal to behold these trunks to pile up and what would it have sounded like? All the pressure. Oil btw came late in the flat seas of the cretacious. Oil is the accumulated fluids of marine life, one could say coal and oil is concentrated former life.
@@nyoodmono4681 Oh interesting, I wonder if you mean all fungi? or just specific pulp eating fungi hadn't evolved on land yet? Because I read that fungi spread to land long before this, but I know it's still debated so I am curious what you've seen? :D
@@GEOGIRL Tbh i have only heard this from different sources without studying it. It would probably be more accurate to say that fungi and insects needed to evolve and learn how to digest this new lingen rescource on land. But it was definetly a crazy time where things on land changed so fast and even changed the atmosphere, seemingly.
Hi Geo Girl, I notice that "Earth System History" was written by Steven M. Stanley. When I was an Honors Historical Geology Student in the '80s, we used Stanley's "Earth and Life Through Time" as one of our texts. I still have it in my library of references. Sincerely: George F. Spicka, Curator of Paleontology (Collections Manager), Natural History Society of Maryland
Being warm-blooded would be especially useful for nocturnal animals, because they can be very energetic when their cold-blooded competitors are sluggish because of cool nights.
Came back again for this presentation. I suppose being an artist I possess an imagination which takes me anywhere Geo Girl presents, in any earth time. following learning and seeing recreated images of flora and fauna millions of years ago, the conjured shapes of scenes almost too beautiful to behold in each epoch slowed down to our speed. Where would I go first? I think 100 million years ago during the ebb and flow of the Western Seaway in North America. Over 600 miles wide and 2000 miles top to bottom. My fascination would be the offshore islands west of Laramidia and the diversity of fauna inhabiting them. Still have to watch out for Spinosaurus.
Ginkos are freaking cool! First they turn this nice yellow, a rather mellow color, Then they drop almost ALL of their leaves in one night. Ginkos and monkey puzzle trees and redwoods are 3 of the most awesome trees...
When I was a kid, we used to collect crinoids walking along the shore of Lake Michigan. They were just stem parts, just like stone cheerios. Fun to make necklaces with.
Just found your chanel and I can see myself binge watching the whole thing in the coming weeks. Quality content. Note for history: subbed at 12.8k subscribers. I hope your channel blows up in popularity in the coming year!
I have a Ginko biloba near my house. It's an astonishingly beautiful tree. I can imagine what a forest of ginkos would have looked like in a carboniferous autumn.
Great video - thank you for clearing up some details of the plants during the carboniferous period. I thought that one of the huge factors that stopped the dinosaurs rebounding was the evolution of grasses.
I went to drumheller in Alberta, Canada this summer. There is a huge museum there about dinosaurs, since there are tons and tons of dinosaurs fossils around from the cretaceous. the musuem has a very diverse collection, and they also go over the history of earth (although the precambrien sections is barely represented). Iin the permian section they represented dimetrodon-like and therapsids as reptile-like mammals or something like that. You're not alone doing this error if that makes you feel better xD . Reptile definition is not very clear but it does not include synapsids :) BTW did you know they just found there a couple week ago a complete haplosaur with it's skin still intact ? That's insane :O
Hi, I read that the reason the carboniferous produced coal deposits around the world is that the trees began producing lignin to strengthen their trunks - but the decay organisms were unable to break down lignin until millions of years later.
I really did enjoy this video - expanded my brain considerably! Two questions (though maybe you have answered them in other videos): (1) do you think that the high oxygen level you mention gave rise to, or encouraged. the development of wings in insects? and (2) teeth - did some amphibians have teeth, or did teeth evolve again in reptiles?
Ooo great questions! To be honest I don't know haha, BUT my guess for (1) is no, because I feel that the oxygen wouldn't have benefitted in any way with the development of wings (maybe their size, but not their presence), because wings is SUCH an advantageous evolutionary trait that I feel it would've evolved no matter the oxygen concentration and it just so happened to be around this time. Now for (2) I am also guessing, but I would say probably both. My guess is because the fish, like Tiktaalik, had teeth when they transitioned to land that some of the early amphibians had teeth, some probably lost them and then re-evolved them in some groups later on because (like wings) teeth are super evolutionarily advantageous so they probably evolved many times in many groups. (BUT AGAIN, these are my educated guesses, I am not an evolutionary expert) ;)
Really interesting stuff. Some of my favorite critters come from old times, like Dunkleosteus and Megatherium, I remember seeing them in books when I was younger. Nice to learn more about them in more modern times, thank you.
An excellent work although might not be of all the public interest. Details well cared, the presentation, including narration, is marvelous, visually appealing as well. Terrestrial animals both vertebrates & invertebrates may often be featured for that period, the video introduces events under water, during transition & the landscape which sets up a stage for newcomers. The structure of the footage is well considered, which makes it distinct from others. Personally, terrestrial creatures in mesozoic is of principal interest. Looking forward to it. Incidentally "before mammals" ? Could be misleading. Yes, those stem groups of mammalian lineage made a debut, but the term sounds misnomer (hair-splitting though). Thanks for your dedication!
Thanks so much! I don't have that much of it, it's more just me regurgitating what's in my textbooks, but I would eventually love to have all this knowledge in my brain :D
I believe Cordaites is pronounced "Core-dye-tees" from what I found online. Great and very informative video nevertheless! This is definitely one of my favorite time periods.
Great video! My PhD advisor says we can't quantify living biomass on preservation bias! Sure we see METRIC LOADS of coal, but this is actually due to the lack of decomposers at this time! Cellulose is still impossible to breakdown in your gut it's tough stuff, reserved for only a few niche organisms bold enough to evolve to break it down :D cheers!
Carboniferous is cooler! I remember (through some reincarnation mechanism) splashing and bubbling around in warm ponds snapping a giant dragonfly now and then, what a square meal! Life was simpler then, instead of this complicated world of wars, famine and climate change. The only thing you had to take care of was avoiding deep water where evil fishes could attack you.
A very nice and simultaneously complete and succinct presentation! I have always wondered, though, how is it that carboniferous forests weren't regularly obliterated by terrifyingly huge and unstoppable forest fires, given the 35% oxygen levels!
Well remember, plants had just started to spread over land so Chris is right that they were relatively far apart (both the bunches and the individual trees), and also these were all swamp lands so very moist! There were only beginning to be forests in dry regions at the time and I bet they did experience forest fires often, but the swamps were too moist. Another thing to remember is much of the land was still just rock, grasses and grasslands didn't evolve until millions of years later in the Cenozoic. :)
@@MrChristianDT In my own defense, I didn't know until I watched this video that carboniferous forests were sparse, though I did begin to consider the possibility (I'm not trying to backdate my knowledge, really. Maybe. NO REALLY!) that perhaps sparse forest structure was part of survival strategy while I was composing this comment (or shortly thereafter).
@@GEOGIRL I know little about forest fire dynamics, especially at high oxygen concentrations (and I don't intend to find out by direct experience), but I'm pretty sure that even very green wood will happily combust at 35% oxygen levels (I know, I know it's not 'wood' at this time, but still...), furthermore, at least the tops (presumably where all the juicy volatiles are concentrated) of the trees would be vulnerable. Also, would great conflagrations (likely lasting just a few hours or maybe days) really show up in the fossil record? My intuition says it would, at least sometimes, but I know next to nothing about taphonomy. As regards underbrush/grasses, I understand that these didn't really exist at the time, but.. 35 PERCENT!!! C'mon! Also, I feel constrained to point out that even you said maybe these weren't actually swamps. Anyway, as I said, I really enjoy your content but I'm quite sure that comment sycophancy isn't the path to better content. Cheers!
