Re: my working hypothesis for body size

[John Bois <jbois@umd5.umd.edu>]

On Fri, 1 May 1998, Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. wrote:

> Also, are global averages ecologically significant in the Late Cretaceous,
> say, compared to the Late Triassic?  In Pangaean times, the world is
> effectively one place, but due to continental drift and the rise of
> epicontinental seaways, the landmasses of the early part of the Late
> Cretaceous (in particular) were even more divided up than they are now.

Is Carroll's (1997) claim, in _Patterns and processes in Vertebrate
evolution_ wrong?  He says that Paleocene mammals radiated almost globally
within a "few hundred thousand years".