The coelacanths were thought to have gone extinct 66 million years ago, until a living specimen belonging to the order was discovered in 1938.

A living fossil is an extant taxon that phenotypically resembles related species known only from the fossil record. To be considered a living fossil, the fossil species must be old relative to the time of origin of the extant clade. Living fossils commonly are of species-poor lineages, but they need not be. While the body plan of a living fossil remains superficially similar, it is never the same species as the remote relatives it resembles, because genetic drift would inevitably change its chromosomal structure.

Living fossils exhibit stasis (also called "bradytely") over geologically long time scales. Popular literature may wrongly claim that a "living fossil" has undergone no significant evolution since fossil times, with practically no molecular evolution or morphological changes. Scientific investigations have repeatedly discredited such claims.[1][2][3]

The minimal superficial changes to living fossils are mistakenly declared as an absence of evolution, but they are examples of stabilizing selection, which is an evolutionary process—and perhaps the dominant process of morphological evolution.[4]


Fossil and living ginkgos
170 million-year-old fossil Ginkgo leaves
Living Ginkgo biloba plant

Living fossils have two main characteristics, although some have a third:

  1. Living organisms that are members of a taxon that has remained recognisable in the fossil record over an unusually long time span.
  2. They show little morphological divergence, whether from early members of the lineage, or among extant species.
  3. They tend to have little taxonomic diversity.[5]

The first two are required for recognition as a living fossil; some authors also require the third, others merely note it as a frequent trait.

Such criteria are neither well-defined nor clearly quantifiable, but modern methods for analyzing evolutionary dynamics can document the distinctive tempo of stasis.[6][7][8] Lineages that exhibit stasis over very short time scales are not considered living fossils; what is poorly-defined is the time scale over which the morphology must persist for that lineage to be recognized as a living fossil.

The term living fossil is much misunderstood in popular media in particular, in which it often is used meaninglessly. In professional literature the expression seldom appears and must be used with far more caution, although it has been used inconsistently.[9][10]

One example of a concept that could be confused with "living fossil" is that of a "Lazarus taxon", but the two are not equivalent; a Lazarus taxon (whether a single species or a group of related species) is one that suddenly reappears, either in the fossil record or in nature, as if the fossil had "come to life again".[11] In contrast to "Lazarus taxa", a living fossil in most senses is a species or lineage that has undergone exceptionally little change throughout a long fossil record, giving the impression that the extant taxon had remained identical through the entire fossil and modern period. Because of the mathematical inevitability of genetic drift, though, the DNA of the modern species is necessarily different from that of its distant, similar-looking ancestor. They almost certainly would not be able to cross-reproduce, and are not the same species.[12]

The average species turnover time, meaning the time between when a species first is established and when it finally disappears, varies widely among phyla, but averages about 2–3 million years.[citation needed] A living taxon that had long been thought to be extinct could be called a Lazarus taxon once it was discovered to be still extant. A dramatic example was the order Coelacanthiformes, of which the genus Latimeria was found to be extant in 1938. About that there is little debate – however, whether Latimeria resembles early members of its lineage sufficiently closely to be considered a living fossil as well as a Lazarus taxon has been denied by some authors in recent years.[1]

Coelacanths disappeared from the fossil record some 80 million years ago (in the upper Cretaceous period) and, to the extent that they exhibit low rates of morphological evolution, extant species qualify as living fossils. It must be emphasised that this criterion reflects fossil evidence, and is totally independent of whether the taxa had been subject to selection at all, which all living populations continuously are, whether they remain genetically unchanged or not.[13]

This apparent stasis, in turn, gives rise to a great deal of confusion – for one thing, the fossil record seldom preserves much more than the general morphology of a specimen. To determine much about its physiology is seldom possible; not even the most dramatic examples of living fossils can be expected to be without changes, no matter how persistently constant their fossils and the extant specimens might seem. To determine much about noncoding DNA is hardly ever possible, but even if a species were hypothetically unchanged in its physiology, it is to be expected from the very nature of the reproductive processes, that its non-functional genomic changes would continue at more-or-less standard rates. Hence, a fossil lineage with apparently constant morphology need not imply equally constant physiology, and certainly neither implies any cessation of the basic evolutionary processes such as natural selection, nor reduction in the usual rate of change of the noncoding DNA.[13]

Some living fossils are taxa that were known from palaeontological fossils before living representatives were discovered. The most famous examples of this are:

All the above include taxa that originally were described as fossils but now are known to include still-extant species.