@@johnwiles4391 Oh my gosh, I wasn't at all trying to be sycophantic, I am sorry it came across that way, I only wanted to try to answer the question ;) Like I said, I think you are right that there must have been forest fires then, and I am sure they are preserved in the rock record. I just wanted to point out how moist things were because most of these newly moved to land trees and vegetated environments were incredibly moist and swampy, and I thought that fires only started in dry regions (BUT I could always be wrong I am only human, I am just given what I think is a good reason to why there might not have been more fires than today) :)
Be thankful you have never heard the term "ginko biloba" before. During the Nineties/Aughts it was one of the major snake-oils being sold. There were constant adverts on tele for it. The only health benefits, for the saps that bought it, were detrimental or negligible. If I recall correctly is was utilised as a stimulant. In industry we consider an Oxygen level of 22 percent to be IDLH, immediately dangerous to life or health because it is oxygen enriched and considered explosive. 19.5 would be the same on the lower end for the opposite reasons. As a kid I grew -up in the "Permian Basin" and went to "Permian High", how cool is that, eh. Cool bedspread, I have an actual chart on the wall in my room. :) Not to out-nerd you or anything, no way I could possibly do that. (The new definition of "nerd" utilised.)
Aragonite formation is favored over calcite formation under conditions where the Mg/Ca ratio is high because the aragonite mineral structure can incorporate more Mg than than the calcite mineral structure can. The reason the ions can only 'fit' in certain mineral structures (atomic arrangments) is due to the difference in ion radius (size) of the Ca ion vs the Mg ion. Hope that makes sense ;)
Yes! Well, keep in mind, it is their test (or hard outer shell) that reaches that size, their cell is the tiny thing at the very center that drove the process of building that shell, but the cell itself does not reach a size that large. Foraminifera tests (or shells) have been shown to reach up to 20 cm!!! Isn't that crazy :D So cool!
@@GEOGIRL Okay, so it's not the cell itself. But that's still superweird. I've been learning a lot of really amazing things about microorganisms latetly. Bacteriophage virusses are scary! Not just what they do but the way they are built. They look like some insidious micro-weapon out of a science ficton spy movie.
@@NelsonDiscovery Yes, the micro-world is quite crazy both the things they do and their physical appearances! I feel like microbes have certainly been the inspiration behind some movie ideas haha
geogirl it’s been awhile! Sorry I haven’t been active I’ve been super busy with college. What’s a good way to contact you? I have something fun brewing in my mind and need advice!
Ha! You were damn close, past self. There were dragon flies with two foot wing spans and centipedes ten feet long. That not centipede feet, that's more like two or three meters.
I would literally marry you tomorrow if I could find a way to trick you into it lol. I don't mean to be rude, you just strike me as awesome is all. I'd totally be your armored placoderm.
that's interesting that you describe dimetrodon as a reptile that was a synapsid. Not very long ago I must have been brutally scolded for calling dimetrodon a dinosaur, and that it was a synapsid which became mammals. But I thought, it would have been a giant lizard, and dinosaur doesn't always have strict scientific meaning, there is also a casual definition (slang?) which means "all of those giant lizards as far back as lizards existed", and for some reason it was as though you were the first person I saw to actually use the term "reptile" to describe dimetrodon, because although they would be a synapsid,,, they were still a lizard. I realize that the understanding is they did not evolve to become the scientific family that was dinosaurs, but they were still a reptile a-way-back-then. Also interesting, from your video it almost is implied that although dimetrodon did not evolve to become a dinosaur, it must have been one of those other large fin-backed reptiles that did. So honestly it's just the same that a large fin-backed lizard (just like dimetrodon in every practical way) WAS the first dinosaur.
I mean, barely any therapsids would have evolved into mammals, , that would be a limited few, but people still call them "early mammals" in casual conversation, and are greeted warmly for it.
Hahaha I actually just pinned a comment about that (I corrected myself: Dimetrodon was reptile-like but NOT actually a reptile), see the pinned comment at the top! ;) Also, that would mean that dinosaurs evolved from the other amniote group (sauropsids) not the one that including Dimetrodon (synapsids) so Dimetrodon was never a dinosaur or related to any (or an ancestor of any) :) Dinosauria is the clade that we commonly call dinosaurs and they actually do have strict scientific meaning. SO SORRY for the confusion I should NOT have called Dimetrodon a reptile, I hope that clears things up (again see the pinned comment for more explanation) Thanks!
@@GEOGIRL ah,, now the way english works,,, lol,,, (which is a word),, is you can't say what ISN'T a word, you can only specifically define how YOU are going to use it. That means that actually, dinosaur DOES mean whatever people used it to describe historically, , and literally everyone used it to describe basically all of those animals in the first pages of the "dinosaurs" school book,, until more recent years. THis means,, that no,, you cannot (according to how english works) say that they are not dinosaurs by all definitions,, you can only say they they do not fit into the taxonomical family "dinosauria" and that more casual uses of the word are non-scientific. That means that at the bar, I can call a dimetrodon a dinosaur in perfect english.
@@tsmspace Well technically they were never defined as dinosaurs because the definition of dinosaurs never included them, so there was never a time that any book (that was correctly using the term dinosaurs) would've designated Dimetrodon as a dinosaur. They were, however, once defined as reptiles, but reptiles has been redefined and we have to use the updated definition. We cannot just go around using definitions that are outdated because things wouldn't make sense. Even when we are using a word "casually" we should still be using it as it was scientifically defined (if it is a word that was defined by science like "dinosaur" was). If we don't, that is how misinformation and miscommunication is born, right? Sorry, I don't want to limit your ability of using the word dinosaur, it's just that as a scientist we try very hard to make sure that misinformation does NOT happen, so when people use scientific terms incorrectly it is a big deal, even though it may seem harmless. I hope you understand :)
@@GEOGIRL no dog. people say as the flow goes. And it doesn't matter, because you go to the big dinosaur park in south dakota and the main thing is a statue of dimetrodon. And then everyone sits around for hours saying it's not a dinosaur. besides, my favorite dinosaur is the pterodactyl.
Haha, I'm not sure, like I said, I think it should be "cor-dates" but that sounds an awful lot like 'chordates' which means vertebrete animals rather than plants and I didn't want to confuse people lol
Thanks! And actually it depends where you live ;) In the US, the Carboniferous was broken into the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian for reasons I discuss in my Carboniferous ice age video, and these are defined as periods at least in the US. I think in other parts of the world they still use Carboniferous as the period name and may treat the Miss and Penn as 'subperiods' but the way I have been taught, they'll always be periods to me haha! Where are you from? I am curious now :)
@@GEOGIRL, The official timescale of professional geologists is handled by the International Commission on Stratigraphy or ICS, and they define the Carboniferous Period with Mississippian and Pennsylvanian Subperiods. I wanted you to know the correct information since you are making educational videos. I have taught geology to undergraduates for 20+ years in Ohio, Illinois, and Washington State. I also teach chess in Seattle. Cheers.
@@UnderhillKoufax Wow, thanks! That's good to know, I appreciate you correcting me here. I agree, I always want to be putting out correct information since I am doing so publically, I just can't believe my textbooks got it so wrong! I guess it happens, I have published a paper with a typo so I am sure those authors can make mistakes too :) Thanks again for letting me know! Must be frusterating that they are mentioned as periods in so many places. I will be more careful about this in the future! ;)
@@GEOGIRL, The ICS ratified the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian Subperiods in 2000, so it is well accepted by most professional geologists now. Of course, there are always a few holdouts, but incorrect names (e.g., Vendian Period, Mississippian Period, Pennsylvanian Period, Primary Era, Secondary Era, Tertiary Era, Antediluvian Era) or incorrect dates (e.g., 570 Ma beginning of Cambrian Period, 65 Ma End-Cretaceous mass extinction) indicate that the speaker is using outdated sources. I appreciate people who have a passion for science education. Do you have a degree in education, science, or both? I am new to your channel so I don’t know. Please remember that the goal of teaching is not perfection, but improving each time you teach. As Nobel-Prize winner Dr. Feynman once said, “As I get older, I realize being wrong isn’t a bad thing like they teach you in school. It is an opportunity to learn something.” And as I tell my chess students, “The main difference between the Chess Master and beginner is that the Chess Master has lost many more games than the beginner has ever played. Making mistakes is one of the best ways to learn something new.” Keep up the good work. Cheers.
@@UnderhillKoufax Wow! I love that quote about being wrong, I am going to tell my students that! Also, yes, I have my bachelors in geology and I am currently a PhD student and TA. I started the youtube channel when I had to record some lectures for my lab students in 2020, and now it's grown into a great hobby for me :) Thanks so much for the support and encouraging words! And thanks for the new information, I am very lucky to have such an intelligent audience! :D
If tyrex was chicken, geo girl can u accept human cousin species had enormous titan body at that time, but their bones burried very deep that why never found yet
The synapsids like pelycosaurs and the later therapsids are no longer referred to as reptiles-- only the sauropsids nowadays. Older literature, though, will refer to them as "mammal-like reptiles," but that's no longer in use. Great video!
