DOCSLIB.ORG

Late Paleozoic Transgressions in the Greater Caucasus (Hun Superterrane, Northern Palaeotethys): Global Eustatic Control

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Late Paleozoic Transgressions in the Greater Caucasus (Hun Superterrane, Northern Palaeotethys): Global Eustatic Control 7008713-XEOLOXIA N 32ok.qxd 28/11/07 22:03 Página 13 Cadernos Lab. Xeolóxico de Laxe ISSN: 0213 - 4497 Coruña. 2007. Vol. 32, pp. 13 - 24 Late Paleozoic Transgressions in the Greater Caucasus (Hun Superterrane, Northern Palaeotethys): Global Eustatic Control Trangresiones del Paleozoico tardío en el Gran Caucaso (Superterreno Hun, PaleoTesis Norte) RUBAN, DMITRY A.1,2 Abstract The Greater Caucasus (a mountain chain in southwesternmost Russia, northern Georgia, and northwestern Azerbaijan) is a Gondwana-derived terrane, which was included into the Hun Superterrane (late Silurian-Late Devonian) and then docked at the Laurussian margin of the Palaeotethys Ocean close to the terranes of the present Alps (Late Devonian-Middle Triassic). The Upper Paleozoic sedimentary complex, up to 20,000 m thick, provides a good record to dis- cuss global eustatic changes. Three transgressions are reported in this region, which occurred in the Lochkovian, Frasnian-Famennian, and Changhsingian. The first of them embraced the nor- thern part of the Greater Caucasus, the second was larger and covered this region entirely, whe- reas the third occurred in its western part only. All of them corresponded evidently to global eus- tatic rises, and, therefore, their explanation does not require an implication of the regional tecto- nic activity. These regional transgressive episodes are also known from the Southern and Carnic Alps, Arabia, and Northern Africa. A correspondence between the Late Permian marine sedimen- tation in the Greater Caucasus and non-marine sedimentation in Spain is established. Thus, they were of planetary extent and the present global eustatic curve is confirmed. The regional trans- gressions resulted in carbonate deposition, biotic radiations, and reefal growth. Key words: palaeogeography, Late Paleozoic, sea-level changes, eustasy, Greater Caucasus, Paleotethys, Russia (1) Contact address: P.O. Box 7333, Rostov-na-Donu, 344056, Russian Federation; ruban- [email protected], [email protected] (2) Institutional address: Department of Geology. University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa. 7008713-XEOLOXIA N 32ok.qxd 28/11/07 22:03 Página 14 14 Ruban CAD. LAB. XEOL. LAXE 32 (2007) INTRODUCTION changes. Hallam (2001) made an intriguing conclusion, that transgressions are more evi- The global sea-level fluctuated strongly dent when traced globally, than regressions, during the Late Paleozoic. Well-known ear- which reflect mostly the regional tectonic lier reconstructions of this eustasy were movements. In the author’s opinion, this made by Vail et al. (1977), Johnson et al. does not diminish the importance of world (1985), Ross & Ross (1985), Hallam (1992), correlation of regressive episodes and uncon- Ronov (1994), and Hallam & Wignall formities, but emphasizes the need for global (1999). Recently, Haq & Al-Qahtani (2005) tracing of the regional transgressions. have proposed a new global eustatic curve. The Greater Caucasus Terrane, presently In general, it is concluded that the sea level included into the Alpine Mediterranean Belt dropped gradually during the Late Paleozoic, and located in the Southwest of Eurasia (Fig. with a pronounced drop in the mid-Permian. 1), provides an exceptional Late Paleozoic Second-order fluctuations were superposed record. According to the present tectonic on this trend. Unfortunately, our knowledge model (Tawadros et al. 2006; Ruban et al., of the Paleozoic sea-level changes remains 2007), this region was one of the Hunic terra- limited (see also Miller et al. 2005). For nes identified by Stampfli & Borel (2002), example, the present curve of Haq & Al- and therefore, its record is meanful for both Qahtani (2005) suggests a major regression the Afro-Arabian margin of Gondwana and in the end-Permian, although Hallam & Variscan Europe. This article is the first, Wignall (1999) argued for a major transgres- which attempts to give a comprehensive, sion at this time. By the same token, sea- although brief synthesis of knowledge on the level changes at the Frasnian-Famennian Late Paleozoic transgressions, which occurred transition are not clear (Racki 2005). in the Greater Caucasus. Verification of proposed