DOCSLIB.ORG

A Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis of the Allegheny Group (Middle Pennsylvanian)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis of the Allegheny Group (Middle Pennsylvanian) A Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis of the Allegheny Group (Middle Pennsylvanian), Southeast Ohio A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Dreadnaught G. Stubbs May 2018 © 2018 Dreadnaught G. Stubbs. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled A Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis of the Allegheny Group (Middle Pennsylvanian), Southeast Ohio by DREADNAUGHT G. STUBBS has been approved for the Department of Geological Sciences and the College of Arts and Sciences by Gregory C. Nadon Associate Professor of Geological Sciences Robert Frank Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT STUBBS, DREADNAUGHT G. M.S., May 2018, Geological Sciences A Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis of the Allegheny Group (Middle Pennsylvanian), Southeast Ohio (253 words) Director of Thesis: Gregory C. Nadon This study examined a complete section of the Allegheny Group near Nelsonville in southeastern Ohio. The study site is located in the backbulge region of the Alleghanian Orogeny where total accommodation was low. Facies analysis of six detailed measured sections concluded that the Allegheny Group was deposited by a fluvially dominated delta system, which can be divided into ten sequences that vary from 2 to 15 m in thickness. Sequence boundaries were placed at the top of paleosol profiles and base of incised fluvial sandstones. Fluvial incision that occurred during the Falling Stage and Lowstand Systems Tracts resulted in the erosion of some, or all, of an underlying sequence, the formation of paleosols on interfluves, and the amalgamation of some fluvial sandstones. Transgressive Systems Tract deposits include coals, marine and lacustrine prodelta mudstones, and fluvial sandstones. Highstand Systems Tract deposits consist primarily of interbedded laminated mudstones, siltstones. Vertical grain size pattern and fossil content were used to infer locations of the Maximum Flooding Surfaces. The composition of individual sequences varies from a single fluvial sandstone body to a complex assemblage of marine to lacustrine mudstones, sandstones, and coal. The variation in facies patterns and sequence thickness within the section, and between this location and other locales along strike reported in the literature, is interpreted to be primarily a function of allogenic glacial-eustatic sea level changes. The allogenic driver was modified to varying degrees by autogenic processes, 4 such as channel avulsion during deposition of the Highstand Systems Tract, that shifted channel locations between sequences. 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My most genuine thanks to Dr. Greg Nadon for his supreme generosity in the form of wisdom, mentorship and kindness. I am honored and proud to have worked with you on these projects. Many thanks to my committee members Dr. Dan Hembree, Dr. Dina Lopez and Dr. Craig Grimes for their patience and for sharing their expertise. Thanks to the Ohio Geological Survey and especially Frank Fugitt. The field work in this study would have taken twice as long if it weren’t for Frank who was in the field with me every humid, Summer day. Thanks to Trey Hedrick who assisted me in the field. Massive thank you to Cheri Sheets who helped me on almost a daily basis during my 4 years in the department. I owe countless thanks to the faculty and staff of the Dept. of Geol. Sciences at OU. I hope to stay in touch with you all. Lastly, I would like to thank my family. I would not be in the position I am today if it wasn’t for your unwavering support. Funding for this research is greatly appreciated and was provided by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources ‘Ohio Rocks’ Grant and the Ohio University Department of Geological Sciences Graduate Alumni Research Grant. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................. 5 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 8 List of Figures .................................................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................... 11 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 11 CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................................................... 16 PREVIOUS WORK ......................................................................................................... 16 CHAPTER 3 .................................................................................................................... 26 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 26 3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 26 3.2 Measured Sections ............................................................................................. 26 3.3 Petrography ........................................................................................................ 26 3.3 X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Analysis .................................................................. 27 CHAPTER 4: ................................................................................................................... 