Why is it ALL MOSTLY mammals above the dinosaurs?

I think this thread is done. The question asked is answered in the very article cited, Remarkable fossils capture mammals’ recovery after the dino-killing asteroid (this was also quoted earlier):

quote:

---

Now, though, a fossil-rich deposit in Colorado’s Denver Basin is offering paleontologists a window into how mammals, plants and reptiles recovered and flourished following the impact.

---

Though the primary focus of this particular article is mammals, it obviously isn't "ALL mammals above the dinosaurs."--Percy

RAZD replied as if he understood your post, but you didn't quote anything and I didn't understand it, so please let me seek clarification. That the thread is done? Something else? Plenty of what below the reptiles? Once I know that I can try to answer this: The article was about a sequence of layers containing mammal fossils - when you say "this layer," which layer are you referring to?Generally I can say that the duration in time that species persist varies widely. Some species might span many geologic ages, some might not. So answering your question in this general context, some mammal species might persist through many ages above the "mammal layer" where first found, some might not.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.Edited by Percy, : Typo.

But your thread title asked why it was "ALL mammals above the dinosaurs?" Your Message 1 said: It's obvious that you missed where the article clearly mentioned plants and reptiles. Since you only raised this point because you were careless in your reading, how is this thread not done?If there's something else you want to discuss, you could change the title. The only reading you have to do regarding the topic of this thread as described by you in Message 1 is this from the article:

quote:

---

Now, though, a fossil-rich deposit in Colorado’s Denver Basin is offering paleontologists a window into how mammals, plants and reptiles recovered and flourished following the impact.

---

--Percy