Interregional Correlation of the Base of the Serpukhovian Stage (Mississippian): Problems and Prospects

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Interregional Correlation of the Base of the Serpukhovian Stage (Mississippian): Problems and Prospects ©Filodiritto Editore – Proceedings Interregional Correlation of the Base of the Serpukhovian Stage (Mississippian): Problems and Prospects NIKOLAEVA Svetlana1,2,3, ALEKSEEV Alexander2,4, KULAGINA Elena5, GATOVSKY Yury4, PONOMAREVA Galina6, GIBSHMAN Nilyufer2 1 Kazan Federal University, Kazan, (RUSSIA) 2 Borissiak Paleontological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, (RUSSIA) 3 Natural History Museum, London, (UK) 4 Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, (RUSSIA) 5 Ufa Federal Research Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences, Ufa, (RUSSIA) 6 Perm State University, Perm, (RUSSIA) Email: [email protected] DOI: 10.26352/D924F5031 Abstract A review of the proposed markers for the base of the Serpukhovian has shown that their entries are not consistent in different sections, especially when they are not controlled by other fossil groups. The diagnosis and interspecific relations in the genus Lochriea of the conodont species L. ziegleri, the primary candidate marker, needs to be reassessed and it needs to be decided which morphotype is the best marker. The first occurrence levels of the marker foraminiferal species, especially J. delicata and N. postrugosus, need to be agreed, and the taxa from the critical levels need to be illustrated before a decision can be made on the boundary choice. Keywords: Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary, GSSP, ammonoids, conodonts, foraminifers Introduction The base of the Serpukhovian Stage is one of the high priority tasks of the Subcommission on Carboniferous Stratigraphy (SCCS). In the type Serpukhovian Region in the Moscow Basin this boundary has traditionally been drawn at the base of the Tarusian Regional Substage [1] at the regional subaerial unconformity surface [2], [3]. The basal beds of the Tarusian contain ammonoids of the genus Cravenoceras and the base of the Tarusian is traditionally correlated with the base of the Pendleian (E1) of Great Britain and with the base of the Lower Namurian of Belgium and Germany [4]. However, this lithological boundary cannot be accepted as an International Standard, such as a GSSP. Therefore, for substantiation and correlation of this boundary outside the type region, it is necessary to recognize marker taxa and select a new section, in which the first appearance datum (FAD) of a proposed boundary marker would be able to be traced in a continuous phylogenetic lineage. Several markers have been proposed, including conodonts, foraminifers, and ammonoids, but there are only few sections that are known to contain all three groups [5]. The following problems currently prevent the definition of the base of the Serpukhovian. 1. Some of the proposed taxa (e.g., the conodont Lochriea ziegleri Nemirovskaya, Perret and Meischner) appear below the traditional base of the Serpukhovian. 2. The appearance of some indicative taxa does not seem to be isochronous. For example, the foraminifer Janischewskina delicata (Malakhova, 1956), Neoarchaediscus postrugosus (Reitlinger, 1949), etc. have been reported from the “Brigantian” (i.e., 183 ©Filodiritto Editore – Proceedings uppermost Viséan) of Western Europe, although they appear in the Tarusian of the type area. 3. Ammonoids that have originally been used to mark the base of the Pendleian in the UK and the Lower Namurian in Germany are not found outside Western Europe. The ammonoid species Cravenoceras leion, which was originally thought to be the boundary marker, is not found outside the type area in the British Isles, and the species Edmooroceras pseudocoronula (Bisat, 1950) is only found in Germany, northern England, and Ireland. 4. The taxonomic concept of the major candidate, the conodont species Lochriea ziegleri, is not developed, and this species is not confirmed from North America. 