29 LITHOFACIES AND FACIES ASSOCIATIONS .............................................................. 29 4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 29 4.2 Lithofacies ........................................................................................................... 29 4.2.1 Facies 1: Black Shale ................................................................................. 32 4.2.2 Facies 2: Mudstone .................................................................................... 35 4.2.3 Facies 3: Siltstone ...................................................................................... 64 4.2.4 Facies 4: Sandstone ................................................................................... 64 4.2.5 Facies 5: Coal ............................................................................................ 74 4.3: Facies Associations ............................................................................................ 76 4.3.2 Facies Association 2: Subaqueous Delta ................................................... 79 4.3.3 Facies Association 3: Delta Plain Interfluve ............................................... 83 4.4 Fluvial Channel Deposits ..................................................................................... 85 4.4.1 FA-4a Single Story Sandstone ................................................................... 85 4.4.2 FA-4b Multistory Sandstone ....................................................................... 86 4.4.3 FA-4c Abandoned Channel ........................................................................ 87 4.5 Depositional Model – Fluvially Dominated Delta ................................................. 89 CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................................... 94 SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHIC FRAMEWORK ............................................................. 94 7 5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 94 5.2 Sequence Stratigraphy Terminology ................................................................... 94 CHAPTER 6 .................................................................................................................. 104 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................ 104 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 107 APPENDIX 1: DETAILED MEASURED SECTIONS ..................................................... 117 APPENDIX 2: PALEOCURRENT DIRECTIONS .......................................................... 123 APPENDIX 3: POINT COUNTING ................................................................................ 124 APPENDIX 4: XRD ....................................................................................................... 125 XRD Sample Preparation ........................................................................................ 125 Brookville XRD Data ................................................................................................ 127 Lower Kittanning XRD Data .................................................................................... 128 Upper Freeport Paleosol XRD Data ........................................................................ 129 APPENDIX 5: XRF DATA ............................................................................................. 130 XRF Data Normalized to Total Mass ....................................................................... 132 XRF Standards .......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cambrian Phytoplankton of the Brunovistulicum – Taxonomy and Biostratigraphy
    MONIKA JACHOWICZ-ZDANOWSKA Cambrian phytoplankton of the Brunovistulicum – taxonomy and biostratigraphy Polish Geological Institute Special Papers,28 WARSZAWA 2013 CONTENTS Introduction...........................................................6 Geological setting and lithostratigraphy.............................................8 Summary of Cambrian chronostratigraphy and acritarch biostratigraphy ...........................13 Review of previous palynological studies ...........................................17 Applied techniques and material studied............................................18 Biostratigraphy ........................................................23 BAMA I – Pulvinosphaeridium antiquum–Pseudotasmanites Assemblage Zone ....................25 BAMA II – Asteridium tornatum–Comasphaeridium velvetum Assemblage Zone ...................27 BAMA III – Ichnosphaera flexuosa–Comasphaeridium molliculum Assemblage Zone – Acme Zone .........30 BAMA IV – Skiagia–Eklundia campanula Assemblage Zone ..............................39 BAMA V – Skiagia–Eklundia varia Assemblage Zone .................................39 BAMA VI – Volkovia dentifera–Liepaina plana Assemblage Zone (Moczyd³owska, 1991) ..............40 BAMA VII – Ammonidium bellulum–Ammonidium notatum Assemblage Zone ....................40 BAMA VIII – Turrisphaeridium semireticulatum Assemblage Zone – Acme Zone...................41 BAMA IX – Adara alea–Multiplicisphaeridium llynense Assemblage Zone – Acme Zone...............42 Regional significance of the biostratigraphic
    [Show full text]
