META-ANALYSIS OF FIELD-BASED FOSSIL COLLECTION METHODS
We focused on articles that 1) used aquatic macroinvertebrates (i.e., not terrestrial, vertebrate, plant, microbe, or microfossils); and 2) were based on fossil material (i.e., not death assemblages, living organisms, or simulations) that 3) was field-collected by the authors for the study at hand (i.e., not museum collections, databases, or literature). The topics were categorized as community paleoecology, biotic interactions, taphonomy/preservation, and “other” topics. Fossil collection method was categorized as “pickup” (hand-picked from ground or outcrop surface), slab/section (methodically counted on hard surfaces or stratigraphic sections), or bulk sediment (from volumes of disaggregated sediment).
We tabulated 703 articles, 93 of which used field-collected, fossil aquatic macroinvertebrates. Slab/section was the most common method (33%), followed by pickup (25%), then bulk sediment (23%). Some articles used more than one method. In 30% of articles, the method was not clearly described. When these “uncertain” articles were assigned a method (from context clues), the distribution changed: pickup 43%, slab/section 47%, bulk 25%.
By topic, 50% of community paleoecology papers used slab/section, followed by pickup (36%) and bulk (32%). Taphonomy/preservation was similar, with 52% slab/section, 36% pickup, but fewer bulk (24%). In biotic interactions, 50% used pickup, 36% bulk, and only 14% slab/section. “Other” papers used more slab/section (56%) and pickup (50%), with only 16% bulk.