'Mother Lode' of Fossils Discovered in Canada

[Judi Lynn]

'Mother Lode' of Fossils Discovered in Canada

The well-preserved nature of the fossils gives scientist a snapshot of life over 500 million years ago

Feb 11, 2014 |By Becky Oskin and LiveScience

A treasure trove of fossils chiseled out of a canyon in Canada's Kootenay National Park rivals the famous Burgess Shale, the best record of early life on Earth, scientists say.

"Once we started to break fresh rock, we realized we had discovered something incredibly special," said Robert Gaines, a geologist at Pomona College in Pomona, Calif., and co-author of a new study announcing the find. "It was an extraordinary moment."

The Burgess Shale refers to both a fossil find and a 505-million-year-old rock formation made of mud and clay. The renowned Burgess Shale fossil quarry, a UNESCO World Heritage site located in Yoho National Park, is in a glacier-carved cliff in the Canadian Rockies. The fossils were discovered in 1909. Since then, several other fossil sites have been found in the Burgess Shale, but none as rich as the original.

The fossils are extraordinary because they preserve soft parts of ancient animals in exceptional detail; these soft parts are less likely to be imprinted in stone than harder parts, like bones. More than 200 animal species have been identified at the 1909 fossil site, providing a rare window into the Cambrian explosion, the time when complex body forms first appeared in Earth's fossil record starting about 542 million years ago.

More:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mother-lode-of-fossils-discovered-in-canada/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciam%2Fevolution+%28Topic%3A+Evolution%29

[Scootaloo]

1. Ugh, I hate that phrase, "Cambrian explosion"

For the simple fact... it likely WASN'T an explosion.

As the article points out, the Burgess Shale is one of extremely few places where 1) the sediment was fine enough to preserve soft body impressions and 2) we can reach. This creates the impression of an "explosion" simply because conditions either did not permit for preservation of earlier forms, or if it did the data is inaccessible to us at the moment. All the forms in the Burgess shale likely evolved well before they were laid down there, sometime back in the Precambrian, and the shales are a snapshot well after the fact.

it annoys me because ID'ers love the "Cambrian explosion" idea, and use it to hawk their bullshit. Same reason the phrase "missing link" makes me want to gnaw someone's face off.

[azurnoir]

2. awww

you just gave baby Jesus's dino a sad

however the Pre-Cambrian is my favorite epoch in pre-history when regular lifeforms were the stuff of today's sci-fi

[Scootaloo]

3. Radial symmetry shall rise again!

Throw off the yoke of those bilateral oppressors, and their echinoderm imposters!

[azurnoir]

4. throw off the yoke of the trilobite overlords

the Ediacaran shall rule once more

[Enthusiast]

5. Scootaloo, I have considered exactly the same thing many times.

The fossils of the Burgess Shale were the result of fortuitous conditions and special medium that happened to the collect and preserve the bodies of Cambrian life. People forget, especially people of the creationist ilk, that fossilization is the result of rare circumstances and fossils like we find in the Burgess Shale are the most rare of all.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. Some good photos at the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/in-pictures-highlights-from-the-kootenay-fossil-site/article16793938/?from=16793750

[theHandpuppet]

8. Loved the photos

Can't wait to read further reports as discoveries are made.

[Javaman]

7. "The fossils were discovered in 1909."

considering in archeological terms, 1909 is like 5 minutes ago, wouldn't his be considered "Late breaking news"?

Okay, I couldn't resist the snark.

This is great stuff.