I think it's super cool to see life stumble on itself when it's first natural response to predation was bulk up, and when it realized that wasn't working it took the better, faster route. Now that's evolution!
Thank you! What an informative video! The late Paleozoic has always been a weak spot in my historical geology knowledge. I’m really glad to be filling those gaps! Also, Cordaites vs. Chordates vs. Cordates (heart-shaped leaves), and Archaeopteryx vs. Archaeopteris (my favorite Paleozoic plant!). I don’t know who came up with these names, but they really could have made more of an effort to be less confusing!
@@GEOGIRL We do know that there was more oxygen in the earth's atmosphere during the Carboniferous period. However, the only way to know exactly how much more oxygen was in the Earth's atmosphere at the time, We would have to travel back to the Carboniferous period and do atmospherical experiments.
Love the Carboniferous! Spent quite a bit of my Alaska career studying it, both in the subsurface and the field. So many stunning exposures in the Brooks Range. I remember several Mississippian limestone bedding surfaces that that were so fossiliferous and in situ that you felt like a time traveler walking a Missssippian shallow shelf. Another comment that jogged my old memory banks was your mention of the ginkgo tree, Ginko biloba. When I was cramming for paleontology finals at UC Berkeley I frequently would sit on a bench, just outside the department of paleontology’s building, that was shaded by the most magnificent ginko tree I’ve ever scene. It was my special place. I saved a leaf from that tree that I incorporated into a bookmark…I have it to this day. Wonderful video Rachel!
Ginko trees are wonderful and more people should plant them. They have a very nice upright growth pattern that requires very little pruning. Also, the wood is very flexible. I have a large ginko tree here in Lincoln, Nebraska. Years ago, we had a serious ice storm in October, while most trees still had leaves. The destruction was extensive with branches down all over. Most trees had heavy damage and many trees completely collapsed. The ginko's branches were weighted down with so much ice, they touched the ground all around it. But when the ice melted, the branches came back up. I didn't have to prune it at all while the other trees had me taking a dozen pick-up loads of branches to a drop-off site where the National Guard was at work. So, everybody plant ginko biloba!!
Don, I was always jealous of the exploration teams who got to go mapping and sampling in the Brooks Range while I only got to look at core on the slope (which was fun/interesting but not exciting). Imagine how it must have felt to know that you are one of only a few humans to see certain views and step on certain ridges or see herds of rarely seen animals and birds in their habitat.....special memories I bet. I bet you have some bear stories too.
Wow Alaska has rocks that old? Based on the Baja BC series Nick Zentner has done it seems there is good geological evidence such as the ophiolite "Z" and paleomagnetic and seismic tomography that Alaska was part of a vast old arc complex which had been out in the Ocean prior to North America ramming into it in the Jurassic after the break up of Pangaea. If that arc complex/microcontinent has stuff that old I wonder just what sorts of fascinating things lived and evolved there? There seems to have been a lot of really old arc complexes which date to the late Neoproterozoic in terms of ages. It seems the "so called "ribbon continent" microcontinent of accretionary arc complexes and fragmentary terrains must have been one of those ancient arcs which had managed to survive getting crushed up into the formation of Pangaea up until it started colliding with North America during the Mesozoic/early Paleogene.
i know there are rules in nature but its amazing how broad the combinations are that are possibel. we talk a lot about the animals evolving, but for me it seems that plants are also even interresting, the looks of the plantlife in the past was so different, alien, i wish i coud see it, but im happy with the next thing, you people that give me the chance to make an image for me of how our planet, life, evolved. so thank you geo girl for taking us along in the past, maybe it will give us a change to understand who we are today.... respect for your work geo girl! greetings from a belgian waffle:D
Oooh you're from Belgium, that's so cool! Thanks for watching and thanks for the comment! I totally agree, a lot of the plants looked super alien back then compared to now. I so badly wish we had time machines to go feel and touch them! haha
I love that you talked about corals! I feel like no one gives enough emphasis to the reef creatures! Super curious about coral evolution they’ve been surviving for what 500 million years? So cool! You’re awesome!
Thank you! I agree no one cares about invertebrates enough! It is so sad, but don't worry, I will always include invertebrate discussion in my videos ;)
Fascinating worlds. The developing terrestial flora seem to have led to a drastic decline in CO2, yet the temperatures did ot change untill the Karoo Ice age.
Great summary but the terms used on the mammalian / reptilian lineages runs slightly contrast to current conventions which seems to perturb palaeontologists today. As I understand it: The ancestors to both reptiles (diapsid) and mammals and their relatives (synapsids) were the ‘Amniotes’ and it was these anapsid descendants of amphibians that laid these watertight eggs. It was at this point the synapsids and diapsids split, which is why the term ‘mammal-like reptile’ has fallen out of use in the last decade; the stem-mammals evolved from amniotes, as did reptiles rather than mammals coming from reptiles. Dimetrodon was an offshoot of this lineage (Sphenacodontidae) rather than a direct ancestor of ours, and it’s currently believed it’s sail would be fairly useless for thermo-regulation as it’s vascular infrastructure seems unlikely to have delivered the flow needed to do so, and no other ectothermic life forms have converged on the same solution, making sexual selection another possibility, but there’s no evidence yet of sexual dimorphism which would be expected, but science is always finding new things, so we just don’t know at the moment… The evolution of these synapsids is amazing and well worth looking into further if you get a chance, every bit as amazing as the more popular dinosaurs
The oldest winged insect known right now is Delitzschala bitterfeldensis. (It's probably German paleontologists trying to troll other people not being able to pronounce the name.)
I find Tiktaalik and acanthastegans fascinating. I'm sure they must have found life difficult and challenging having to accustom themselves to having to bear their entire weight on their limbs.
Like others I also just discovered your site. I took Geology 101 in 1966 and fell in love with it because it taught me why, how and where I came from. I told my professor that I wanted to change my major and he asked me what were my goals in a career because in the mid 60s geologist were either teaching or driving cabs. So he dissuaded the change. Then in 1973 we had the Arab oil embargo, North Sea and Gulf of Mexico oil discoveries and geologist were in big demand. Please keep up your postings and I will check out the ones I missed. Very well presented. Thanks.
I would like to compliment the host. Everything is very well done. She happened to read good sources. However, she has a fantastic way to deliver the "matter". She has a future in the science divulgation field. I apologize to all who has been following this channel, but I just came across her. Good job girl!
Isn't this the period of time when the oxygen in Earth's atmosphere was over 30% and that allowed for HUGE invertebrates like giant insects? Also, what life forms in this period of time were humans' ancestors and what other modern day animals are they the ancestors of? Presumably all mammals at least.
