{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010917030567685589, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.642512077294686, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What does palaeontology contribute to systematics in a molecular world?

Palaeontology provides the only direct record for morphological and genetic change through time and uniquely contributes to systematics in two ways: by providing access to denser taxon sampling than is otherwise possible and by dating divergence times. Claims that ancient DNA has survived millions of years in certain fossils suggested the possibility that palaeontology could contribute directly to molecular systematic studies. Unfortunately, none of the supposed geologically ancient DNA records stands up to detailed scrutiny and fossils therefore contribute primarily through the morphological information they preserve. Denser taxon sampling can improve the accuracy of phylogenetic estimates primarily through allowing better discrimination of homoplasy from homology. This in turn leads to more accurate hypotheses of character transformation. Denser taxon sampling also offers the opportunity for more accurate rooting, since more characters can be polarized by reference to a stem-group taxon than to an extant sister-group taxon. Missing data can be a problem for fossils, but is not crippling. Finally the temporal order of clade appearances in the fossil record can provide ancillary evidence for selecting a working phylogeny from among a number of equally most parsimonious cladograms.