Other examples of living fossils are single living species that have no close living relatives, but are survivors of large and widespread groups in the fossil record. For example:

All of these were described from fossils before later being found alive.[14][15][16]

The fact that a living fossil is a surviving representative of an archaic lineage does not imply that it must retain all the "primitive" features (plesiomorphies) of its ancestral lineage. Although it is common to say that living fossils exhibit "morphological stasis", stasis, in the scientific literature, does not mean that any species is strictly identical to its ancestor, much less remote ancestors.

Some living fossils are relicts of formerly diverse and morphologically varied lineages, but not all survivors of ancient lineages necessarily are regarded as living fossils. See for example the uniquely and highly autapomorphic oxpeckers, which appear to be the only survivors of an ancient lineage related to starlings and mockingbirds.[17]

Evolution and living fossils

The term living fossil is usually reserved for species or larger clades that are exceptional for their lack of morphological diversity and their exceptional conservatism, and several hypotheses could explain morphological stasis on a geologically long time-scale. Early analyses of evolutionary rates emphasized the persistence of a taxon rather than rates of evolutionary change.[18] Contemporary studies instead analyze rates and modes of phenotypic evolution, but most have focused on clades that are thought to be adaptive radiations rather than on those thought to be living fossils. Thus, very little is presently known about the evolutionary mechanisms that produce living fossils or how common they might be. Some recent studies have documented exceptionally low rates of ecological and phenotypic evolution despite rapid speciation.[19] This has been termed a "non-adaptive radiation" referring to diversification not accompanied by adaptation into various significantly different niches.[20] Such radiations are explanation for groups that are morphologically conservative. Persistent adaptation within an adaptive zone is a common explanation for morphological stasis.[21] The subject of very low evolutionary rates, however, has received much less attention in the recent literature than that of high rates.

Living fossils are not expected to exhibit exceptionally low rates of molecular evolution, and some studies have shown that they do not.[22] For example, on tadpole shrimp (Triops), one article notes, "Our work shows that organisms with conservative body plans are constantly radiating, and presumably, adapting to novel conditions... I would favor retiring the term 'living fossil' altogether, as it is generally misleading."[23] Some scientists instead prefer a new term stabilomorph, being defined as "an effect of a specific formula of adaptative strategy among organisms whose taxonomic status does not exceed genus-level. A high effectiveness of adaptation significantly reduces the need for differentiated phenotypic variants in response to environmental changes and provides for long-term evolutionary success."[24]

The question posed by several recent studies pointed out that the morphological conservatism of coelacanths is not supported by paleontological data.[25][26] In addition, it was shown recently that studies concluding that a slow rate of molecular evolution is linked to morphological conservatism in coelacanths are biased by the a priori hypothesis that these species are 'living fossils'.[1] Accordingly, the genome stasis hypothesis is challenged by the recent finding that the genome of the two extant coelacanth species L. chalumnae and L. menadoensis contain multiple species-specific insertions, indicating transposable element recent activity and contribution to post-speciation genome divergence.[27] Such studies, however, challenge only a genome stasis hypothesis, not the hypothesis of exceptionally low rates of phenotypic evolution.


The term was coined by Charles Darwin in his On the Origin of Species from 1859, when discussing Ornithorhynchus (the platypus) and Lepidosiren (the South American lungfish):

All fresh-water basins, taken together, make a small area compared with that of the sea or of the land; and, consequently, the competition between fresh-water productions will have been less severe than elsewhere; new forms will have been more slowly formed, and old forms more slowly exterminated. And it is in fresh water that we find seven genera of Ganoid fishes, remnants of a once preponderant order: and in fresh water we find some of the most anomalous forms now known in the world, as the Ornithorhynchus and Lepidosiren, which, like fossils, connect to a certain extent orders now widely separated in the natural scale. These anomalous forms may almost be called living fossils; they have endured to the present day, from having inhabited a confined area, and from having thus been exposed to less severe competition.