Yep! Like I mentioned in the video, the insects were able to get huge due to the increased oxygen and the amphibians that had just evolved from lobed finned fished that began to walk on land evolved into reptiles which diversified into many groups, including the therapsids that later evolved into mammals ;)
So one important detail of the coal belt is that they generally didn't form on continents instead the coal deposits were found along what was then numerous mature topical volcanic arcs mush like modern Indonesia which would over the course of the Carboniferous become accreted/smashed between the continents Laurentia Baltica Siberia and Gondwana. This detail is important context because the late Devonian to late Permian was the great late Paleozoic ice age which involved numerous glaciation episodes interspersed with interglacials following the Milankovitch cycles for over a hundred million years. This caused significant changes in sea levels which caused environmental shifts between shallow tropical seas and tropical jungles. These sea level fluxes as well as the formation of deep basins during arc accretion where submerged organic material can accumulate was likely the true reason behind the great carboniferous coal belts with the mountain building metamorphism finishing the details behind the large frequency coal formation during this time. Also regarding the giant millipedes Arthropleura the discovery of giant Arthropleura living during times with much lower oxygen levels throws out the hypothesis that their large size was the cause of their gigantism instead it seems likely that the absence of competition was what likely enabled them to grow to large sizes then. The timeline for early land life whether myriapods chelicerates or insects is last I checked largely unresolved since the first appearance of these groups in the fossil record were already highly advanced and diverse which presumably couldn't have come from nowhere. Insects were likely around far earlier since the oldest fossils from around 400 Ma had already developed wings likewise by the time Myriapods appear into the fossil record in the Silurian the modern groups had already radiated and diversified. The same is true with Chelicerates with them having appeared in the fossil record largely already diversified. In fact the marine examples the Eurypterids and Horseshoe crabs had an odd peculiarity that they had to return to land to reproduce likely as in the modern counterparts of Horseshoe crabs(Xiphosura) their young lacked the ability to breathe in water until after their first major molt. We have reason to believe this applied to them since the vast majority of their fossil record are exoskeleton molts which in modern examples are produced whenever the animals come to shore to spawn. This along with phylogenetic evidence which identifies Horseshoe crabs as unequivocally being the sister group to the unfortunately poorly studied arachnid group called hooded tick spiders Ricinulei nested deep within the arachnid family tree. Notably supporting this is the mystery of why all arachnids as well as the Xiphosura and Eurypterids which have conventionally been thought to be sister groups to arachnids all possess strong UV fluorescence particularly tuned to the higher energy UV B and UVC radiation blocked out by the modern ozone layer. Moreover all these organisms appear to represent a single radiation to larger body sizes within a otherwise paraphyletic grouping of mites thus suggesting our classical picture of terrestrial colonization is likely incorrect. Thus there is growing evidence to suggest that the lack of these creatures in marine fossil record and their sudden appearance of already highly diverse and "advanced" terrestrial forms in the early Paleozoic is likely a result of fossilization bias of marine environments over terrestrial ones. I.e. animals had already come ashore much earlier based on molecular clock estimates and the lack of fossils some of them namely chelicerates and Myriapods had likely come ashore or into near shore/freshwater environments by the Cambrian likely following the colonization of land by the green algae from which plants descend. So not really new to land just new to gigantism though given they were all from the complex subduction fed volcanic archipelagos could this have been island gigantism?
I have a piece of shale that I found in the eastern rocky mountains west of Calgary Alberta [25 years ago]. It is packed with Crynoid stems and lacy Bryzoans. I have always wondered how old it was, now I know...Early Carboniferous [Mississippian]. Thanks very much Geo Girl!
Invited this it’s really cool how our ancestry began with worm like creatures with a notochord that gave rise primitive fish which gave rise to jawed fish which gave rise to lobe finned fishes which gave rise to amphibians which gave rise to amniotes which gave rise to stem mammals which gave rise to mammals which eventually gave rise to us via the ancestor shared by rodents, Lagomorphs and primates
Good video. I like all the plants and animals. Were the Carboniferous trees built more like banana trees, with more of a stem than a woody trunk? Also, what happened to dimetrodon when it got really windy? I would've liked to see one of those big hellbenders (giant river salamander). I wonder if they were poisonous, and how their skin toxins evolved? So much to discover.
Yes, exactly, more of a stem than a woddy trunk, at least for the early swamp trees, before large coniferous forests which were more woody. Also, I love the wind question LOL, I assume he either just went in the water, or hid behind some the trees haha. And what an interesting point about the skin toxins! Now you've got me wondering about their evolution too! I wish skin toxin residue was preserved in the rock record... I wonder if maybe some part of it is.. That'd be such a cool thing to study!
This summer I was working in a selective cut white pine forest. There were huge white pines scattered around while all other trees had been cut. It reminded me of the drawings I’d seen of lycopod forests.
PS. Fascinating video. Makes me want to reread Benton’s, and Brannen’s, books. When I retire, I hope to return to school and get a bachelors in one of the paleo fields. I’d do it now except by the time I graduate I’d be retirement age anyway, so may as well wait.
Yea, I'm not sure that this video is any better or different than the others, it's just that it is September now and I always start getting way more views when the school semester begins! haha! ;)
CORRECTION: Dimetrodons (pelycosaurs) were 'reptile shaped' (reptilomorphs) but did NOT evolve from reptiles.
Two major groups evolved from the earliest amniotes: sauropsids (which evolved into reptiles & birds) and synapsids (which evolved into mammals). Because pelycosaurs were synapsids, they actually never evolved 'from' reptiles, they just shared a close ancestor with them (the earliest amniotes).
These earliest amniotes were called reptilomorpha (reptile-shaped animals). The classification of 'reptiles' underwent some modification a couple decades ago and apparently my textbook had not adopted that change even though it was written relatively recently, so I apologize for any confusion!
Please thank my loyal follower, Ted Etienne, for catching this mistake! ;D
Thank you so much! And you even gave me a shout-out! >>blushes in embarrassment
@@tedetienne7639 Thank me? No thank YOU Ted! These are kind of things that makes me so happy to have such a knowledgeable audience. I am only human so I am bound to make mistakes, but when you catch them and help me out, that is really awesome! ;D
@@GEOGIRL Thanks for the clarification up date. This is all good stuff .Consensus agreement can change very quickly but some of us will unfortunately continue with what we know already. Also today's mistakes sometimes provoke tomorrow's new knowledge.
@@DavoidJohnson "Today's mistakes sometimes provoke tomorrow's new knowledge" Wow, I love that ;D
I was going to point that out. Thanks for the correction.
Hey I just found your channel and I love it!! I've always been interested in earth's past. I have so many books on prehistory and books on dinosaurs as well as many hours reading the wiki. Glad to see someone teaching others and getting them interested in the beauty of our past.
Thanks so much! So glad you like the topic and my channel :D
I'm going to be honest with you, I've never actually wondered what wacky creatures were running around before the dinosaurs but the algorithm has decided it's about damn time I learned
The ALGORITHM rules 😉
I read a hypothesis recently that speculated that the Carboniferous may not have been swampy. The reason we find such massive coal deposits from that period may be that pulp eating fungi had not yet appeared. Hence, the accumulation of forest debris that we now find as coal. I thought that was interesting, if it turns out to be correct. Fascinating presentation. Thanks!
Oh wow! That's such an interesting hypothesis! I am going to have to read about that, thanks for sharing ;D
Yes, fungi and other destruents have not developed yet on land, nothing could dissolve the lingin. It must have been surreal to behold these trunks to pile up and what would it have sounded like? All the pressure. Oil btw came late in the flat seas of the cretacious. Oil is the accumulated fluids of marine life, one could say coal and oil is concentrated former life.
@@nyoodmono4681 Oh interesting, I wonder if you mean all fungi? or just specific pulp eating fungi hadn't evolved on land yet? Because I read that fungi spread to land long before this, but I know it's still debated so I am curious what you've seen? :D
@@GEOGIRL Tbh i have only heard this from different sources without studying it. It would probably be more accurate to say that fungi and insects needed to evolve and learn how to digest this new lingen rescource on land. But it was definetly a crazy time where things on land changed so fast and even changed the atmosphere, seemingly.
This is what my bio professor told me, nothing had evolved yet to eat lignin and/or cellulose.
The amniotic egg and thicker skin were one of those breakthroughs in evolution.
100%!
Hi Geo Girl, I notice that "Earth System History" was written by Steven M. Stanley. When I was an Honors Historical Geology Student in the '80s, we used Stanley's "Earth and Life Through Time" as one of our texts. I still have it in my library of references. Sincerely: George F. Spicka, Curator of Paleontology (Collections Manager), Natural History Society of Maryland
Oh wow that's so cool! Thanks for the comment, nice to have a Curator of Paleontology here ;D
Being warm-blooded would be especially useful for nocturnal animals, because they can be very energetic when their cold-blooded competitors are sluggish because of cool nights.
Came back again for this presentation. I suppose being an artist I possess an imagination which takes me anywhere Geo Girl presents, in any earth time. following learning and seeing recreated images of flora and fauna millions of years ago, the conjured shapes of scenes almost too beautiful to behold in each epoch slowed down to our speed.
Where would I go first? I think 100 million years ago during the ebb and flow of the Western Seaway in North America. Over 600 miles wide and 2000 miles top to bottom. My fascination would be the offshore islands west of Laramidia and the diversity of fauna inhabiting them.
Still have to watch out for Spinosaurus.