  • Subcommission on Permian Stratigraphy International
    Number 30 June 1997 A NEWSLETTER OF THE SUBCOMMISSION ON PERMIAN STRATIGRAPHY SUBCOMMISSION ON PERMIAN STRATIGRAPHY INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON STRATIGRAPHY INTERNATIONAL UNION OF GEOLOGICAL SCIENCES (IUGS) Table of Contents Notes from the SPS Secretary...................................................................................................................-1- Claude Spinosa Note from the SPS Chairman....................................................................................................................-2- Bruce R. Wardlaw Proposed new chronostratigraphic units for the Upper Permian ..............................................................-3- Amos Salvador Comments on Subdivisions of the Permian and a Standard World Scale ................................................-4- Neil W. Archbold and J. Mac Dickins Permian chronostratigraphic subdivisions ................................................................................................-5- Jin Yugan, Bruce R. Wardlaw, Brian F. Glenister and Galina V. Kotlyar The Permian Time-scale ...........................................................................................................................-6- J. B. Waterhouse Sequence Stratigraphy along Aidaralash Creek and the Carboniferous/Permian GSSP ..........................-8- Walter S. Snyder and Dora M. Gallegos Upper Paleozoic Fusulinacean Biostratigraphy of the Southern Urals ...................................................-11- Vladimir I. Davydov, Walter S. Snyder and Claude Spinosa Cordaitalean
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvanian Boundary Unconformity in Marine Carbonate Successions
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dissertations & Theses in Earth and Atmospheric Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Department of Sciences Summer 6-2014 ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE MISSISSIPPIAN – PENNSYLVANIAN BOUNDARY UNCONFORMITY IN MARINE CARBONATE SUCCESSIONS WITH A CASE STUDY OF THE KARST DEVELOPMENT ATOP THE MADISON FORMATION IN THE BIGHORN BASIN, WYOMING. Lucien Nana Yobo University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/geoscidiss Part of the Geochemistry Commons, Geology Commons, Sedimentology Commons, and the Stratigraphy Commons Nana Yobo, Lucien, "ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE MISSISSIPPIAN – PENNSYLVANIAN BOUNDARY UNCONFORMITY IN MARINE CARBONATE SUCCESSIONS WITH A CASE STUDY OF THE KARST DEVELOPMENT ATOP THE MADISON FORMATION IN THE BIGHORN BASIN, WYOMING." (2014). Dissertations & Theses in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences. 59. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/geoscidiss/59 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations & Theses in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE MISSISSIPPIAN – PENNSYLVANIAN BOUNDARY UNCONFORMITY IN MARINE CARBONATE SUCCESSIONS WITH A CASE STUDY OF THE KARST DEVELOPMENT ATOP THE MADISON FORMATION IN THE BIGHORN BASIN, WYOMING. By Luscalors Lucien Nana Yobo A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Major: Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Under the Supervision of Professor Tracy D.
    [Show full text]
  • PDF Viewing Archiving 300
    Bull. Soc. belge Géologie T. 83 fasc. 4 pp. 235- 253 Bruxelles 1974 THE CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHIC UNITS OF THE UPPER CARBONIFEROUS IN EUROPE R.H. WAGNER * ABSTRACT: The history is traced of the various chronostratigraphic units recognised in the Upper Carboniferous of western Europe, and their stratotypes are discussed. A correlation is given for the chronostratigraphic units in the Middle and Upper Carboniferou& series of Russia, in the light of pre­ dominantly marine successions in N.W. Spain, and suggestions are made for an integrated scheme of major units. Introduction In western Europe the classification of Carboniferous strata was further taken in The main chronostratigraphic divisions of hand by the Congrès pour !'Avancement des the Carboniferous in Europe were established Etudes de Stratigraphie Carbonifère which by MUNIER CHALMAS & DE LAPPARENT(1893), met in Heerlen in 1927, 1935, 1951 and who distinguished three marine stages charac­ 1958. The 1927 congress sanctioned the use terised by different faunas, viz. Dinantienl, of Namurian, a stage introduced by PURVES Moscovien2 and Ouralienl, and two stages, in 1883 and which corresponds to the West­ Westphalien1 and Stéphanien, characterised phalien inférieur of MUNIER CHALMAS & by coal-measures facies. Most of the names DE LAPPARENT. It also introduced the A, had been used before (see footnotes), but B and C divisions for the remaining West­ the 'Note sur la Nomenclature des Terrains phalian (i.e. the Westphalien supérieur of sédimentaires' provided the first formai MUNIER CHALMAS & DE LAPPARENT). The framework for a subdivision into stages of the 1935 congress expanded the Westphalian Carboniferous System. MuNIER CHALMAS & upwards by recognising the presence of a DE LAPPARENT gave precedence to the marine Westphalian D division, and subdivided the stages, Moscovian and Uralian, and regarded Namurian into A, B and C.
