Many species now going extinct may vanish without a fossil trace

[Plazma Inferno!]

Scientists struggle to compare the magnitude of Earth’s ongoing sixth mass-extinction event with the five great die-offs of prehistory.
Three paleontologists from the University of Illinois at Chicago compared the "Red List" of endangered species with several ecological databases of living species and three paleontological databases of catalogued fossils. They ran a statistical analysis to indicate which threatened species were most likely to disappear with no mark of their existence. The researchers were shocked to find that more than 85 percent of the mammal species at high risk of extinction lack a fossil record. Those at highest risk have about half the probability of being incorporated into the fossil record compared to those at lower risk.
This finding also suggests that we may also be underestimating the extent of previous mass extinctions.

http://news.uic.edu/many-species-now-going-extinct-may-vanish-without-a-fossil-trace

 

[Edont Knoff]

Question is, how much has the world changed, and do these changes have an impact on the fossilation chances? I was told that 2000 years ago my place was full of swamps and jungle like forests. Now most swamps are gone and the forests are "cleaned up" with much less dead trees and undergrowth.

Swamps seem to be good places to preserve dead bodies. A lack of swamps seems to mean less natural preservation.

Swamps have been dried out in many countries to get more farmland or places to build houses.

Interesting research, but I'd like to see more investigation about the nature of the time, and how suitable those conditions were/are to fossilize dead animals and plants.