Ginkos are freaking cool! First they turn this nice yellow, a rather mellow color, Then they drop almost ALL of their leaves in one night. Ginkos and monkey puzzle trees and redwoods are 3 of the most awesome trees...
I listen to this to bed, 4 nights in a row now!
You explain it so well with such a soothing voice. Thank you!
Oh my gosh! 4 nights in a row, wow, you are great thanks! haha ;) So glad you enjoy it so much!
@@GEOGIRL One of my fav topics yes! , a strange time that actually existed! 😮😮😮
When I was a kid, we used to collect crinoids walking along the shore of Lake Michigan. They were just stem parts, just like stone cheerios. Fun to make necklaces with.
Just found your chanel and I can see myself binge watching the whole thing in the coming weeks. Quality content.
Note for history: subbed at 12.8k subscribers.
I hope your channel blows up in popularity in the coming year!
I have a Ginko biloba near my house. It's an astonishingly beautiful tree. I can imagine what a forest of ginkos would have looked like in a carboniferous autumn.
Great video - thank you for clearing up some details of the plants during the carboniferous period. I thought that one of the huge factors that stopped the dinosaurs rebounding was the evolution of grasses.
i learn so much from your channel!! its amazing 😁👍
Thank you! I am so glad you find it informative :D
My favorite period! First stop with my time machine.
That's a great choice! I agree, this period is hard to beat! ;D
Excellent channel. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. I’m now a subscriber.
Thanks so much for the comment and for subscibing! I am so glad you like my channel :D
Love your videoes keep learning and making curious ❤️
I went to drumheller in Alberta, Canada this summer. There is a huge museum there about dinosaurs, since there are tons and tons of dinosaurs fossils around from the cretaceous. the musuem has a very diverse collection, and they also go over the history of earth (although the precambrien sections is barely represented). Iin the permian section they represented dimetrodon-like and therapsids as reptile-like mammals or something like that. You're not alone doing this error if that makes you feel better xD . Reptile definition is not very clear but it does not include synapsids :)
BTW did you know they just found there a couple week ago a complete haplosaur with it's skin still intact ? That's insane :O
Wow skin! Was it just an imprint or was the actual skin preserved?? Was is re-mineralized? OMG I have to look this up now haha so cool!
Excellent presentation. I learned from it.
Hi, I read that the reason the carboniferous produced coal deposits around the world is that the trees began producing lignin to strengthen their trunks - but the decay organisms were unable to break down lignin until millions of years later.
Yea, thanks for mentioning that, that's a great point! I am actually going to be making another video about that in the future ;D
You are amazing and so ambitious and intelligent and inspiring. Thank you
Thank you so much for the kind words! ;)
I really did enjoy this video - expanded my brain considerably! Two questions (though maybe you have answered them in other videos): (1) do you think that the high oxygen level you mention gave rise to, or encouraged. the development of wings in insects? and (2) teeth - did some amphibians have teeth, or did teeth evolve again in reptiles?
Ooo great questions! To be honest I don't know haha, BUT my guess for (1) is no, because I feel that the oxygen wouldn't have benefitted in any way with the development of wings (maybe their size, but not their presence), because wings is SUCH an advantageous evolutionary trait that I feel it would've evolved no matter the oxygen concentration and it just so happened to be around this time. Now for (2) I am also guessing, but I would say probably both. My guess is because the fish, like Tiktaalik, had teeth when they transitioned to land that some of the early amphibians had teeth, some probably lost them and then re-evolved them in some groups later on because (like wings) teeth are super evolutionarily advantageous so they probably evolved many times in many groups. (BUT AGAIN, these are my educated guesses, I am not an evolutionary expert) ;)
@@GEOGIRL Very many thanks for replying - looking forward to more of your videos
Really interesting stuff. Some of my favorite critters come from old times, like Dunkleosteus and Megatherium, I remember seeing them in books when I was younger. Nice to learn more about them in more modern times, thank you.
Dunkleosteus was known to participate in late Devonian, undersea basketball games.
An excellent work although might not be of all the public interest. Details well cared, the presentation, including narration, is marvelous, visually appealing as well.
Terrestrial animals both vertebrates & invertebrates may often be featured for that period, the video introduces events under water, during transition & the landscape which sets up a stage for newcomers. The structure of the footage is well considered, which makes it distinct from others. Personally, terrestrial creatures in mesozoic is of principal interest. Looking forward to it.
Incidentally "before mammals" ? Could be misleading. Yes, those stem groups of mammalian lineage made a debut, but the term sounds misnomer (hair-splitting though). Thanks for your dedication!
Mmmmm yeah I really like uhh.. Paleozoic life n stuff! Great video thanks for showing us
Awesome knowledge you have! 👍
Thanks so much! I don't have that much of it, it's more just me regurgitating what's in my textbooks, but I would eventually love to have all this knowledge in my brain :D
Do you have a master's or Ph.D in paleo?
So interesting. Thanks for the knowledge
Of course! So glad you found it interesting and informative! ;)
I believe Cordaites is pronounced "Core-dye-tees" from what I found online. Great and very informative video nevertheless! This is definitely one of my favorite time periods.
As always, amazing :)
Thank you! ;D
Great video! My PhD advisor says we can't quantify living biomass on preservation bias! Sure we see METRIC LOADS of coal, but this is actually due to the lack of decomposers at this time! Cellulose is still impossible to breakdown in your gut it's tough stuff, reserved for only a few niche organisms bold enough to evolve to break it down :D cheers!
Great summary!
Thanks ;D
The Merriam-Webster dictionary says the pronunciation of "cordiates" is Kor-dites.
Carboniferous is cooler! I remember (through some reincarnation mechanism) splashing and bubbling around in warm ponds snapping a giant dragonfly now and then, what a square meal! Life was simpler then, instead of this complicated world of wars, famine and climate change. The only thing you had to take care of was avoiding deep water where evil fishes could attack you.
New Subscriber: This was my second video I watched.
Yay! Which was the first? Hope you liked both! ;)
Very useful video 🙏
Thanks! So glad you thought so ;D
Great video. My favorite part was thinking about a forest of stem-like "pre trees"
Yea, I found those extremely interesting as well! :D
Great Penn fossils in North Texas.
really excellent content.
Thank you so much! :)
thanks for the science, gal gadot
A very nice and simultaneously complete and succinct presentation! I have always wondered, though, how is it that carboniferous forests weren't regularly obliterated by terrifyingly huge and unstoppable forest fires, given the 35% oxygen levels!
Maybe that's why some of these plants grew so far apart?
Well remember, plants had just started to spread over land so Chris is right that they were relatively far apart (both the bunches and the individual trees), and also these were all swamp lands so very moist! There were only beginning to be forests in dry regions at the time and I bet they did experience forest fires often, but the swamps were too moist. Another thing to remember is much of the land was still just rock, grasses and grasslands didn't evolve until millions of years later in the Cenozoic. :)
@@MrChristianDT In my own defense, I didn't know until I watched this video that carboniferous forests were sparse, though I did begin to consider the possibility (I'm not trying to backdate my knowledge, really. Maybe. NO REALLY!) that perhaps sparse forest structure was part of survival strategy while I was composing this comment (or shortly thereafter).
@@GEOGIRL I know little about forest fire dynamics, especially at high oxygen concentrations (and I don't intend to find out by direct experience), but I'm pretty sure that even very green wood will happily combust at 35% oxygen levels (I know, I know it's not 'wood' at this time, but still...), furthermore, at least the tops (presumably where all the juicy volatiles are concentrated) of the trees would be vulnerable. Also, would great conflagrations (likely lasting just a few hours or maybe days) really show up in the fossil record? My intuition says it would, at least sometimes, but I know next to nothing about taphonomy.
As regards underbrush/grasses, I understand that these didn't really exist at the time, but.. 35 PERCENT!!! C'mon! Also, I feel constrained to point out that even you said maybe these weren't actually swamps.
Anyway, as I said, I really enjoy your content but I'm quite sure that comment sycophancy isn't the path to better content. Cheers!
