scholarly journals Systematics of Lutetian Larger Foraminifera and magneto-biostratigraphy from the South Pyrenean Basin (Sierras Exteriores, Spain)

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 1-XX
Author(s):  
Roi Silva-Casal ◽  
Josep Serra-Kiel ◽  
Adriana Rodriguez-Pintó ◽  
Emilio L Pueyo ◽  
Marcos Aurell ◽  
...  

An extense systematic description of the Eocene larger foraminiferal faunas recorded in the South Pyrenean Basin (Sierras Exteriores) is presented herein. The large dataset provided in this work includes both Nummulites and Alveolina species, along with a variety of other porcellaneous and hyaline taxa with lesser biostratigraphic relevance, are represented. The larger foraminifera described in this work correspond mainly to the Lutetian (SBZ13 to SBZ16 biozones) interval, but late Ypresian (SBZ11, Cuisian) and Bartonian (SBZ17) shallow benthic zones have also been identified.As one of the most relevant results of this systematic analysis, a new species, Idalina osquetaensis, is described. The systematic revision of middle to late Lutetian alveolines led to a reassessment of A. fusiformis and the finding of two new precursor forms, described as affinis of their corresponding species, A. aff. fragilis and A. aff. elongata. The new forms A. aff. elongata and A. aff. fragilis fill the gap in the middle to late Lutetian alveolinid biostratigraphy. Despite not being exclusive to SBZ16, these new forms provide realiable biostratigraphic information where Nummulites are not present. This realibility lies on the correlation of Nummulites and Alveolina biomarkers in the same sections and their calibration to the global time scale through magnetostratigraphy. In fact, magnetostratigraphic calibration of all described taxa is also provided, along with an update of the SBZ calibration to the current Geologic Time Scale (Gradstein et al., 2012).

1991 ◽  
Vol 99 (5) ◽  
pp. 786-786
Author(s):  
John J. Flynn

2013 ◽  
pp. 476-476
Author(s):  
Frank D. Stacey ◽  
Paul M. Davis

2014 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 473
Author(s):  
Tegan Smith ◽  
John Laurie ◽  
Lisa Hall ◽  
Robert Nicoll ◽  
Andrew Kelman ◽  
...  

The international Geologic Time Scale (GTS) continually evolves due to refinements in age dating and the addition of more defined stages. The GTS 2012 has replaced GTS 2004 as the global standard timescale, resulting in changes to the age and duration of most chronological stages. These revisions have implications for interpreted ages and durations of sedimentary rocks in Australian basins, with ramifications for petroleum systems modelling. Accurate stratigraphic ages are required to reliably model the burial history of a basin, hence kerogen maturation and hydrocarbon expulsion and migration. When the resolution of the time scale is increased, models that utilise updated ages will better reflect the true basin history. The international GTS is largely built around northern hemisphere datasets. At APPEA 2009, Laurie et al. announced a program to tie Australian biozones to GTS 2004. Now, with the implementation of GTS 2012, these ties are being updated and refined, requiring a comprehensive review of the correlations between Australian and International biozonation schemes. The use of Geoscience Australia’s Timescales Database and a customised ‘Australian Datapack’ for the visualisation software package TimeScale Creator has greatly facilitated the transition from GTS 2004 to GTS 2012, as anticipated in the design of the program in 2009. Geoscience Australia’s basin biozonation and stratigraphy charts (e.g. Northern Carnarvon and Browse basins) are being reproduced to reflect the GTS 2012 and modified stratigraphic ages. Additionally, new charts are being added to the series, including a set of onshore basin charts, such as the Georgina and Canning basins.


2008 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix M. Gradstein ◽  
James G. Ogg ◽  
Martin van Kranendonk

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 525-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erle C Ellis

Even as it remains an informal term defining the emergence of humans as a force transforming Earth as a system, the Anthropocene is stimulating novel research and discussion across the academy and well beyond. While geography has always been deeply connected with the coupled human–environment paradigm, physical geographer’s embrace of the Anthropocene still appears lukewarm at best. While there are good reasons to hesitate, including the fact that the Anthropocene is not yet, and might never be, formalized in the Geologic Time Scale, physical geographers have much to gain by embracing what is rapidly becoming the most influential scholarly discussion on human–environmental relations in a generation. This editorial was commissioned for the author’s debut as Contributing Editor of Progress in Physical Geography.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document