eustatic curves as well as their details, improvement, and justi- GEOLOGICAL SETTING fication is possible only by careful compari- son of numerous regional data from across The Greater Caucasus pertains to a large the world. An example from the Jurassic mountain chain, which is located in the demonstrates that such analysis would signi- Southwest of Eurasia and connected with the ficantly contribute both to the identification other mountains originated during the Alpine of the global sea-level changes and their phase of orogenic activity. The Greater explanation (Hallam 2001). A reconstruction Caucasus embraces southwesternmost Russia, of the global eustatic curve is an enormously northern Georgia, and northwestern Azerbaijan. difficult task and some doubts are even The Paleozoic sedimentary complexes, whose expressed as to its existence (e.g., total thickness is up to 20,000 m, are known in McGowran 2005). However, such a curve the central part of this territory. They are expo- will be an important key to explain the chan- sed both in numerous little outcrops and in the ges in world palaeogeography, sedimentary continuous sections along the river valleys. environments, and biotic evolution. In the Deposits of all three Upper Paleozoic systems regional record, we document the global sea- are known in the Greater Caucasus (Fig. 1). The level changes by the transgressive and Devonian is dominated by volcanics and volca- regressive episodes. However, the latter may noclastics, and carbonates are known in the also reflect (and almost always do anyway!) Upper Devonian. The Mississippian is compo- the regional tectonic influences. Thus, our sed of shales, sandstones, and rare carbonates, task is to differentiate between the eustatic- whereas the Pennsylvanian is represented by and tectonic-induced regional sea-level non-marine coal-bearing strata. The Cisuralian- 7008713-XEOLOXIA N 32ok.qxd 28/11/07 22:03 Página 15 CAD. LAB. XEOL. LAXE 32 (2007) Late Paleozoic Transgressions 15 Guadulupian is a typical molasse, whereas the mentation recommence, when accumulation of mid-Permian corresponds to a major hiatus. sandstones and shales was followed by a remar- Only in the Changhsingian, did marine sedi- kable episode of carbonate sedimentation. Fig. 1. Location of the Greater Caucasus Terrane and a composite lithologic section of the Paleozoic depo- sits exposed in the northern Greater Caucasus (after Ruban (2006) with additions). The base palaeomaps are simplified from Stampfli & Borel (2002). The Greater Caucasus Terrane has been was formed (Stampfli & Borel 2002; Stampfli identified by Gamkrelidze (1997) and later by et al. 2002; von Raumer et al., 2002, 2003). A Tawadros et al. (2006) and Ruban et al. (2007). new ocean, i.e., the Palaeotethys, was origina- The latter authors have also developed a new ted in between the Hun Superterrane and model, which describes the evolution of the Gondwana. This ocean grew in size, whereas Greater Caucasus (Fig. 1). Until the mid- the oceans, located between the Hun and Silurian, this terrane was a part of the Afro- Laurussia, were closed. Thus, the Greater Arabian margin of Gondwana, i.e., it lay on the Caucasus Terrane together with the other southern periphery of the Prototethys and Hunic terranes moved northward. In the Late Rheic oceans. In the Ludlow, a breakup occu- Devonian, it reached the Laurussian margin. rred along the Gondwanan margin and a rib- The right-lateral displacements along the bon of terranes, called the Hun Superterrane, major shear zone (Arthaud & Matte 1977; 7008713-XEOLOXIA N 32ok.qxd 28/11/07 22:03 Página 16 16 Ruban CAD. LAB. XEOL. LAXE 32 (2007) Swanson 1982; Rapalini & Vizán 1993; in the comprehensive overviews by Stampfli & Borel 2002; Ruban & Yoshioka Paffengol’ts (1959), Milukho-Maklaj & 2005) led to the stacking of the Greater Miklukho-Maklaj (1966), Kizeval’ter & Caucasus Terrane somewhere close to the Robinson (1973), Obut et al. (1988), Kotlyar Carnic Alps and Bohemia. In the Late Triassic, et al. (1999, 2004) and Gaetani et al. (2005). the direction of the displacements along the The periods, when marine facies became the above-mentioned shear zone changed to left- most wide-spread, were the times of trans- lateral (Swanson 1982; Rapalini & Vizán gressions. Each regional transgressive episode 1993; Ruban & Yoshioka 2005). The Greater is characterized here in a similar way, i.e., its Caucasus Terrane then rapidly reached its pre- age, area, sedimentary environments, and pos- sent