@@johnwiles4391 Oh my gosh, I wasn't at all trying to be sycophantic, I am sorry it came across that way, I only wanted to try to answer the question ;)
Like I said, I think you are right that there must have been forest fires then, and I am sure they are preserved in the rock record. I just wanted to point out how moist things were because most of these newly moved to land trees and vegetated environments were incredibly moist and swampy, and I thought that fires only started in dry regions (BUT I could always be wrong I am only human, I am just given what I think is a good reason to why there might not have been more fires than today) :)
Omg she is beautiful, I had to subscribe right away! We need more intelligent women here in England.
Thanks for subscribing! I hope you enjoy my videos ;D
Thanks
Of course! Glad you liked it ;)
Be thankful you have never heard the term "ginko biloba" before. During the Nineties/Aughts it was one of the major snake-oils being sold. There were constant adverts on tele for it. The only health benefits, for the saps that bought it, were detrimental or negligible. If I recall correctly is was utilised as a stimulant.
In industry we consider an Oxygen level of 22 percent to be IDLH, immediately dangerous to life or health because it is oxygen enriched and considered explosive. 19.5 would be the same on the lower end for the opposite reasons.
As a kid I grew -up in the "Permian Basin" and went to "Permian High", how cool is that, eh.
Cool bedspread, I have an actual chart on the wall in my room. :) Not to out-nerd you or anything, no way I could possibly do that. (The new definition of "nerd" utilised.)
Cool channel. Great depth and breadth of detail in a very concise package. Also, HR Giger fuckin' loved crinoids, amirite?
Now I'd really want to pay a visit to a carboniferous swamp tree forest 😅
Amphibians on pogo sticks!
Your hair looks nice in the video also very educational as well 👍 you do a really good job you should be a college professor
this was great thx 👍🏽
Imagine animals became space faring or returned to the sea
I thought the Devonian was part of the Late Paleozoic?
The Devonian is defined as part of the Mid Paleozoic (Early: Cambrian-Ordovician; Mid: Silurian-Devonian; Late: Carboniferous-Permian) :)
Why is aragonite formation favored in higher Mg conditions?
Aragonite formation is favored over calcite formation under conditions where the Mg/Ca ratio is high because the aragonite mineral structure can incorporate more Mg than than the calcite mineral structure can. The reason the ions can only 'fit' in certain mineral structures (atomic arrangments) is due to the difference in ion radius (size) of the Ca ion vs the Mg ion. Hope that makes sense ;)
@@GEOGIRL Yes, thanks for the explanation
"Cor-die-tees."
Aaahh Thank you!! ;D
5:48 A single cell of up to 10 cm length??? Not a colony? A single cell?
Yes! Well, keep in mind, it is their test (or hard outer shell) that reaches that size, their cell is the tiny thing at the very center that drove the process of building that shell, but the cell itself does not reach a size that large. Foraminifera tests (or shells) have been shown to reach up to 20 cm!!! Isn't that crazy :D So cool!
@@GEOGIRL Okay, so it's not the cell itself. But that's still superweird. I've been learning a lot of really amazing things about microorganisms latetly. Bacteriophage virusses are scary! Not just what they do but the way they are built. They look like some insidious micro-weapon out of a science ficton spy movie.
@@NelsonDiscovery Yes, the micro-world is quite crazy both the things they do and their physical appearances! I feel like microbes have certainly been the inspiration behind some movie ideas haha
geogirl it’s been awhile! Sorry I haven’t been active I’ve been super busy with college. What’s a good way to contact you? I have something fun brewing in my mind and need advice!
Hey, good to see a comment from you here! Hope you've been well, you can email me at rachelfphillips@aol.com! ;)
@@GEOGIRL Sent!
Nice look💖✨😇
Thanks! ;)
@@GEOGIRL most welcome..😇😇✨✨✨
If there were 5000 species of foramins, how did they find a mate in such a crowd of non-specifics??
That fish has a buzz saw in its mouth
6:40 time: "algal reeds"?
Hahaha Oops, reefs ;)
Spiders the size of large dogs! (Guess before I watch the video). Will edit...
Ha! You were damn close, past self. There were dragon flies with two foot wing spans and centipedes ten feet long. That not centipede feet, that's more like two or three meters.
😌
I would literally marry you tomorrow if I could find a way to trick you into it lol. I don't mean to be rude, you just strike me as awesome is all. I'd totally be your armored placoderm.
Hahaha thank you, I am so glad I come off as awesome! Sometimes I think it may be misconstrued as 'nerdy' rather than awesome LOL
CUBIC meters! Not square! Volume! Not area.
Oops, haha my bad, thanks for that correction ;)
that's interesting that you describe dimetrodon as a reptile that was a synapsid. Not very long ago I must have been brutally scolded for calling dimetrodon a dinosaur, and that it was a synapsid which became mammals. But I thought, it would have been a giant lizard, and dinosaur doesn't always have strict scientific meaning, there is also a casual definition (slang?) which means "all of those giant lizards as far back as lizards existed", and for some reason it was as though you were the first person I saw to actually use the term "reptile" to describe dimetrodon, because although they would be a synapsid,,, they were still a lizard. I realize that the understanding is they did not evolve to become the scientific family that was dinosaurs, but they were still a reptile a-way-back-then. Also interesting, from your video it almost is implied that although dimetrodon did not evolve to become a dinosaur, it must have been one of those other large fin-backed reptiles that did. So honestly it's just the same that a large fin-backed lizard (just like dimetrodon in every practical way) WAS the first dinosaur.
I mean, barely any therapsids would have evolved into mammals, , that would be a limited few, but people still call them "early mammals" in casual conversation, and are greeted warmly for it.
Hahaha I actually just pinned a comment about that (I corrected myself: Dimetrodon was reptile-like but NOT actually a reptile), see the pinned comment at the top! ;) Also, that would mean that dinosaurs evolved from the other amniote group (sauropsids) not the one that including Dimetrodon (synapsids) so Dimetrodon was never a dinosaur or related to any (or an ancestor of any) :) Dinosauria is the clade that we commonly call dinosaurs and they actually do have strict scientific meaning. SO SORRY for the confusion I should NOT have called Dimetrodon a reptile, I hope that clears things up (again see the pinned comment for more explanation) Thanks!
@@GEOGIRL ah,, now the way english works,,, lol,,, (which is a word),, is you can't say what ISN'T a word, you can only specifically define how YOU are going to use it. That means that actually, dinosaur DOES mean whatever people used it to describe historically, , and literally everyone used it to describe basically all of those animals in the first pages of the "dinosaurs" school book,, until more recent years. THis means,, that no,, you cannot (according to how english works) say that they are not dinosaurs by all definitions,, you can only say they they do not fit into the taxonomical family "dinosauria" and that more casual uses of the word are non-scientific. That means that at the bar, I can call a dimetrodon a dinosaur in perfect english.
@@tsmspace Well technically they were never defined as dinosaurs because the definition of dinosaurs never included them, so there was never a time that any book (that was correctly using the term dinosaurs) would've designated Dimetrodon as a dinosaur. They were, however, once defined as reptiles, but reptiles has been redefined and we have to use the updated definition. We cannot just go around using definitions that are outdated because things wouldn't make sense.
Even when we are using a word "casually" we should still be using it as it was scientifically defined (if it is a word that was defined by science like "dinosaur" was). If we don't, that is how misinformation and miscommunication is born, right? Sorry, I don't want to limit your ability of using the word dinosaur, it's just that as a scientist we try very hard to make sure that misinformation does NOT happen, so when people use scientific terms incorrectly it is a big deal, even though it may seem harmless. I hope you understand :)
@@GEOGIRL no dog. people say as the flow goes. And it doesn't matter, because you go to the big dinosaur park in south dakota and the main thing is a statue of dimetrodon. And then everyone sits around for hours saying it's not a dinosaur. besides, my favorite dinosaur is the pterodactyl.
8:24 You are clearly comparing volumes, not areas... you should say cubic meters, not square meters.
'cor-day-ites'?
Haha, I'm not sure, like I said, I think it should be "cor-dates" but that sounds an awful lot like 'chordates' which means vertebrete animals rather than plants and I didn't want to confuse people lol
@@GEOGIRL It was a suggestion, not a critique. I think you're amazing. Blessings.
Good job, but the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian are SUBPERIODS of the Carboniferous Period.
