Blog # 2 Why is fossil record hard to interpret?

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.hgs.org/attachments/wysiwyg/14610/FossilAmonite.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.hgs.org/en/art/2177/&usg=__d1J8s3CNZ8RnySaPxQC_n86invM=&h=721&w=800&sz=120&hl=en&start=1&sig2=2cxCBnceLIok1bVUOzUZAw&zoom=1&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=q_iUnsM53g0jUM:&tbnh=129&tbnThe translation of the fossil record has been based upon various types of preservation.  Some species are underrepresented or have not yet been found.  We are left with a vague picture of the past, especially the beginning of the past.  Whether an organism is preserved greatly based on the surrounding environment from which it died.  Plants and animals from humid tropical forests are rarely preserved because they decompose rapidly in these regions.  Similarly, fossils from high elevation areas rarely survive due to high rates of erosion.  Desert creatures generally become fossilized more often due to the preserving arid conditions. aquatic organisms are often well preserved if their bodies ended up in deep water where there is little oxygen and life. Not all bones from the same animal survive equally well.  Lightweight bones with relatively large surface areas deteriorate more quickly and are, therefore, less often fossilized.  Small, delicate bones are also more likely to be crushed or carried away from the rest of a skeleton by running water. There is  fossil record resulting from the fact that paleontologists have not equally searched all areas of the globe. Because of the inaccessibility of some regions, such as Central Asia and much of Africa, their fossil records are poorly understood compared to those of Europe and North America.