position at the south of Baltica plate. sible controls are considered. METHOD: A CONCEPTUAL FRAME- A RECORD OF THE REGIONAL WORK TRANSGRESSIONS According to Catuneanu (2006), transgres- Three transgressive episodes may be recor- sion is defined as a landward migration of the ded in the Late Paleozoic history of the Greater shoreline. It is strongly recommended to make Caucasus, namely the Lochkovian, the a distinction between transgressions and dee- Frasnian-Famennian, and the Changhsingian pening pulses. Although they are linked in episodes. some cases, their true relationships are very The Lochkovian regional transgressive complicated (see also Catuneanu 2006). Not in episode (D1-RTE) is recorded in the northern all cases does a transition to facies formed at part of the Greater Caucasus (Fig. 3). greater depth, recorded in the sedimentary suc- Carbonates with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Extent and Duration of Marine Anoxia During the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) Mass Extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France
    This is a repository copy of Extent and duration of marine anoxia during the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) mass extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/297/ Article: Bond, D.P.G., Wignall, P.B. and Racki, G. (2004) Extent and duration of marine anoxia during the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) mass extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France. Geological Magazine, 141 (2). pp. 173-193. ISSN 0016-7568 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756804008866 Reuse See Attached Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Geol. Mag. 141 (2), 2004, pp. 173–193. c 2004 Cambridge University Press 173 DOI: 10.1017/S0016756804008866 Printed in the United Kingdom Extent and duration of marine anoxia during the Frasnian– Famennian (Late Devonian) mass extinction in Poland, Germany, Austria and France DAVID BOND*, PAUL B. WIGNALL*† & GRZEGORZ RACKI‡ *School of Earth Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK ‡Department of Palaeontology and Stratigraphy, University of Silesia, ul. Bedzinska 60, PL-41-200 Sosnowiec, Poland (Received 25 March 2003; accepted 10 November 2003) Abstract – The intensity and extent of anoxia during the two Kellwasser anoxic events has been investigated in a range of European localities using a multidisciplinary approach (pyrite framboid assay, gamma-ray spectrometry and sediment fabric analysis).
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian Mass Extinction: Comparing Brachiopod Faunas
    Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian mass extinction: Comparing brachiopod faunas PAUL COPPER Copper, P. 1998. Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian mass extinction: Comparing bra- chiopod faunas.- Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 43,2,137-154. The Frasnian-Famennian (F-F) mass extinctions saw the global loss of all genera belonging to the tropically confined order Atrypida (and Pentamerida): though Famen- nian forms have been reported in the literafure, none can be confirmed. Losses were more severe during the Givetian (including the extinction of the suborder Davidsoniidina, and the reduction of the suborder Lissatrypidina to a single genus),but ońgination rates in the remaining suborder surviving into the Frasnian kept the group alive, though much reduced in biodiversity from the late Earb and Middle Devonian. In the terminal phases of the late Palmatolepis rhenana and P linguifurmis zones at the end of the Frasnian, during which the last few Atrypidae dechned, no new genera originated, and thus the Atrypida were extĘated. There is no evidence for an abrupt termination of all lineages at the F-F boundary, nor that the Atrypida were abundant at this time, since all groups were in decline and impoverished. Atypida were well established in dysaerobic, muddy substrate, reef lagoonal and off-reef deeper water settings in the late Givetian and Frasnian, alongside a range of brachiopod orders which sailed through the F-F boundary: tropical shelf anoxia or hypońa seems implausible as a cause for aĘpid extinction. Glacial-interglacial climate cycles recorded in South Ameńca for the Late Devonian, and their synchronous global cooling effect in low latitudes, as well as loss of the reef habitat and shelf area reduction, remain as the most likely combined scenarios for the mass extinction events.