Thanks! And actually it depends where you live ;) In the US, the Carboniferous was broken into the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian for reasons I discuss in my Carboniferous ice age video, and these are defined as periods at least in the US. I think in other parts of the world they still use Carboniferous as the period name and may treat the Miss and Penn as 'subperiods' but the way I have been taught, they'll always be periods to me haha! Where are you from? I am curious now :)
@@GEOGIRL, The official timescale of professional geologists is handled by the International Commission on Stratigraphy or ICS, and they define the Carboniferous Period with Mississippian and Pennsylvanian Subperiods. I wanted you to know the correct information since you are making educational videos. I have taught geology to undergraduates for 20+ years in Ohio, Illinois, and Washington State. I also teach chess in Seattle. Cheers.
@@UnderhillKoufax Wow, thanks! That's good to know, I appreciate you correcting me here. I agree, I always want to be putting out correct information since I am doing so publically, I just can't believe my textbooks got it so wrong! I guess it happens, I have published a paper with a typo so I am sure those authors can make mistakes too :) Thanks again for letting me know! Must be frusterating that they are mentioned as periods in so many places. I will be more careful about this in the future! ;)
@@GEOGIRL, The ICS ratified the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian Subperiods in 2000, so it is well accepted by most professional geologists now. Of course, there are always a few holdouts, but incorrect names (e.g., Vendian Period, Mississippian Period, Pennsylvanian Period, Primary Era, Secondary Era, Tertiary Era, Antediluvian Era) or incorrect dates (e.g., 570 Ma beginning of Cambrian Period, 65 Ma End-Cretaceous mass extinction) indicate that the speaker is using outdated sources. I appreciate people who have a passion for science education. Do you have a degree in education, science, or both? I am new to your channel so I don’t know. Please remember that the goal of teaching is not perfection, but improving each time you teach. As Nobel-Prize winner Dr. Feynman once said, “As I get older, I realize being wrong isn’t a bad thing like they teach you in school. It is an opportunity to learn something.” And as I tell my chess students, “The main difference between the Chess Master and beginner is that the Chess Master has lost many more games than the beginner has ever played. Making mistakes is one of the best ways to learn something new.” Keep up the good work. Cheers.
@@UnderhillKoufax Wow! I love that quote about being wrong, I am going to tell my students that! Also, yes, I have my bachelors in geology and I am currently a PhD student and TA. I started the youtube channel when I had to record some lectures for my lab students in 2020, and now it's grown into a great hobby for me :) Thanks so much for the support and encouraging words! And thanks for the new information, I am very lucky to have such an intelligent audience! :D
🙃
If tyrex was chicken, geo girl can u accept human cousin species had enormous titan body at that time, but their bones burried very deep that why never found yet
Debate Kent Hovind
The synapsids like pelycosaurs and the later therapsids are no longer referred to as reptiles-- only the sauropsids nowadays. Older literature, though, will refer to them as "mammal-like reptiles," but that's no longer in use. Great video!
I think it's super cool to see life stumble on itself when it's first natural response to predation was bulk up, and when it realized that wasn't working it took the better, faster route. Now that's evolution!
Thank you! What an informative video! The late Paleozoic has always been a weak spot in my historical geology knowledge. I’m really glad to be filling those gaps!
Also, Cordaites vs. Chordates vs. Cordates (heart-shaped leaves), and Archaeopteryx vs. Archaeopteris (my favorite Paleozoic plant!). I don’t know who came up with these names, but they really could have made more of an effort to be less confusing!
Hahaha! AGREED about the names! They made a lot of those too close and too confusing! LOL
@@GEOGIRL We do know that there was more oxygen in the earth's atmosphere during the Carboniferous period. However, the only way to know exactly how much more oxygen was in the Earth's atmosphere at the time, We would have to travel back to the Carboniferous period and do atmospherical experiments.
@@stephenlangsl67 well that's not going to happen!
Love the Carboniferous! Spent quite a bit of my Alaska career studying it, both in the subsurface and the field. So many stunning exposures in the Brooks Range. I remember several Mississippian limestone bedding surfaces that that were so fossiliferous and in situ that you felt like a time traveler walking a Missssippian shallow shelf. Another comment that jogged my old memory banks was your mention of the ginkgo tree, Ginko biloba. When I was cramming for paleontology finals at UC Berkeley I frequently would sit on a bench, just outside the department of paleontology’s building, that was shaded by the most magnificent ginko tree I’ve ever scene. It was my special place. I saved a leaf from that tree that I incorporated into a bookmark…I have it to this day. Wonderful video Rachel!
Wow that's so cool! Mississipian limestone is always so packed with cool fossils, I love it! :D
Carboniferous Alaska??
Wow hard to imagine☺️
Ginko trees are wonderful and more people should plant them. They have a very nice upright growth pattern that requires very little pruning. Also, the wood is very flexible. I have a large ginko tree here in Lincoln, Nebraska. Years ago, we had a serious ice storm in October, while most trees still had leaves. The destruction was extensive with branches down all over. Most trees had heavy damage and many trees completely collapsed. The ginko's branches were weighted down with so much ice, they touched the ground all around it. But when the ice melted, the branches came back up. I didn't have to prune it at all while the other trees had me taking a dozen pick-up loads of branches to a drop-off site where the National Guard was at work. So, everybody plant ginko biloba!!
Don, I was always jealous of the exploration teams who got to go mapping and sampling in the Brooks Range while I only got to look at core on the slope (which was fun/interesting but not exciting). Imagine how it must have felt to know that you are one of only a few humans to see certain views and step on certain ridges or see herds of rarely seen animals and birds in their habitat.....special memories I bet. I bet you have some bear stories too.
Wow Alaska has rocks that old? Based on the Baja BC series Nick Zentner has done it seems there is good geological evidence such as the ophiolite "Z" and paleomagnetic and seismic tomography that Alaska was part of a vast old arc complex which had been out in the Ocean prior to North America ramming into it in the Jurassic after the break up of Pangaea. If that arc complex/microcontinent has stuff that old I wonder just what sorts of fascinating things lived and evolved there? There seems to have been a lot of really old arc complexes which date to the late Neoproterozoic in terms of ages. It seems the "so called "ribbon continent" microcontinent of accretionary arc complexes and fragmentary terrains must have been one of those ancient arcs which had managed to survive getting crushed up into the formation of Pangaea up until it started colliding with North America during the Mesozoic/early Paleogene.
i know there are rules in nature but its amazing how broad the combinations are that are possibel. we talk a lot about the animals evolving, but for me it seems that plants are also even interresting, the looks of the plantlife in the past was so different, alien, i wish i coud see it, but im happy with the next thing, you people that give me the chance to make an image for me of how our planet, life, evolved. so thank you geo girl for taking us along in the past, maybe it will give us a change to understand who we are today.... respect for your work geo girl! greetings from a belgian waffle:D
Oooh you're from Belgium, that's so cool! Thanks for watching and thanks for the comment! I totally agree, a lot of the plants looked super alien back then compared to now. I so badly wish we had time machines to go feel and touch them! haha
Just think our plant and animal life of today will be unrecognizable and alien to those of the future
@@SoulDelSol Wow, you're right, that is so trippy to think about! haha
I love that you talked about corals! I feel like no one gives enough emphasis to the reef creatures! Super curious about coral evolution they’ve been surviving for what 500 million years? So cool! You’re awesome!
Thank you! I agree no one cares about invertebrates enough! It is so sad, but don't worry, I will always include invertebrate discussion in my videos ;)
@@GEOGIRL Can you do a coral evolution theme video?
Fascinating worlds. The developing terrestial flora seem to have led to a drastic decline in CO2, yet the temperatures did ot change untill the Karoo Ice age.
Great summary but the terms used on the mammalian / reptilian lineages runs slightly contrast to current conventions which seems to perturb palaeontologists today. As I understand it:
The ancestors to both reptiles (diapsid) and mammals and their relatives (synapsids) were the ‘Amniotes’ and it was these anapsid descendants of amphibians that laid these watertight eggs. It was at this point the synapsids and diapsids split, which is why the term ‘mammal-like reptile’ has fallen out of use in the last decade; the stem-mammals evolved from amniotes, as did reptiles rather than mammals coming from reptiles.