5. Deep-water and shallow-water successions of the boundary interval cannot currently be reliably correlated. Below we will discuss these problems in greater detail and outline possible prospects for defining the boundary in the near future. Problems in Identifying the Base of the Serpukhovian (1) In the type Serpukhovian areas, in the Novogurovsky Quarry, the FOD (First Occurrence Datum) of L. ziegleri is established in the shallow-water limestones of the upper half of the Venevian (middle part of sequence VN2, Unit 23) [3]. However, the specimens of L. ziegleri from VN2 are derived, so the FAD (First Appearance Datum) of this species should be expected lower in the section [5]. It is clear that the first occurrence of L. ziegleri is below the base of the type Serpukhovian and its equivalents [6], and a decision should be made whether lowering the base of the Serpukhovian is an appropriate measure, or whether a marker should be sought among other taxa appearing nearer to the traditional boundary. Because of the traditional correlation of the basal Tarusian with the basal Namurian, Pendleian, and Kosogorian, this decision has to take into account changes that might affect regional scales in Belgium, UK and other areas, which will lead to objections by some authors [7]. In the Dombar Section in the Mugodzhary Region of the South Urals, the entry of L. ziegleri was recorded within the Hypergoniatites- Ferganoceras Genozone, the topmost in the Upper Viséan succession of the South Urals [8]. Similar results were obtained in the Verkhnyaya Kardailovka Section on the eastern slope of the South Urals where L. ziegleri first appears in the interval 19.53-19.63 m (L. cruciformis appears in the interval 19.63-19.72) from the base of the section, which is below the entry of Ferganoceras constrictum Nikolaeva and Konovalova, 2017 at 20.8 m from the base of the section [9], [10]. In the Wenne Section (Rhenish Massif, Germany) the FOD of L. ziegleri was reported from the Upper Viséan Lyrogoniatites suerlandense Zone [11], but this morphotype does not belong to this species [12]. It is more difficult to correlate the entry of L. ziegleri with foraminiferal markers because both are facies dependent, and in basinal sections indicative foraminifers are scarce or absent. (2) Among foraminifers, several species have been proposed as possible markers, the main candidates were Janischewskina delicata, Endothyranopsis plana Brazhnikova in Brazhnikova et al., 1967, Planoendothyra ex gr. aljutovica (Reitlinger, 1950), Eostaffellina decurta (Rauser- Chernousova, 1948), Neoarchaediscus postrugosus, Eolasiodiscus donbassicus Reitlinger, 1956, Monotaxinoides gracilis (Dain in Reitlinger, 1956) [13], [14], [15]. The FADs of these taxa do not seem to be consistent. For instance, Janischewskina delicata, Plectomillerella tortula (Zeller, 1953), Planoendothyra sp., and Endothyra phrissa (Zeller, 1953), were reported ca. 6 m above the base of the Venevian (middle of sequence VN2, Unit 23) [3], but this still needs to be confirmed, because in Zaborie (Moscow Basin) it is recorded from the Tarusian and in the Khudolaz Section from the Sunturian (see references in [5]). Vdovenko in [1] cited 184 ©Filodiritto Editore – Proceedings Janischewskina sp., Janischewskina ex gr. typica, Janischewskina ex gr. rovnensis (Ganelina, 1956) from the Moscow Basin. However, their distribution was not clearly shown. J. typica was illustrated ([1], pl. XVII, Fig. 3) from Sample G-15-16, which according to [1], p. 78, text- fig. 35, is approximately in the middle of the Tarusian in the Gurievsky Quarry, Tula Region, Moscow Basin. No J. delicata was illustrated. Gibshman et al., [2] illustrated J. delicata in pl. 5, Figs. 17 and 18 (Sample 14/40, Bed 25, Lower Tarusian); and J. typica in pl. 5, Fig. 13 (Sample 14/40, Bed 25). In the same publication J. delicata is shown in text-fig. 4 to occur in the middle of Bed 23, Sample 13/40, in the upper part of Bed 23, Sample 13/42, in the middle of Bed 24, Sample 13/43 (all Venevian), then near the base of Bed 25, Sample 14/40, middle of Bed 25, Sample 14/41, upper part of Bed 25, Sample 14/42, all Tarusian, and then in the Protvian. However, the description of the succession in the Novogurovsky Quarry mentions ([2], p. 22) the presence of J. cf. delicata in Beds 23 and 24, and J. cf. typica and J. delicata are reported from Bed 25. These discrepancies need to be clarified. Neoarchaediscus postrugosus in the Moscow Basin and Izyayu River (Subpolar Urals) enters in the basal Serpukhovian (i.e., in the Tarusian) [5], [16]. However, it has been reported