Other definitions


Elephant shrews resemble the extinct Leptictidium of Eocene Europe.

A living taxon that lived through a large portion of geologic time.[citation needed]

The Australian lungfish (Neoceratodus fosteri), also known as the Queensland lungfish, is an example of an organism that meets this criterion. Fossils identical to modern specimens have been dated at over 100 million years old. Modern Queensland lungfish have existed as a species for almost 30 million years. The contemporary nurse shark has existed for more than 112 million years, making this species one of the oldest, if not actually the oldest extant vertebrate species.

Resembles ancient species

A living taxon morphologically and/or physiologically resembling a fossil taxon through a large portion of geologic time (morphological stasis).[29]

Retains many ancient traits

More primitive trapdoor spiders, such as this female Liphistius sp., have segmented plates on the dorsal surface of the abdomen and cephalothorax, a character shared with scorpions, making it probable that after the spiders diverged from the scorpions, the earliest unique ancestor of trapdoor species was the first to split off from the lineage that contains all other extant spiders.

A living taxon with many characteristics believed to be primitive.[citation needed] This is a more neutral definition. However, it does not make it clear whether the taxon is truly old, or it simply has many plesiomorphies. Note that, as mentioned above, the converse may hold for true living fossil taxa; that is, they may possess a great many derived features (autapomorphies), and not be particularly "primitive" in appearance.

Relict population

Any one of the above three definitions, but also with a relict distribution in refuges.[citation needed]

Some paleontologists believe that living fossils with large distributions (such as Triops cancriformis) are not real living fossils. In the case of Triops cancriformis (living from the Triassic until now), the Triassic specimens lost most of their appendages (mostly only carapaces remain), and they have not been thoroughly examined since 1938.

Low diversity

Any of the first three definitions, but the clade also has a low taxonomic diversity (low diversity lineages).[citation needed]

Oxpeckers are morphologically somewhat similar to starlings due to shared plesiomorphies, but are uniquely adapted to feed on parasites and blood of large land mammals, which has always obscured their relationships. This lineage forms part of a radiation that includes Sturnidae and Mimidae, but appears to be the most ancient of these groups. Biogeography strongly suggests that oxpeckers originated in eastern Asia and only later arrived in Africa, where they now have a relict distribution.[17]

The two living species thus seem to represent an entirely extinct and (as Passerida go) rather ancient lineage, as certainly as this can be said in the absence of actual fossils. The latter is probably due to the fact that the oxpecker lineage never occurred in areas where conditions were good for fossilization of small bird bones, but of course, fossils of ancestral oxpeckers may one day turn up enabling this theory to be tested.

Operational definition

An operational definition was proposed in 2017, where a 'living fossil' lineage has a slow rate of evolution and occurs close to the middle of morphological variation (the centroid of morphospace) among related taxa (i.e. a species is morphologically conservative among relatives).[30] The scientific accuracy of the morphometric analyses used to classify tuatara as a living fossil under this definition have been criticised however,[31] which prompted a rebuttal from the original authors.[32]


Some of these are informally known as "living fossils".

Ginkgos not only have existed for a long time, but also have a long life span, with some having an age of over 2,500 years. Six specimens survived the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, 1 to 2 kilometers from ground zero. They still live there today.
Ferns were the dominant plant group in the Jurassic period, with some species, such as Osmunda claytoniana, maintaining evolutionary stasis for at least 180 million years.[33][34]






Echidnas are one of few mammals to lay eggs.
Hoatzin hatch with two visible claws on their wings, but the claws fall out once the birds reach maturity.
Crocodilians survived the K–Pg extinction event that killed off the non-avian dinosaurs.
Tuataras are reptiles, yet retain more primitive characteristics than lizards and snakes.
The goblin shark is the only extant representative of the family Mitsukurinidae, a lineage some 125 million years old (early Cretaceous).
Nautilus retain the external spiral shell that its other relatives have lost.
With little change over the last 450 million years, the horseshoe crabs appear as living fossils.