    [Show full text]
  • Paleozoic Geology of the Dobbin Summit-Clear Creek Area, Monitor
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF DIANE CAROL WISE for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Geology presented on August 13, 1976 Title: PALEOZOIC GEOLOGY OF THE DOBBIN SUMMIT- CLEAR CREEK AREA, MONITOR RANGE, NYiE COUNTY, NEVADA Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy son Paleozoic limestones, dolomites, quartz arenites, and other clastic rocks were mapped in the vicinity of Dobbin Summit and Clear Creek in the central Monitor Range. Sedimentary rock units present in this area represent the shallow-shelf eastern assemblage and basin and also the basin-slope facies of the traditional limestone- clastic assemblage. The four oldest, Ordovician, units were deposited in shallow shelf environments. The Lower Ordovician Goodwin Formation is composed of about 1200 feet of calcareous shales and thin-bedded limestones. The overlying Antelope Valley Limestone is about 500 feet thick and consists of wackestones, packstones, and rare algal grainstones.The Copenhagen Formation (135 feet thick) is the highest regressive deposit of sandstone, siltstone, and limestone below the transgressive Eureka Quartzite.The Eureka is a quartz arenite 181 feet thick, with an intercalated shallow marine dolomite member. The transition from shallow to deep water conditions can be seen in the change from algal boundstones to laminated lime mud- stones in the Hanson Creek Formation (190 feet thick).The super- jacent Roberts Mountains Formation (285 feet thick) is composed of lime mudstones and allodapic beds deposited in basinal, deep water conditions.During earliest Devonian
    [Show full text]
  • (Late Devonian) Boundary Within the Foreknobs Formation, Maryland and West Virginia
    The Frasnian-Famennian (Late Devonian) boundary within the Foreknobs Formation, Maryland and West Virginia GEORGE R. McGHEE, JR. Department of Geological Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627 ABSTRACT The approximate position of the Frasnian-Famennian (Late De- vonian) boundary is determined within the Foreknobs Formation along the Allegheny Front in Maryland and West Virginia by utiliz- ing the time ranges of the articulate brachiopods Athryis angelica Hall, Cyrtospirifer sulcifer (Hall), and members of the Atrypidae. INTRODUCTION The age of strata previously called the "Chemung Formation" along the Allegheny Front in Maryland and West Virginia (Fig. 1) has been of interest to Devonian wokers for some time. Recent at- tempts to resolve this problem include the works of Dennison (1970, 1971) and Curry (1975). New paleontological contribu- tions to the resolution of time relations within the Greenland Gap Group ("Chemung Formation") are the object of this paper, which is an outgrowth of a much larger ecological analysis of Late Devo- nian benthic marine fauna as preserved in the central Appalachians (McGhee, 1975, 1976). STRATIGRAPHIC SETTING The following is a condensation and summary of the evolution of Upper Devonian stratigraphic nomenclatural usage in the study Figure 1. Location map of study area, showing positions of the mea- area; for a more complete and thorough discussion, the reader is sured sections used in this study (after Dennison, 1970). referred to Dennison (1970) and Kirchgessner (1973). The Chemung Formation was originally designated by James lower Cohocton Stage." Elsewhere, concerning the upper limit of Hall (1839) from Chemung Narrows in south-central New York.
    [Show full text]
  • Precisely Dating the Frasnian–Famennian Boundary
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Precisely dating the Frasnian– Famennian boundary: implications for the cause of the Late Devonian Received: 12 April 2018 Accepted: 12 June 2018 mass extinction Published: xx xx xxxx L. M. E. Percival1, J. H. F. L. Davies2, U. Schaltegger 2, D. De Vleeschouwer3, A.-C. Da Silva4,5 & K. B. Föllmi1 The Frasnian–Famennian boundary records one of the most catastrophic mass extinctions of the Phanerozoic Eon. Several possible causes for this extinction have been suggested, including extra- terrestrial impacts and large-scale volcanism. However, linking the extinction with these potential causes is hindered by the lack of precise dating of either the extinction or volcanic/impact events. In this study, a bentonite layer in uppermost-Frasnian sediments from Steinbruch Schmidt (Germany) is re-analysed using CA-ID-TIMS U-Pb zircon geochronology in order to constrain the date of the Frasnian–Famennian extinction. A new age of 372.36 ± 0.053 Ma is determined for this bentonite, confrming a date no older than 372.4 Ma for the Frasnian–Famennian boundary, which can be further constrained to 371.93–371.78 Ma using a pre-existing Late Devonian age model. This age is consistent with previous dates, but is signifcantly more precise. When compared with published ages of the Siljan impact crater and basalts produced by large-scale volcanism, there is no apparent correlation between the extinction and either phenomenon, not clearly supporting them as a direct cause for the Frasnian– Famennian event. This result highlights an urgent need for further Late Devonian geochronological and chemostratigraphic work to better understand the cause(s) of this extinction.