from the Brigantian and its equivalents in British Isles and Morocco [17], [18] and Spain [19], [20]. In the Ladeinaya Gora Section in the Middle Urals, where Lochriea ziegleri is recorded in Bed 17, Neoarchaediscus postrugosus appears 1.5 m below it, at the base of Bed 17, Sample 17.3; and in the Mariinsky Log Section Neoarchaediscus postrugosus enters at the level of Sample 3c.3 in Unit 3b, 3 m above the FOD of L. ziegleri [21], [22]. Monotaxinoides gracilis is recorded in many regions and it is more or less associated with the Serpukhovian, appearing somewhat above the entry of L. ziegleri (Canalón Member of the Alba Formation, basal unit in the Vegas de Sotres Section, Cantabrian Mountains, Spain) above the level of the first appearance of L. ziegleri [19]. In the South Urals, in the Suleimanovo Section, it is also found ca. 4 m above the base of the Serpukhovian, probably in the equivalents of the Steshevian (the base of the stage is drawn by the appearance of Eostaffellina decurta [23]). In the Muradymovo Section, also South Urals, M. gracilis is found in the Yuldybaevian Regional Substage [24]. Summaries of the proposed foraminiferal markers published by [5], [25] and [41] showed considerable discrepancies in their FODs. It has been proposed to use two zonal foraminiferal schemes for the inner and outer shelf [25]. The summaries have suggested that the taxonomy of the key taxa and their detailed records need to be re-examined and published in greater detail. (3) The base of the Serpukhovian in the British Isles was traditionally considered to be close to the base of the Pendleian Stage.
Recommended publications
  • Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana
    Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 348 Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana By W. H. EASTON GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 348 A study of the stratigraphic and ecologic associa­ tions and significance offossils from the Big Snowy group of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian rocks UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1962 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library has cataloged this publication as follows : Eastern, William Heyden, 1916- Carboniferous formations and faunas of central Montana. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1961. iv, 126 p. illus., diagrs., tables. 29 cm. (U.S. Geological Survey. Professional paper 348) Part of illustrative matter folded in pocket. Bibliography: p. 101-108. 1. Paleontology Montana. 2. Paleontology Carboniferous. 3. Geology, Stratigraphic Carboniferous. I. Title. (Series) For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, B.C. CONTENTS Page Page Abstract-__________________________________________ 1 Faunal analysis Continued Introduction _______________________________________ 1 Faunal relations ______________________________ 22 Purposes of the study_ __________________________ 1 Long-ranging elements...__________________ 22 Organization of present work___ __________________ 3 Elements of Mississippian affinity.._________ 22 Acknowledgments--.-------.- ___________________
    [Show full text]
  • Northern England Serpukhovian (Early Namurian)
    1 Northern England Serpukhovian (early Namurian) 2 farfield responses to southern hemisphere glaciation 3 M.H. STEPHENSON1, L. ANGIOLINI2, P. CÓZAR3, F. JADOUL2, M.J. LENG4, D. 4 MILLWARD5, S. CHENERY1 5 1British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham, NG12 5GG, United Kingdom 6 2Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra "A. Desio", Università degli Studi di Milano, Via 7 Mangiagalli 34, Milano, 20133, Italy 8 3Instituto de Geología Económica CSIC-UCM; Facultad de Ciencias Geológicas; 9 Departamento de Paleontología; C./ José Antonio Novais 228040-Madrid; Spain 10 4NERC Isotope Geosciences Laboratory, British Geological Survey, Keyworth, 11 Nottingham, NG12 5GG, United Kingdom 12 5British Geological Survey, Murchison House, Edinburgh, United Kingdom 13 14 15 Word count 7967 16 7 figs 17 1 table 18 67 references 19 RUNNING HEADER: NAMURIAN FARFIELD GLACIATION REPONSE 1 20 Abstract: During the Serpukhovian (early Namurian) icehouse conditions were initiated 21 in the southern hemisphere; however nearfield evidence is inconsistent: glaciation 22 appears to have