See also


  1. ^ a b c Casane, Didier; Laurenti, Patrick (2013-04-01). "Why coelacanths are not 'living fossils'". BioEssays. 35 (4): 332–338. doi:10.1002/bies.201200145. ISSN 1521-1878. PMID 23382020. S2CID 2751255.
  2. ^ Mathers, Thomas C.; Hammond, Robert L.; Jenner, Ronald A.; Hänfling, Bernd; Gómez, Africa (2013). "Multiple global radiations in tadpole shrimps challenge the concept of 'living fossils'". PeerJ. 1: e62. doi:10.7717/peerj.62. PMC 3628881. PMID 23638400.
  3. ^ Grandcolas, Philippe; Nattier, Romain; Trewick, Steve (2014-01-12). "Relict species: a relict concept?". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 29 (12): 655–663. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2014.10.002. ISSN 0169-5347. PMID 25454211.
  4. ^ Lynch, M (1990). "The rate of evolution in mammals from the standpoint of the neutral expectation". The American Naturalist. 136 (6): 727–741. doi:10.1086/285128. S2CID 11055926.
  5. ^ Eldridge, Niles; Stanley, Steven (1984). Living Fossils. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  6. ^ Butler, M.; King, A. (2004). "Phylogenetic comparative analysis: A modeling approach for adaptive evolution". The American Naturalist. 164 (6): 683–695. doi:10.1086/426002. PMID 29641928. S2CID 4795316.
  7. ^ Hansen, T.; Martins, E. (1996). "Translating between microevolutionary process and macroevolutionary patterns: The correlation structure of interspecific data". Evolution. 50 (4): 1404–1417. doi:10.2307/2410878. JSTOR 2410878. PMID 28565714.
  8. ^ Harmon, L.; Losos, J.; Davies, T.; Gillespie, R.; Gittleman, J.; Jennings, W.; et al. (2010). "Early bursts of body size and shape evolution are rare in comparative data". Evolution. 64 (8): 2385–2396. doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.01025.x. PMID 20455932. S2CID 17544335.
  9. ^ Nagalingum NS, Marshall CR, Quental TB, Rai HS, Little DP, Mathews S (11 November 2011). "Recent synchronous radiation of a living fossil". Science (published 20 October 2011). 334 (6057): 796–799. Bibcode:2011Sci...334..796N. doi:10.1126/science.1209926. PMID 22021670. S2CID 206535984.
  10. ^ Cavin, Lionel; Guinot, Guillaume (13 August 2014). Coelacanths as "almost living fossils". Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle (Report). Perspective Article. Genève, Switzerland: Département de Géologie et Paléontologie. doi:10.3389/fevo.2014.00049.
  11. ^ Dawson MR, Marivaux L, Li CK, Beard KC, Métais G (10 March 2006). "Laonastes and the "Lazarus effect" in recent mammals". Science. 311 (5766): 1456–1458. Bibcode:2006Sci...311.1456D. doi:10.1126/science.1124187. PMID 16527978. S2CID 25506765.
  12. ^ Let's make living fossils extinct
  13. ^ a b Yadav, P.R. (1 January 2009). Understanding Palaeontology. Discovery Publishing House. pp. 4 ff. ISBN 978-81-8356-477-9.
  14. ^ a b Montresor, M.; Janofske, D.; Willems, H. (1997). "The cyst-theca relationship in Calciodinellum operosum emend. (Peridiniales, Dinophyceae) and a new approach for the study of calcareous cysts". Journal of Phycology. 33 (1): 122–131. doi:10.1111/j.0022-3646.1997.00122.x. S2CID 84169394.
  15. ^ a b Gu, H.; Kirsch, M.; Zinßmeister, C.; Söhner, S.; Meier, K.J.S.; Liu, T.; Gottschling, M. (2013). "Waking the dead: Morphological and molecular characterization of extant †Posoniella tricarinelloides (Thoracosphaeraceae, Dinophyceae)". Protist. 164 (5): 583–597. doi:10.1016/j.protis.2013.06.001. PMID 23850812.
  16. ^ a b Mertens, K.N.; Takano, Y.; Head, M.J.; Matsuoka, K. (2014). "Living fossils in the Indo-Pacific warm pool: A refuge for thermophilic dinoflagellates during glaciations". Geology. 42 (6): 531–534. Bibcode:2014Geo....42..531M. doi:10.1130/G35456.1.