    [Show full text]
  • GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE V
    GSA GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE v. 4.0 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. (Ma) ANOM. CHRON. CHRO HOLOCENE 1 C1 QUATER- 0.01 30 C30 66.0 541 CALABRIAN NARY PLEISTOCENE* 1.8 31 C31 MAASTRICHTIAN 252 2 C2 GELASIAN 70 CHANGHSINGIAN EDIACARAN 2.6 Lopin- 254 32 C32 72.1 635 2A C2A PIACENZIAN WUCHIAPINGIAN PLIOCENE 3.6 gian 33 260 260 3 ZANCLEAN CAPITANIAN NEOPRO- 5 C3 CAMPANIAN Guada- 265 750 CRYOGENIAN 5.3 80 C33 WORDIAN TEROZOIC 3A MESSINIAN LATE lupian 269 C3A 83.6 ROADIAN 272 850 7.2 SANTONIAN 4 KUNGURIAN C4 86.3 279 TONIAN CONIACIAN 280 4A Cisura- C4A TORTONIAN 90 89.8 1000 1000 PERMIAN ARTINSKIAN 10 5 TURONIAN lian C5 93.9 290 SAKMARIAN STENIAN 11.6 CENOMANIAN 296 SERRAVALLIAN 34 C34 ASSELIAN 299 5A 100 100 300 GZHELIAN 1200 C5A 13.8 LATE 304 KASIMOVIAN 307 1250 MESOPRO- 15 LANGHIAN ECTASIAN 5B C5B ALBIAN MIDDLE MOSCOVIAN 16.0 TEROZOIC 5C C5C 110 VANIAN 315 PENNSYL- 1400 EARLY 5D C5D MIOCENE 113 320 BASHKIRIAN 323 5E C5E NEOGENE BURDIGALIAN SERPUKHOVIAN 1500 CALYMMIAN 6 C6 APTIAN LATE 20 120 331 6A C6A 20.4 EARLY 1600 M0r 126 6B C6B AQUITANIAN M1 340 MIDDLE VISEAN MISSIS- M3 BARREMIAN SIPPIAN STATHERIAN C6C 23.0 6C 130 M5 CRETACEOUS 131 347 1750 HAUTERIVIAN 7 C7 CARBONIFEROUS EARLY TOURNAISIAN 1800 M10 134 25 7A C7A 359 8 C8 CHATTIAN VALANGINIAN M12 360 140 M14 139 FAMENNIAN OROSIRIAN 9 C9 M16 28.1 M18 BERRIASIAN 2000 PROTEROZOIC 10 C10 LATE
    [Show full text]
  • Age and Palaeoenvironments of the Manacapuru Formation, Presidente Figueiredo (AM) Region, Lochkovian of the Amazonas Basin
    SILEIR RA A D B E E G D E A O D L E O I G C I A O ARTICLE BJGEO S DOI: 10.1590/2317-4889201920180130 Brazilian Journal of Geology D ESDE 1946 Age and palaeoenvironments of the Manacapuru Formation, Presidente Figueiredo (AM) region, Lochkovian of the Amazonas Basin Patrícia Ferreira Rocha1* , Rosemery Rocha da Silveira1 , Roberto Cesar de Mendonça Barbosa1 Abstract The Manacapuru Formation, Amazonas Basin, outcrops on the margins of a highway in the region of Presidente Figueiredo, state of Amazo- nas. A systematic palynological and a lithofaciological analysis was carried out aiming to contribute to the paleoenvironmental understanding of the Manacapuru Formation and its respective age. The present work uses the analysis of the chitinozoan for biostratigraphic purposes as a tool. A total of 27 samples were collected in which an assemblage of lower Lochkovian can be recognized, whose characteristic species are Angochitina filosa, Cingulochitina ervensis, Lagenochitina navicula, and Pterochitina megavelata. It was possible to identify an intense reworking in the exposure, evidenced by the presence of paleofaunas ranging from Ludfordian to Pridolian, which may be associated to the constant storm events that reached the shelf. The lithofaciological analysis allowed the recognition of 6 predominantly muddy sedimentary lithofacies with sandy intercalations that suggest deposition in an offshore region inserted in a shallow marine shelf and influenced by storms. KEYWORDS: Chitinozoan; Devonian; Manacapuru Formation; Amazonas Basin. INTRODUCTION the results with more intensively investigated areas in Brazil and In the Silurian and Devonian period, the South Pole proposed five chitinozoan assemblages. Reworking was recog- was located close to the South American paleoplate margins nized in some sections.