started in limited areas of eastern Australia in the earliest Serpukhovian, 23 followed by a long interglacial, whereas data from South America and Tibet suggest 24 glaciation throughout the Serpukhovian. New farfield data from the Woodland, 25 Throckley and Rowlands Gill boreholes in northern England allow this inconsistency to 26 be addressed. δ18O from well-preserved late Serpukhovian (late Pendleian to early 27 Arnsbergian) Woodland brachiopods vary between –3.4 and –6.3‰, and δ13C varies 28 between –2.0 and +3.2‰, suggesting a δ18O seawater (w) value of around –1.8‰ 29 VSMOW, and therefore an absence of widespread ice-caps. The organic carbon δ13C 30 upward increasing trend in the Throckley Borehole (Serpukhovian to Bashkirian; c.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Correlation of the Base of the Serpukhovian Stage
    Correlation of the base of the Serpukhovian Stage (Carboniferous; Mississippian) in northwest Europe GEORGE D. SEVASTOPULO* & MILO BARHAM✝ *Department of Geology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland ✝Milo Barham, Department of Applied Geology, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia Author for correspondence: [email protected] Running head: Correlation base Serpukhovian northwest Europe Abstract - The Task Group charged with proposing the GSSP for the base of the Serpukhovian Stage (Mississippian: Lower Carboniferous) is likely to use the global First Appearance Datum (FAD: evolutionary first appearance) of the conodont Lochriea ziegleri in the lineage Lochriea nodosa-L. ziegleri for the definition and correlation of the base of the stage. It is important to establish that the FOD (First Occurrence Datum) of L. ziegleri in different basins is essentially penecontemporaneous. Ammonoids provide high-resolution biostratigraphy in the late Mississippian but their use for international correlation is limited by provincialism. However, it is possible to assess the levels of diachronism of the FOD of L. ziegleri in sections in northwest Europe using ammonoid zones. Published compilations of conodont distribution in the Rhenish Slate Mountains of Germany show the FOD of L. ziegleri in the Emstites novalis Biozone (upper part of the P2c zone of the British/Irish ammonoid biozonation) but L. ziegleri has also been reported as occurring in the Neoglyphioceras spirale Biozone (P1d zone). In the Yoredale Group of northern England, the FOD of L. ziegleri is in either the P1c or P1d zone. In NW Ireland, the oldest records of both L. nodosa and L. ziegleri are from the Lusitanoceras granosum Biozone (P2a).
    [Show full text]
  • Lithostratigraphy, Microlithofacies, And
    Lithostratigraphy, Microlithofacies, and Conodont Biostratigraphy and Biofacies of the Wahoo Limestone (Carboniferous), Eastern Sadlerochit Mountains, Northeast Brooks Range, Alaska U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1568 j^^^fe^i^^t%t^^S%^A^tK-^^ ^.3lF Cover: Angular unconformity separating steeply dipping pre-Mississippian rocks from gently dipping carbonate rocks of the Lisburne Group near Sunset Pass, eastern Sadlerochit Mountains, northeast Brooks Range, Alaska. The image is a digital enhancement of the photograph (fig. 5) on page 9. Lithostratigraphy, Microlithofacies, and Conodont Biostratigraphy and Biofacies of the Wahoo Limestone (Carboniferous), Eastern Sadlerochit Mountains, Northeast Brooks Range, Alaska By Andrea P. Krumhardt, Anita G. Harris, and Keith F. Watts U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1568 Description of the lithostratigraphy, microlithofacies, and conodont bio stratigraphy and biofacies in a key section of a relatively widespread stratigraphic unit that straddles the Mississippian-Pennsylvanian boundary UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1996 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GORDON P. EATON, Director For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Published in the Eastern Region, Reston, Va. Manuscript approved for publication June 26, 1995. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Krumhardt, Andrea P. Lithostratigraphy, microlithofacies, and conodont biostratigraphy and biofacies of the Wahoo Limestone (Carboniferous), eastern Sadlerochit Mountains, northeast Brooks Range, Alaska / by Andrea P. Krumhardt, Anita G. Harris, and Keith F.