    [Show full text]
  • (Lower Carboniferous) of the Upper Silesian Coal Basin
    Acta Geologica Polonica, Vol. 64 (2014), No. 1, pp. 13–45 DE DE GRUYTER OPEN DOI: 10.2478/agp-2014-0002 G Rugosa (Anthozoa) from the Serpukhovian (Lower Carboniferous) of the Upper Silesian Coal Basin JERZY FEDOROWSKI1 AND IWONA MACHŁAJEWSKA2 1Institute of Geology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Maków Polnych 16, Pl-61-606 Poznań, Poland. E-mail: [email protected] 2Institute of Applied Geology, Silesian University of Technology, Akademicka 2, PL-41-200 Gliwice, Poland. E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT: Fedorowski, J. and Machłajewska, I. 2014. Rugosa (Anthozoa) of the Serpukhovian from the Upper Silesian Coal Basin. Acta Geologica Polonica, 64 (1), 13–45. Warszawa. Two species, Antiphyllum sp. nov. 1 and Zaphrufimia sp. nov. 1, the first corals found in Štur horizon of the up- per Malinowickie Beds, Upper Pendleian (E1), are here described. Additional study of the subspecies of Za- prufimia disjuncta show them to be more similar than previously thought. Although they occur mainly in the Enna and Barbara horizons, one specimen of Z. d. serotina comes from the Gabriela horizon. Biozone Zaphrufimia disujncta disjuncta/Z .d .praematura is proposed for the Enna and Barbara horizons. The subzone of Zaphru- fimia/Triadufimia of that Biozone, defined by the presence of Triadufimia gen. nov., is restricted to the Enna hori- zon. As confirmed by the occurrence of Cravenoceratoides edalensis, the new subzone roughly corresponds to the E2b1 ammonite Zone. An Antiphyllum/Ostravaia/Variaxon assemblage Zone is proposed for the coral as- semblage of the Gaebler horizon. Cravenoceratoides nitidus present in the Roemer band (Ib) shows it to corre- late with the E2b2 ammonite Zone.
    [Show full text]
  • (Foram in Ifers, Algae) and Stratigraphy, Carboniferous
    MicropaIeontoIogicaI Zonation (Foramin ifers, Algae) and Stratigraphy, Carboniferous Peratrovich Formation, Southeastern Alaska By BERNARD L. MAMET, SYLVIE PINARD, and AUGUSTUS K. ARMSTRONG U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2031 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Robert M. Hirsch, Acting Director 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 Text and illustrations edited by Mary Lou Callas Line drawings prepared by B.L. Mamet and Stephen Scott Layout and design by Lisa Baserga UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1993 For sale by Book and Open-File Report Sales U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Mamet, Bernard L. Micropaleontological zonation (foraminifers, algae) and stratigraphy, Carboniferous Peratrovich Formation, southeastern Alaska / by Bernard L. Mamet, Sylvie Pinard, and Augustus K. Armstrong. p. cm.-(U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 2031) Includes bibtiographical references. 1. Geology, Stratigraphic-Carboniferous. 2. Geology-Alaska-Prince of Wales Island. 3. Foraminifera, Fossil-Alaska-Prince of Wales Island. 4. Algae, Fossil-Alaska-Prince of Wales Island. 5. Paleontology- Carboniferous. 6. Paleontology-Alaska-Prince of Wales Island. I. Pinard, Sylvie. II. Armstrong, Augustus K. Ill. Title. IV. Series. QE75.B9 no. 2031 [QE671I 557.3 s--dc20 [551.7'5'097982] 92-32905 CIP CONTENTS Abstract