  17. ^ a b Zuccon, Dario; Cibois, Anne; Pasquet, Eric; Ericson, Per G.P. (2006). "Nuclear and mitochondrial sequence data reveal the major lineages of starlings, mynas and related taxa" (PDF). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 41 (2): 333–344. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2006.05.007. PMID 16806992.
  18. ^ Simpson, George (1953). The Major Features of Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press.
  19. ^ Kozack, K.; Weisrock, D. W.; Larson, A. (2006). "Rapid lineage accumulation in a non-adaptive radiation: phylogenetic analysis of diversification rates in eastern North American woodland salamanders (Plethodontidae: Plethodon)". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 273 (1586): 539–546. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3326. PMC 1560065. PMID 16537124.
  20. ^ Gittenberger, E. (1991). "What about non-adaptive radiation?". Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 43 (4): 263–272. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1991.tb00598.x.
  21. ^ Estes, Suzanne; Arnold, Stevan (2007). "Resolving the paradox of stasis: Models with stabilizing selection explain evolutionary divergence on all timescales". The American Naturalist. 169 (2): 227–244. doi:10.1086/510633. PMID 17211806. S2CID 18734233.
  22. ^ "The Falsity of Living Fossils". The Scientist. Retrieved 2015-12-03.
  23. ^ "Diversification in Ancient Tadpole Shrimps Challenges the Term 'Living Fossil'" Science Daily accessed 2 April 2013; "The Falsity of 'Living Fossils'", The Scientist accessed 2 April 2013.
  24. ^ Kin, Adrian; Błażejowski, Błażej (2014-10-02). "The Horseshoe Crab of the Genus Limulus: Living Fossil or Stabilomorph?". PLOS ONE. 9 (10): e108036. Bibcode:2014PLoSO...9j8036K. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0108036. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 4183490. PMID 25275563.
  25. ^ Friedman M, Coates MI, Anderson P (2007). "First discovery of a primitive coelacanth fin fills a major gap in the evolution of lobed fins and limbs". Evolution & Development. 9 (4): 329–37. doi:10.1111/j.1525-142X.2007.00169.x. PMID 17651357. S2CID 23069133.
  26. ^ Friedman M, Coates MI (2006). "A newly recognized fossil coelacanth highlights the early morphological diversification of the clade". Proc. R. Soc. B. 273 (1583): 245–250. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3316. PMC 1560029. PMID 16555794.
  27. ^ Naville M, Chalopin D, Casane D, Laurenti P, Volff JN (July–August 2015). "The coelacanth: Can a "living fossil" have active transposable elements in its genome?". Mobile Genetic Elements. 5 (4): 55–9. doi:10.1080/2159256X.2015.1052184. PMC 4588170. PMID 26442185.
  28. ^ On the Origin of Species, 1859, p. 107.
  29. ^ "The University of Chicago Medical Center: Scientists find lamprey a 'living fossil' ". 2006-10-26. Retrieved 2012-05-16.
  30. ^ a b Herrera-Flores, Jorge A.; Stubbs, Thomas L.; Benton, Michael J. (2017). "Macroevolutionary patterns in Rhynchocephalia: is the tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus) a living fossil?". Palaeontology. 60 (3): 319–328. doi:10.1111/pala.12284.
  31. ^ Vaux, Felix; Morgan-Richards, Mary; Daly, Elizabeth E.; Trewick, Steven A. (2019). "Tuatara and a new morphometric dataset for Rhynchocephalia: Comments on Herrera-Flores et al". Palaeontology. 62 (2): 321–334. doi:10.1111/pala.12402. S2CID 134902015.
  32. ^ Herrera-Flores, Jorge A.; Stubbs, Thomas L.; Benton, Michael J. (2019). "Reply to comments on: Macroevolutionary patterns in Rhynchocephalia: is the tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus) a living fossil?" (PDF). Palaeontology. 62 (2): 335–338. doi:10.1111/pala.12404. hdl:1983/846d212a-6eb6-494e-855f-e0684bede158. S2CID 133726749.