    [Show full text]
  • International Chronostratigraphic Chart
    INTERNATIONAL CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHIC CHART www.stratigraphy.org International Commission on Stratigraphy v 2014/02 numerical numerical numerical Eonothem numerical Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age Series / Epoch Stage / Age Erathem / Era System / Period GSSP GSSP age (Ma) GSSP GSSA EonothemErathem / Eon System / Era / Period EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) EonothemErathem / Eon System/ Era / Period age (Ma) / Eon GSSP age (Ma) present ~ 145.0 358.9 ± 0.4 ~ 541.0 ±1.0 Holocene Ediacaran 0.0117 Tithonian Upper 152.1 ±0.9 Famennian ~ 635 0.126 Upper Kimmeridgian Neo- Cryogenian Middle 157.3 ±1.0 Upper proterozoic Pleistocene 0.781 372.2 ±1.6 850 Calabrian Oxfordian Tonian 1.80 163.5 ±1.0 Frasnian 1000 Callovian 166.1 ±1.2 Quaternary Gelasian 2.58 382.7 ±1.6 Stenian Bathonian 168.3 ±1.3 Piacenzian Middle Bajocian Givetian 1200 Pliocene 3.600 170.3 ±1.4 Middle 387.7 ±0.8 Meso- Zanclean Aalenian proterozoic Ectasian 5.333 174.1 ±1.0 Eifelian 1400 Messinian Jurassic 393.3 ±1.2 7.246 Toarcian Calymmian Tortonian 182.7 ±0.7 Emsian 1600 11.62 Pliensbachian Statherian Lower 407.6 ±2.6 Serravallian 13.82 190.8 ±1.0 Lower 1800 Miocene Pragian 410.8 ±2.8 Langhian Sinemurian Proterozoic Neogene 15.97 Orosirian 199.3 ±0.3 Lochkovian Paleo- Hettangian 2050 Burdigalian 201.3 ±0.2 419.2 ±3.2 proterozoic 20.44 Mesozoic Rhaetian Pridoli Rhyacian Aquitanian 423.0 ±2.3 23.03 ~ 208.5 Ludfordian 2300 Cenozoic Chattian Ludlow 425.6 ±0.9 Siderian 28.1 Gorstian Oligocene Upper Norian 427.4 ±0.5 2500 Rupelian Wenlock Homerian
    [Show full text]
  • Paleogeographic Maps Earth History
    History of the Earth Age AGE Eon Era Period Period Epoch Stage Paleogeographic Maps Earth History (Ma) Era (Ma) Holocene Neogene Quaternary* Pleistocene Calabrian/Gelasian Piacenzian 2.6 Cenozoic Pliocene Zanclean Paleogene Messinian 5.3 L Tortonian 100 Cretaceous Serravallian Miocene M Langhian E Burdigalian Jurassic Neogene Aquitanian 200 23 L Chattian Triassic Oligocene E Rupelian Permian 34 Early Neogene 300 L Priabonian Bartonian Carboniferous Cenozoic M Eocene Lutetian 400 Phanerozoic Devonian E Ypresian Silurian Paleogene L Thanetian 56 PaleozoicOrdovician Mesozoic Paleocene M Selandian 500 E Danian Cambrian 66 Maastrichtian Ediacaran 600 Campanian Late Santonian 700 Coniacian Turonian Cenomanian Late Cretaceous 100 800 Cryogenian Albian 900 Neoproterozoic Tonian Cretaceous Aptian Early 1000 Barremian Hauterivian Valanginian 1100 Stenian Berriasian 146 Tithonian Early Cretaceous 1200 Late Kimmeridgian Oxfordian 161 Callovian Mesozoic 1300 Ectasian Bathonian Middle Bajocian Aalenian 176 1400 Toarcian Jurassic Mesoproterozoic Early Pliensbachian 1500 Sinemurian Hettangian Calymmian 200 Rhaetian 1600 Proterozoic Norian Late 1700 Statherian Carnian 228 1800 Ladinian Late Triassic Triassic Middle Anisian 1900 245 Olenekian Orosirian Early Induan Changhsingian 251 2000 Lopingian Wuchiapingian 260 Capitanian Guadalupian Wordian/Roadian 2100 271 Kungurian Paleoproterozoic Rhyacian Artinskian 2200 Permian Cisuralian Sakmarian Middle Permian 2300 Asselian 299 Late Gzhelian Kasimovian 2400 Siderian Middle Moscovian Penn- sylvanian Early Bashkirian
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Geologic Time Scale Cenozoic Mesozoic Paleozoic Precambrian Magnetic Magnetic Bdy