    [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]
  • Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2019-07-01 Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin Joshua Kerst Meibos Brigham Young University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Meibos, Joshua Kerst, "Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin" (2019). Theses and Dissertations. 7583. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/7583 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin Joshua Kerst Meibos A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Scott M. Ritter, Chair Brooks B. Britt Sam Hudson Department of Geological Sciences Brigham Young University Copyright © 2019 Joshua Kerst Meibos All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin Joshua Kerst Meibos Department of Geological Sciences, BYU Master of Science The stratal architecture of the upper Ely Limestone and Mormon Gap Formation (Pennsylvanian-early Permian) in western Utah reflects the interaction of icehouse sea-level change and tectonic activity in the distal Antler-Sonoma foreland basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Figure 3A. Major Geologic Formations in West Virginia. Allegheney And
    82° 81° 80° 79° 78° EXPLANATION West Virginia county boundaries A West Virginia Geology by map unit Quaternary Modern Reservoirs Qal Alluvium Permian or Pennsylvanian Period LTP d Dunkard Group LTP c Conemaugh Group LTP m Monongahela Group 0 25 50 MILES LTP a Allegheny Formation PENNSYLVANIA LTP pv Pottsville Group 0 25 50 KILOMETERS LTP k Kanawha Formation 40° LTP nr New River Formation LTP p Pocahontas Formation Mississippian Period Mmc Mauch Chunk Group Mbp Bluestone and Princeton Formations Ce Obrr Omc Mh Hinton Formation Obps Dmn Bluefield Formation Dbh Otbr Mbf MARYLAND LTP pv Osp Mg Greenbrier Group Smc Axis of Obs Mmp Maccrady and Pocono, undivided Burning Springs LTP a Mmc St Ce Mmcc Maccrady Formation anticline LTP d Om Dh Cwy Mp Pocono Group Qal Dhs Ch Devonian Period Mp Dohl LTP c Dmu Middle and Upper Devonian, undivided Obps Cw Dhs Hampshire Formation LTP m Dmn OHIO Ct Dch Chemung Group Omc Obs Dch Dbh Dbh Brailler and Harrell, undivided Stw Cwy LTP pv Ca Db Brallier Formation Obrr Cc 39° CPCc Dh Harrell Shale St Dmb Millboro Shale Mmc Dhs Dmt Mahantango Formation Do LTP d Ojo Dm Marcellus Formation Dmn Onondaga Group Om Lower Devonian, undivided LTP k Dhl Dohl Do Oriskany Sandstone Dmt Ot Dhl Helderberg Group LTP m VIRGINIA Qal Obr Silurian Period Dch Smc Om Stw Tonoloway, Wills Creek, and Williamsport Formations LTP c Dmb Sct Lower Silurian, undivided LTP a Smc McKenzie Formation and Clinton Group Dhl Stw Ojo Mbf Db St Tuscarora Sandstone Ordovician Period Ojo Juniata and Oswego Formations Dohl Mg Om Martinsburg Formation LTP nr Otbr Ordovician--Trenton and Black River, undivided 38° Mmcc Ot Trenton Group LTP k WEST VIRGINIA Obr Black River Group Omc Ordovician, middle calcareous units Mp Db Osp St.
