Are Impact Craters and Extinction Episodes Periodic? Implications for Planetary Science and Astrobiology
First published: 2020
Brief summary
Meta-review of 58 published spectral analyses of impact crater ages and 35 analyses of extinction events; finds a majority support significant cycles averaging ~29.7 Myr (craters) and ~26.5 Myr (extinctions), with mutual ~26 Myr phase alignment.
Article
Are Impact Craters and Extinction Episodes Periodic? Implications for Planetary Science and Astrobiology is a peer-reviewed review article published by Astrobiology (journal) in 2020. It focuses on meta-review of 58 published spectral analyses of impact crater ages and 35 analyses of extinction events; finds a majority support significant cycles averaging ~29.7 Myr (craters) and ~26.5 Myr (extinctions), with mutual ~26 Myr phase alignment.
The analysis focuses on ~29.7 Myr (craters, ~60% of 58 analyses significant), ~26.5 Myr (extinctions, ~67% of 35 analyses significant). It also considers cross-wavelet transform analysis used. This gives the cycle claim a specific numerical and evidential setting rather than presenting periodicity only as a visual impression.
The article reports the following result: About 60% of the crater trials support a statistically significant cycle averaging approximately 29.7 million years, and about 67% of the trials of extinction episodes found a significant cycle averaging approximately 26.5 million years. The interpretation is strongest when it survives dating uncertainty, preservation bias, alternative event selections and correction for multiple statistical tests.
For cycles researchers, the article brings together impact craters, extinction cycles, astrobiology, meta-analysis. It is relevant to debates over whether recurring patterns in the geological record reflect astronomical forcing, internal Earth processes, preservation bias or dating uncertainty.
Because it is a peer-reviewed review article, the article is a strong starting point for discussion in the Geology & Paleontology forum, although its conclusions should still be compared with later replications and updated datasets.
Source details and credits
- Source / publisher: Astrobiology (journal)
- Source type: Peer-reviewed review article
- URL type: WWW
- Credits: Astrobiology (journal)
- URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32865423/