    2009 GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE CENOZOIC MESOZOIC PALEOZOIC PRECAMBRIAN MAGNETIC MAGNETIC BDY. AGE POLARITY PICKS AGE POLARITY PICKS AGE PICKS AGE . N PERIOD EPOCH AGE PERIOD EPOCH AGE PERIOD EPOCH AGE EON ERA PERIOD AGES (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) (Ma) HIST. HIST. ANOM. ANOM. (Ma) CHRON. CHRO HOLOCENE 65.5 1 C1 QUATER- 0.01 30 C30 542 CALABRIAN MAASTRICHTIAN NARY PLEISTOCENE 1.8 31 C31 251 2 C2 GELASIAN 70 CHANGHSINGIAN EDIACARAN 2.6 70.6 254 2A PIACENZIAN 32 C32 L 630 C2A 3.6 WUCHIAPINGIAN PLIOCENE 260 260 3 ZANCLEAN 33 CAMPANIAN CAPITANIAN 5 C3 5.3 266 750 NEOPRO- CRYOGENIAN 80 C33 M WORDIAN MESSINIAN LATE 268 TEROZOIC 3A C3A 83.5 ROADIAN 7.2 SANTONIAN 271 85.8 KUNGURIAN 850 4 276 C4 CONIACIAN 280 4A 89.3 ARTINSKIAN TONIAN C4A L TORTONIAN 90 284 TURONIAN PERMIAN 10 5 93.5 E 1000 1000 C5 SAKMARIAN 11.6 CENOMANIAN 297 99.6 ASSELIAN STENIAN SERRAVALLIAN 34 C34 299.0 5A 100 300 GZELIAN C5A 13.8 M KASIMOVIAN 304 1200 PENNSYL- 306 1250 15 5B LANGHIAN ALBIAN MOSCOVIAN MESOPRO- C5B VANIAN 312 ECTASIAN 5C 16.0 110 BASHKIRIAN TEROZOIC C5C 112 5D C5D MIOCENE 320 318 1400 5E C5E NEOGENE BURDIGALIAN SERPUKHOVIAN 326 6 C6 APTIAN 20 120 1500 CALYMMIAN E 20.4 6A C6A EARLY MISSIS- M0r 125 VISEAN 1600 6B C6B AQUITANIAN M1 340 SIPPIAN M3 BARREMIAN C6C 23.0 345 6C CRETACEOUS 130 M5 130 STATHERIAN CARBONIFEROUS TOURNAISIAN 7 C7 HAUTERIVIAN 1750 25 7A M10 C7A 136 359 8 C8 L CHATTIAN M12 VALANGINIAN 360 L 1800 140 M14 140 9 C9 M16 FAMENNIAN BERRIASIAN M18 PROTEROZOIC OROSIRIAN 10 C10 28.4 145.5 M20 2000 30 11 C11 TITHONIAN 374 PALEOPRO- 150 M22 2050 12 E RUPELIAN
    [Show full text]
  • Late Viséan Conodont Biostratigraphy and Biofacies in the Kingscourt Area, Ireland
    Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana Modena, Novembre 1999 Late Viséan conodont biostratigraphy and biofacies in the Kingscourt area, Ireland H.E. Anne SOMERVILLE Ian D. SOMERVILLE Department of Geology University College Duolin KEYWORDS- Conodonts Biostratigraphy, Biofacies, Carboniferous, Late Viséan, Kingscourt, Ireland. ABSTRACT - The Gnathodus bilineatus and Lochriea nodosa zones are recognised in the Kingscourt area, Ireland in both platform and basinal facies. The base ofthe nodosa Zone ù defined by the synchronous first occurrence ofL. nodosa and L. mononodosa in the same bed. Severa! conodont species (e.g. Mestognathus bipluti, Idioprioniodus healdi and Kladognathus macrodentata) are mostly restricted to the Brigantian (upper part ofthe bilineatus and nodosa zones). The richest and most diverse conodont faunas dominated by species ofGnathodus and Lochriea are Jrom late platform and basinallimestones within the L. nodosa Zone (Gnathodus-Lochriea Biofacies) . Lower yields and diversity are recorded Jrom early Brigantian platform limestones (upper p art ofthe G. bilineatus Zone); with the poorest conodont yields in late Asbian platform limestones and mudmounds ofthe lower G. bilineatus Zone. T here is a significant rise in the abundance and diversity of conodonts above the Asbian/Brigantian bounda'} a change which coincides with changes in foraminiferal assemblages and lithofacies; this indicates probable transgressive environmental injluences. A second major increase in conodont abundance and diversity is recognised at the base ofthe nodosa Zone, in platform and basinal {acies. Shallow-water, coarse-grainedAsbian platform limestones are dominated by Synclydognathus geminus and Kladognathus tenuis compfectens (Synclydognathus-Kladognathus Biofacies), the elements of which are ojten abraded and fragmented. The best preserved faunas are mostly from the wackestones in the nodosa Zone at Poulmore, which have the best representation ofall apparatus components.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT to the BOARD of NATURAL RESOURCES and CONSERVATION
