>I know, which is why I'm skeptical about the outcome of the other one (the
>Ammons et al one). That is, if they really *are* a "fossil forest," even
>if a disturbed one (with stumps drifting in from yonder), you'd expect
>the ecology to be more consistent than you found it to be. As I recall,
>you found various types of pollens, leaves, etc. from temperate, tropical
>ecologies across levels (that is, in the same levels), right? That's what
>I'm remembering here. One thing I don't recall seeing is whether the
>mix is homogeneous between levels, which is what a one-event deposition
>would predict, or heterogeneous, which would be inconsistent with that.
>The diagrams I looked at were intra-level (which seemed to be the focus
>of the paper). Do you have multiple-level data to compare like this?
The data show differences between levels and a distribution of palynomorphs
and trees on levels that is inconsonant with any forest in our experience.
Art
http://chadwicka.swau.edu