Validating the new paradigm for extinction: Overcoming 200 years of historical neglect, philosophical misconception, and inadequate language

Abstract

The first “complete” paradigm of extinction was proposed as “the multigenerational, attritional loss of reproductive fitness,” for which MALF is a suitable acronym. A “complete” paradigm must encompass cause, effect, and a mechanism. The primary goal of this study is to verify the new paradigm. We cite four independent tests of the paradigm employing observational, experimental, and wholly theoretical techniques, utilizing phyletically diverse organisms from disparate parts of the Earth. All of these analyses confirmed the new paradigm. This new paradigm was originally derived from studies of MALF on six species of higher plants. We now report seven additional, worldwide examples from the earlier literature of higher plants (and a small mammal) that support the new paradigm. We also note the stark deficiencies in comparing “mass” and “background” extinctions and the unique case of the end-Cretaceous mass extinction. To provide context for the new paradigm, we explore the long history of linguistic and philosophical contradiction or misconception that prevented the construction of a complete extinction paradigm for approximately 200 years. We also discuss the inadequacy of “incomplete” paradigms based largely on “cause-alone” explanations. We then consider logical inconsistencies and difficulties inherent in the usage of the term “extinction” itself and propose a new term for extinction. We then discuss cases of relict species that are the last survivors of their lineage and are essentially “functionally” extinct, thus making them excellent subjects for the study of MALF. Anthropogenic extinctions are exceptionally rapid when compared to typical MALF extinctions. For extinctions occurring at least within the life span of a species we suggest the term “quasi-catastrophic.”