    Illinois State Geological Survey Annual Report May 1987-June 1988 Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DIVISION ANNUAL REPORT to the BOARD OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION May 1987 to June 1988 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign http://archive.org/details/annualreportto8788illi CONTENTS HIGHLIGHTS 1 MINERAL RESOURCES 8 Illinois Mineral Industry In 1986 and 1987 8 Other Noteworthy Mineral Resource Developments 9 Coal 10 Coal Database Management 11 Coal Resources 13 Coal Characterization 13 Coal Cleaning: Physical and Microbial 15 Coal Cleaning: Chemical and Thermal 16 Coal Combustion 18 Liquids and Gases from Coal 20 Technical Support Services 21 Coal Technology Transfer and Information Services 22 Oil and Gas 22 Oil and Gas Program for Illinois 23 Oil and Gas Statistics 23 Oil and Gas Resources 25 Improved Oil Recovery Methods and Concepts 25 New Exploration Methods and Concepts 27 Hydrocarbon Generation and Migration Studies 28 Oil and Gas Database Management 30 Oil and Gas Technology Transfer and Information Services 30 Other Energy Sources 31 Coal Gas 31 Geothermal Energy 31 Industrial Minerals 31 Mineral Resource Assessments 31 Limestone and Dolomite Resources 33 Sand and Gravel Resources 34 Silica and Industrial Sand 34 Clay Mineralogy and Clay Resources 35 Fluorspar and Metal Resources 35 Beneficiation/Processing 36 Technology Transfer and Information Services 36 Special Projects 38 Mineral Economics 39 Market Research 39
    [Show full text]
  • Visean – Moscovian Conodont Biostratigraphy of the Ko-Yama Limestone Group, Akiyoshi Belt, SW Japan
    Natural Science Research, Univ. Tokushima (Peer-Reviewed Paper) Vol. 27, No. 3 (2013), p. 29 – 52. Visean – Moscovian conodont biostratigraphy of the Ko-yama Limestone Group, Akiyoshi Belt, SW Japan Keisuke ISHIDA 1*, Sigeyuki SUZUKI 2 and Noriyuki INADA 2,3 1 Laboratory of Geology, Institute of SAS, University of Tokushima, 770-8502, Tokushima, Japan * Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] 2 Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology, Okayama University, 700-8530, Okayama, Japan e-mail: [email protected] 3 Geoengineering Division of the Dia Consultants Co. Ltd., 331-0811, Saitama, Japan e-mail: [email protected] __________________________________________________________________________________________ Abstract Carboniferous clastic carbonates associated with basaltic pyroclasts and spicular chert beds in the lower part of the Ko-yama Limestone Group contain the Visean – Moscovian conodont succession of Gnathodus semiglaber (late Visean), Gnathodus praebilineatus – Lochriea multinodosa (late Visean), Lochriea ziegleri – Gnathodus girtyi girtyi s.l. (early Serpukhovian), Neoganthodus symmetricus – Idiognathodus primulus (middle – late Bashkirian), and Idiognathoides convexus – Gondolella clarki (early Moscovian). The FAD of Lochriea ziegleri marks the Visean/Serpukhovian boundary in the section. The middle – late Bashkirian Neoganthodus symmetricus – Idiognathodus primulus Fauna is a mixed fauna containing reworked Serpukhovian and older elements possibly related to an erosional event after the Early Bashkirian global eustatic low-stand. The revision of conodont zonal correlation in the Akiyoshi Belt was examined with the Mississippian/Pennsylvanian boundary considering the FAD of Declinognathodus noduliferus in the previously proposed zones in the similar Hina, Atetsu, Akiyoshi and Omi limestone groups. Idiognathodus craticulinodosus n. sp. was described as the middle – late Bashkirian to early Moscovian index.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Task Group Progress Report for the Viséan-Serpukhovian Boundary