  33. ^ Bomfleur B, McLoughlin S, Vajda V (March 2014). "Fossilized nuclei and chromosomes reveal 180 million years of genomic stasis in royal ferns". Science. 343 (6177): 1376–7. Bibcode:2014Sci...343.1376B. doi:10.1126/science.1249884. PMID 24653037. S2CID 38248823.
  34. ^ Kazlev, M. Alan (2002). "Palaeos website". Archived from the original on 2006-01-05. Retrieved July 22, 2008.
  35. ^ "cyanobacteria". Archived from the original on 2019-05-03. Retrieved 2019-04-27.
  36. ^ Hagino, K.; Young, J. R.; Bown, P. R.; Godrijan, J.; Kulhanek, D.; Kogane, K.; Horiguchi, T. (2015). "Re-discovery of a "living fossil" coccolithophore from the coastal waters of Japan and Croatia". Marine Micropaleontology. 116 (1): 28–37. Bibcode:2015MarMP.116...28H. doi:10.1016/j.marmicro.2015.01.002.
  37. ^ Chambers, T.C.; Drinnan, A.N.; McLoughlin, S. (1998). "Some morphological features of Wollemi Pine (Wollemia nobilis: Araucariaceae) and their comparison to Cretaceous plant fossils". International Journal of Plant Sciences. 159: 160–171. doi:10.1086/297534. S2CID 84425685.
  38. ^ McLoughlin S., Vajda V.; Vajda (2005). "Ancient wollemi pines resurgent". American Scientist. 93 (6): 540–547. doi:10.1511/2005.56.981.
  39. ^ Vallejo-Marin, Mario (2017-08-01). "Revealed: the first ever flower, 140m years ago, looked like a magnolia". The Conversation. Retrieved 2023-05-17.
  40. ^ Robinson, T.; Yang, F.; Harrison, W. (2002). "Chromosome painting refines the history of genome evolution in hares and rabbits (order Lagomorpha)". Cytogenetic and Genome Research. 96 (1–4): 223–227. doi:10.1159/000063034. PMID 12438803. S2CID 19327437.
  41. ^ Eldridge, Niles; Stanley, Steven M., eds. (1984). "Tragulids as Living Fossils". Living Fossils. Casebooks in Earth Sciences. pp. 87–94. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-8271-3_9. ISBN 978-1-4613-8273-7.
  42. ^ "Why is the okapi called a living fossil?". The Milwaukee Journal. 24 June 1954.
  43. ^ "Red panda". National Zoo. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. 22 April 2016. Retrieved 4 May 2017. Red pandas are considered by many to be living fossils. They have no close living relatives, and their nearest fossil ancestors, Parailurus, lived 3–4 million years ago.
  44. ^ Fordyce, R.E.; Marx, F.G. (2013). "The pygmy right whale Caperea marginata: The last of the cetotheres". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 280 (1753): 1–6. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.2645. PMC 3574355. PMID 23256199.
  45. ^ "'Extinct' whale found: Odd-looking pygmy whale traced back 2 million years". Christian Science Monitor. 23 April 2012. Retrieved 19 December 2012.
  46. ^ Radcliffe, Robin W.; Morkel, Peter vdB. (2014). "Chapter 54: Rhinoceroses". In West, Gary; Heard, Darryl; Caulkett, Nigel (eds.). Zoo Animal and Wildlife Immobilization and Anesthesia (2nd ed.). doi:10.1002/9781118792919.ch54.
  47. ^ Janis, Christine M. (1984). "Tapirs as Living Fossils". In Eldridge, Niles; Stanley, Steven M. (eds.). Living Fossils. Casebooks in Earth Sciences. pp. 80–86. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-8271-3_8. ISBN 978-1-4613-8273-7.
  48. ^ Switek, Brian (21 March 2011). "The pelican's beak: Success and evolutionary stasis". Wired (repost). Wired Science. Vol. 152. pp. 15–20. doi:10.1007/s10336-010-0537-5. Retrieved 10 June 2013.
  49. ^ Morelle, Rebecca (4 June 2013). "Rediscovered hula painted frog 'is a living fossil'". BBC News. Retrieved 4 June 2013.
  50. ^ Dillon, Robert T.; Robinson, John D. (2009). "The snails the dinosaurs saw: are the pleurocerid populations of the Older Appalachians a relict of the Paleozoic Era?". Journal of the North American Benthological Society. 28 (1): 1–11. doi:10.1899/08-034.1. ISSN 0887-3593. S2CID 85340338.