Article navigation
Other|
April 01, 1995
Why no new phyla after the Cambrian? Genome and ecospace hypotheses revisited
James W. Valentine
James W. Valentine
University of California at Berkeley, Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley, CA, United States
Search for other works by this author on:
PALAIOS (1995) 10 (2): 190-194.
Article history
first online:
03 Mar 2017
Citation
James W. Valentine; Why no new phyla after the Cambrian? Genome and ecospace hypotheses revisited. PALAIOS ; 10 (2): 190–194. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3515182
Download citation file:
Close
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Email alerts
Index Terms/Descriptors
Citing articles via
Related Articles
Coordinated stasis or coincident relative stability?
Paleobiology
Tetrapod origins
Paleobiology
Evolutionary implications of a new transitional blastozoan echinoderm from the middle Cambrian of the Czech Republic
Journal of Paleontology
O – Goldschmidt Abstracts 2013
Mineralogical Magazine
Related Book Content
From paleontology to paleobiology: A half-century of progress in understanding life history
The Web of Geological Sciences: Advances, Impacts, and Interactions
Extinctions of Permian and Triassic nonmarine vertebrates
Geological Implications of Impacts of Large Asteroids and Comets on the Earth
Windward vs. leeward variability of faunal distribution in a Silurian (Wenlockian) pinnacle reef complex—Ray Reef, Macomb County, Michigan
Paleozoic Stratigraphy and Resources of the Michigan Basin
Smith Woodward’s ideas on fish classification
Arthur Smith Woodward: His Life and Influence on Modern Vertebrate Palaeontology
Carbon-isotope anomalies at era boundaries; Global catastrophes and their ultimate cause
Global Catastrophes in Earth History; An Interdisciplinary Conference on Impacts, Volcanism, and Mass Mortality
Late Devonian icriodontid biofacies models and alternate shallow-water conodont zonation
Conodont Biofacies and Provincialism