    [Show full text]
  • VOLUME 33 December 2017
    VOLUME 33 December 2017 Volume 33 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE’S COLUMN…………………………………………………………………..…….. 2 OBITUARY……………………………………………………………………………………..…5 SCCS REPORTS………………………………………………………………………………….7 ANNUAL REPORT TO ICS FOR 2016-2017…………………………………………………..….7 TASK GROUP REPORTS FOR 2016-2017 AND WORK PLANS FOR 2017 FISCAL YEAR………….11 Report of the task group to establish a GSSP close to the existing Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary…………11 Report of the task group to establish a GSSP close to the existing Bashkirian-Moscovian boundary………16 Report of the task group to establish the Moscovian-Kasimovian and Kasimovian-Gzhelian boundaries…....18 SCCS DOCUMENTS (CONTRIBUTIONS BY MEMBERS)…………………………………...……21 SHALLOW-WATER SIPHONODELLIDS AND DEFINITION OF THE DEVONIAN-CARBONIFEROUS BOUNDARY…………………………………………………………………………………….21 REPORT FOR PROGRESS FOR 2017 ACTIVITIES IN THE CANTABRIAN MOUNTAINS, SPAIN AND THE AMAZONAS BASIN, BRAZIL……………………………………………...………………26 TAXONOMIC AND STRATIGRAPHIC PROBLEMS CONCERNING THE CONODONTS LOCHRIEA SENCKENBERGICA NEMIROVSKAYA, PERRET & MEISCHNER, 1994 AND LOCHRIEA ZIEGLERI NEMIROVSKAYA, PERRET & MEISHCNER, 1994-CONSEQUENCES FOR DEFINING THE VISÉAN- SERPUKHOVIAN BOUNDARY………………………………………………………………………………...28 PROGRESS ON THE VISÉAN-SERPUKHOVIAN BOUNDARY IN SOUTH CHINA AND GERMANY……………………………………………………………………………………..35 POTENTIAL FOR A MORE PRECISE CORRELATION OF THE BASHKIRIAN AMMONOID AND FORAMINIFERAL ZONES IN THE SOUTH URALS…………………………………………..……42 CHEMOMETRICS AND CARBONIFEROUS MEDULLOSALEAN FRONDS: IMPLICATIONS FOR CARBONIFEROUS PHYTOSTRATIGRAPHY…………………………………………………...…45
    [Show full text]
  • Note: Page Numbers in Italic Refer to Illustrations, Those in Bold Type Refer to Tables
    Index Note: Page numbers in italic refer to illustrations, those in bold type refer to tables. Aachen-Midi Thrust 202, 203, 233, 235 Armorican affinities 132, 283 Acadian Armorican Massif 27, 29, 148, 390 basement 36 Armorican Terrane Assemblage 10, 13, 22 Orogeny 25 drift model 27-28 accommodation cycles 257, 265 magmatic rocks 75 accommodation space 265, 277 palaeolatitudes 28 acritarchs, Malopolska Massif 93 in Rheno-Hercynian Belt 42 advection, as heat source 378, 388 separation from Avalonia 49 African-European collision 22 tectonic m61ange 39 Air complex, palaeomagnetism 23, 25 Tepl/t-Barrandian Unit 44 Albersweiler Orthogneiss 40 terminology 132 Albtal Granite 48 Terrane Collage 132 alkali basalts 158 Ashgill, glacial deposits 28, 132, 133 allochthonous units, Rheno-Hercynian Belt 38 asthenosphere, upwelling 355, 376, 377 Alps asthenospheric source, metabasites 165 collisional orogeny 370 Attendorn-Elspe Syncline 241 see also Proto-Alps augen-gneiss 68 alteration, mineralogical 159 Avalon Terrane 87 Amazonian Craton 120, 122, 123, 147 Avalonia American Antarctic Ridge 167, 168, 170 and Amazonian Craton 120 Amorphognathus tvaerensis Zone 6 brachiopods 98 amphibolite facies metamorphism 41, 43, 67, 70 and Bronovistulian 110 Brunovistulian 106 collision with Armorica 298 Desnfi dome 179 collision with Baltica 52 MGCR 223 drift model 27 Saxo-Thuringia 283, 206 extent of 10 amphibolites, Bohemian Massif 156, 158 faunas 94 anatectic gneiss 45, 389 Gondwana derivation 22 anchimetamorphic facies 324 palaeolatitude 27 Anglo-Brabant Massif
    [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]