Dimetrodon was an offshoot of this lineage (Sphenacodontidae) rather than a direct ancestor of ours, and it’s currently believed it’s sail would be fairly useless for thermo-regulation as it’s vascular infrastructure seems unlikely to have delivered the flow needed to do so, and no other ectothermic life forms have converged on the same solution, making sexual selection another possibility, but there’s no evidence yet of sexual dimorphism which would be expected, but science is always finding new things, so we just don’t know at the moment…
The evolution of these synapsids is amazing and well worth looking into further if you get a chance, every bit as amazing as the more popular dinosaurs
The oldest winged insect known right now is Delitzschala bitterfeldensis. (It's probably German paleontologists trying to troll other people not being able to pronounce the name.)
I find Tiktaalik and acanthastegans fascinating. I'm sure they must have found life difficult and challenging having to accustom themselves to having to bear their entire weight on their limbs.
I remember the carboniferous very well. Lots of bugs, plants, and oxygen. Gave me a headache.
Great video! Artistic depictions of a carboniferous environment look so cool. Fun to learn about.
Thanks! So glad you liked it, I love looking for the depictions for these earth history videos ;D They are so cool!
Like others I also just discovered your site. I took Geology 101 in 1966 and fell in love with it because it taught me why, how and where I came from. I told my professor that I wanted to change my major and he asked me what were my goals in a career because in the mid 60s geologist were either teaching or driving cabs. So he dissuaded the change. Then in 1973 we had the Arab oil embargo, North Sea and Gulf of Mexico oil discoveries and geologist were in big demand. Please keep up your postings and I will check out the ones I missed. Very well presented. Thanks.
Thank you so much! I am so glad you enjoy and appreciate my posts ;D
I would like to compliment the host. Everything is very well done. She happened to read good sources. However, she has a fantastic way to deliver the "matter". She has a future in the science divulgation field. I apologize to all who has been following this channel, but I just came across her. Good job girl!
Thank you so much, this is so kind! :)
Interesting! Probably my favorite period in the paleozoic
It's a hard one to beat for sure! :D
Isn't this the period of time when the oxygen in Earth's atmosphere was over 30% and that allowed for HUGE invertebrates like giant insects? Also, what life forms in this period of time were humans' ancestors and what other modern day animals are they the ancestors of? Presumably all mammals at least.
Yep! Like I mentioned in the video, the insects were able to get huge due to the increased oxygen and the amphibians that had just evolved from lobed finned fished that began to walk on land evolved into reptiles which diversified into many groups, including the therapsids that later evolved into mammals ;)
NO NOT GIANT SPIDERS NOT THE JBA FOFI
Yes
So one important detail of the coal belt is that they generally didn't form on continents instead the coal deposits were found along what was then numerous mature topical volcanic arcs mush like modern Indonesia which would over the course of the Carboniferous become accreted/smashed between the continents Laurentia Baltica Siberia and Gondwana. This detail is important context because the late Devonian to late Permian was the great late Paleozoic ice age which involved numerous glaciation episodes interspersed with interglacials following the Milankovitch cycles for over a hundred million years. This caused significant changes in sea levels which caused environmental shifts between shallow tropical seas and tropical jungles. These sea level fluxes as well as the formation of deep basins during arc accretion where submerged organic material can accumulate was likely the true reason behind the great carboniferous coal belts with the mountain building metamorphism finishing the details behind the large frequency coal formation during this time.
Also regarding the giant millipedes Arthropleura the discovery of giant Arthropleura living during times with much lower oxygen levels throws out the hypothesis that their large size was the cause of their gigantism instead it seems likely that the absence of competition was what likely enabled them to grow to large sizes then.
The timeline for early land life whether myriapods chelicerates or insects is last I checked largely unresolved since the first appearance of these groups in the fossil record were already highly advanced and diverse which presumably couldn't have come from nowhere. Insects were likely around far earlier since the oldest fossils from around 400 Ma had already developed wings likewise by the time Myriapods appear into the fossil record in the Silurian the modern groups had already radiated and diversified. The same is true with Chelicerates with them having appeared in the fossil record largely already diversified. In fact the marine examples the Eurypterids and Horseshoe crabs had an odd peculiarity that they had to return to land to reproduce likely as in the modern counterparts of Horseshoe crabs(Xiphosura) their young lacked the ability to breathe in water until after their first major molt. We have reason to believe this applied to them since the vast majority of their fossil record are exoskeleton molts which in modern examples are produced whenever the animals come to shore to spawn. This along with phylogenetic evidence which identifies Horseshoe crabs as unequivocally being the sister group to the unfortunately poorly studied arachnid group called hooded tick spiders Ricinulei nested deep within the arachnid family tree. Notably supporting this is the mystery of why all arachnids as well as the Xiphosura and Eurypterids which have conventionally been thought to be sister groups to arachnids all possess strong UV
fluorescence particularly tuned to the higher energy UV B and UVC radiation blocked out by the modern ozone layer. Moreover all these organisms appear to represent a single radiation to larger body sizes within a otherwise
paraphyletic grouping of mites thus suggesting our classical picture of terrestrial colonization is likely incorrect.
Thus there is growing evidence to suggest that the lack of these creatures in marine fossil record and their sudden appearance of already highly diverse and "advanced" terrestrial forms in the early Paleozoic is likely a result of fossilization bias of marine environments over terrestrial ones. I.e. animals had already come ashore much earlier based on molecular clock estimates and the lack of fossils some of them namely chelicerates and Myriapods had likely come ashore or into near shore/freshwater environments by the Cambrian likely following the colonization of land by the green algae from which plants descend.
So not really new to land just new to gigantism though given they were all from the complex subduction fed volcanic archipelagos could this have been island gigantism?
Love your thoughtful contribution
I have a piece of shale that I found in the eastern rocky mountains west of Calgary Alberta [25 years ago]. It is packed with Crynoid stems and lacy Bryzoans. I have always wondered how old it was, now I know...Early Carboniferous [Mississippian]. Thanks very much Geo Girl!
Glossopteris looks startlingly similar to eucalyptus leaves. I wonder if they are related.
Life before mammals sucked. There was no milk for cookies.
That's a great point lol
🎉🎉 I've come back from the future to watch this again!!!! I love the carboniferous!!!!
Omg so many views! I’m so happy you’re starting to get the recognition you deserve! 😊
Aw thank you! So grateful for your support! ;D
Invited this it’s really cool how our ancestry began with worm like creatures with a notochord that gave rise primitive fish which gave rise to jawed fish which gave rise to lobe finned fishes which gave rise to amphibians which gave rise to amniotes which gave rise to stem mammals which gave rise to mammals which eventually gave rise to us via the ancestor shared by rodents, Lagomorphs and primates
Good video. I like all the plants and animals. Were the Carboniferous trees built more like banana trees, with more of a stem than a woody trunk? Also, what happened to dimetrodon when it got really windy? I would've liked to see one of those big hellbenders (giant river salamander). I wonder if they were poisonous, and how their skin toxins evolved? So much to discover.
Yes, exactly, more of a stem than a woddy trunk, at least for the early swamp trees, before large coniferous forests which were more woody. Also, I love the wind question LOL, I assume he either just went in the water, or hid behind some the trees haha. And what an interesting point about the skin toxins! Now you've got me wondering about their evolution too! I wish skin toxin residue was preserved in the rock record... I wonder if maybe some part of it is.. That'd be such a cool thing to study!
Thanks. Hey, I'm all for Dragonflies with 2' wing spans! But 10' Centipedes? Uh, nope. tavi.
just found the channel im searching for
That's good to hear, I hope you enjoy :D
This summer I was working in a selective cut white pine forest. There were huge white pines scattered around while all other trees had been cut. It reminded me of the drawings I’d seen of lycopod forests.
PS. Fascinating video. Makes me want to reread Benton’s, and Brannen’s, books. When I retire, I hope to return to school and get a bachelors in one of the paleo fields. I’d do it now except by the time I graduate I’d be retirement age anyway, so may as well wait.
I'll just be stupid and say she makes me remember what it is to learn. She's also nice to look at.
This video is doing very well, I better watch it. I ❤️ GEO GIRL
Yea, I'm not sure that this video is any better or different than the others, it's just that it is September now and I always start getting way more views when the school semester begins! haha! ;)
It's amazing that the earth could create an environment like this