    [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]
  • The Lochkovian-Pragian Boundary in the Lower Devo~Ian of the Barrandian Area (Czechoslovakia)
    ©Geol. Bundesanstalt, Wien; download unter www.geologie.ac.at Jb. Geol. B.-A. ISSN 0016-7800 Band 128 Heft 1 S.9-41 Wien, Mai 1985 The Lochkovian-Pragian Boundary in the Lower Devo~ian of the Barrandian Area (Czechoslovakia) By Ivo CHLUpAC, PAVEL LUKES, FLORENTIN PARIS & HANS PETER SCHÖNLAUB*) With 17 figures, 1 table and 4 plates Tschechoslowakei Barrandium Karnische Alpen Devon Stratigraphische Korrelation Lochkov-Prag-Grenze Tentaculiten Conodonten Graptolithen Chitinozoa Trilobita Brachiopoda Contents Summary, Zusammenfassung . .. 9 1. Introduction..... .. 9 2. Description of sections 10 2.1. Cerna rokle near Kosoi' 10 2.2. Trebotov - Solopysky 13 2.3. Praha - Velka Chuchle (Pi'fdol f) 14 2.4. Cikanka quarry near Praha-Slivenec 17 2.5. Radolfn Valley - Hvizaalka quarry 19 2.6. Oujezdce quarry near Suchomasty 22 3. Stratigraphic significance of some fossil groups in the Lochkovian-Pragian boundary beds of the Barrandian 22 3.1. Dacryoconarid tentaculites (P. LUKES) 22 3.2. Conodonts (H. P. SCHÖNLAUB) 24 3.3. Chitinozoans (F. PARIS) 27 3.4. Graptolites 28 3.5. Trilobites 28 3.6. Brachiopods 29 3.6. Some other groups 29 4. Proposal for a conodont based Lochkovian-Pragian boundary 30 5. Conclusion 30 References 32 Zusammenfassung Summary Im Barrandium Böhmens wurde die Lochkov/Prag-Grenze Six selected sections of the Lochkovian-Pragian boundary des Unterdevons an 6 ausgewählten Profilen in Hinblick auf ih- beds in the Barrandian area of central Bohemia were subject- ren Makro- und Mikrofossilinhalt biostratigraphisch untersucht. ed to investigations of mega- and microfossils. Joint occur- Für Korrelationszwecke sind in erster Linie Dacryoconariden, rence of different stratigraphically important fossil groups, par- Conodonten, Chitinozoen, Trilobiten, Graptolithen und Bra- ticularly dacryoconarid tentaculites, conodonts, chitinozoans, chiopoden geeignet.
    [Show full text]
  • Revision of the Silurian and Early Devonian Chonetoidean Brachiopods of Southeastern Australia
    © Copyright Australian Museum, 2000 Records of the Australian Museum (2000) Vol. 52: 245–287. ISSN 0067-1975 Revision of the Silurian and Early Devonian Chonetoidean Brachiopods of Southeastern Australia DESMOND L. STRUSZ Department of Geology, Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200, Australia [email protected] ABSTRACT. Thirty-eight species of ostensibly chonetoid brachiopods (some under open nomenclature) have been described from the Silurian and Lower Devonian rocks of southeastern Australia, although most are neither widely distributed nor abundant. Descriptions of many have been based on inadequate material, and in one significant case (Johnsonetes australis) the original material is lost, necessitating selection of a neotype to resolve formally the identity of that species in comparison with the similar species J. culleni. In this systematic revision the known species are redescribed and where possible their generic positions and possible synonymy determined; three are rejected from the Chonetoidea. Silurian taxa include Strophochonetes melbournensis, S. kemezysi n.sp. and “Protochonetes” cf. minimus. Early Devonian faunas are much more diverse. Lochkovian species are S.? savagei n.sp., S.? psiloplia, “S.” cresswelli, Parachonetes robustus, and the poorly known “Chonetes” ruddockensis. “Strophochonetes” cresswelli and P. robustus are also found in the Pragian, along with Asymmetrochonetes? planata, Parachonetes baragwanathi, P.? bowieae, P.? suavis, Septachonetes micrus, “Chonetes” taggertyensis and “Chonetes” foedus. The youngest species in the region are Emsian: Johnsonetes australis, J. culleni, J. latus, Septachonetes melanus, Parachonetes buchanensis, P. spooneri, P. konincki and P. flemingi. No species is currently known to be sufficiently widely distributed geographically and sufficiently restricted stratigraphically to be of clear biostratigraphic use.
    [Show full text]