    2014 PROGRESS REPORT OF THE TASK GROUP TO ESTABLISH A GSSP CLOSE TO THE EXISTING VISÉAN-SERPUKHOVIAN BOUNDARY Chairman Barry C. Richards Barry C. Richards1 and Task Group 1Geological Survey of Canada-Calgary, 3303-33 St. N.W., Calgary, Alberta. Canada T2L 2A7 E-mail: [email protected] Introduction and general activities An index for boundary definition has been selected, but not voted on by the task group and SCCS for final approval, and work is well advanced at the two prime GSSP candidate sections: the Verkhnyaya Kardailovka in the southern Ural Mountains of Russia and the Naqing (Nashui) section in southern Guizhou Province, China. In the Cantabrian Mountains of northwest Spain, work continued on the Millaró and Vegas de Sotres sections, two other potential candidate sections for the GSSP. For boundary definition, the group is using the first evolutionary occurrence of the conodont Lochriea ziegleri Nemirovskaya, Perret & Meischner, 1994 in the lineage Lochriea nodosa (Bischoff, 1957)−Lochriea ziegleri. L. ziegleri appears in the Brigantian Substage of NW Europe somewhat below the current base of the Serpukhovian as defined by its lectostratotype section in the Zaborie quarry near the city of Serpukhov in the Moscow Basin, Russia (Kabanov et al., 2009, 2012, 2013). The most important accomplishments in 2014 were: 1) the completion of a manuscript by Nemirovska et al. (in progress) titled “Conodonts of the genus Lochriea near the Viséan/Serpukhovian boundary (Mississippian) at the Naqing section, Guizhou Province, South China”. That study enables confirmation and refinement of known lineages within the genus, and two lineages are proposed: a) the noded Lochriea species L.
    [Show full text]
  • Pander Society Newsletter
    Pander Society Newsletter Compiled and edited by P.H. von Bitter and J. Burke DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL HISTORY (PALAEOBIOLOGY SECTION), ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM, TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA M5S 2C6 Number 38 June 2006 www.conodont.net CHIEF PANDERER’S REMARKS Dear Conodont Colleagues: A year has gone by since I last communicated like this, and I’m pleased (and relieved) that another Pander Society Newsletter is ready to ‘go’. Thank you for having sent in your reports and questionnaires; without your willingness to going through a bit of pain there would be no Pander Society Newsletter, and our communications would be the poorer. I am very grateful to compiler and editor Joan Burke (Toronto) and webmaster Mark Purnell (Leicester) for their dedication and ongoing interest; they have helped me greatly and continue to make me look better than I really am, particularly in a time of personal and professional transition. You, the Pander Society membership, continue to ‘re-invent’ and apply conodonts in startling new ways. Some of this re-invention was seen at the Pander Society Symposium in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, where on March 20-22, 2006 our (mostly) North American members focused on Conodonts & Sequence Stratigraphy. Looking ahead, the programme of ICOS 2006 on July 12-30/ 2006 in Leicester, England, promises not only to surprise and delight, but looks remarkably diverse and imaginative. Christian Pander, would, on the 150th anniversary of the publication of his major conodont study, no doubt be enormously impressed and pleased with the innovativeness and progress of his intellectual grandchildren. My best wishes to all of you.
    [Show full text]