arkL edit interval

arkL

select id,columnx from arkL_columns where dataset_id like 10

View/Edit arkL Database interval - E8 pfZ

Navigation

The age-window currently being used to search for terms for autocompletion is -5.95 -> 96.235 Ma.

	interval above:	E9 pfZ
parent-intervals:	this interval:	E8 pfZ	sub-intervals:
	interval below:	E7 pfZ

Mode selector

Interval data

intervalx:	E8 pfZhas added abv?yesid: 4314 sort:545
alternative_term:	block label:
formal term:	Guembelitrioides nuttalli Lowest-occurrence Zone
interval_type:
parent_interval:
dataset:	forams - planktic (dataset id = 10)
alt dataset:	(dataset id = )
TSC Column:	id:104
stage:
colour:
interval_notes:	Eocene Foram Zone E8 has a complex history of redefinition and revised datum-chron calibrations. E8 of Wade et al’11 clarifies what was previously considered coeval "base events", which are now known to diverge => use FAD of Guembelitrioides nuttalli. The previous Eocene Foram Zone P10 (= essentially E8 of Berggren-Pearson ’05) is EITHER the ’G. nuttalli zone (beginning at FAD) or the ’Hantkenina nuttalli Interval Zone’ (FAD to the FAD of ’Globigerapsis kugleri’) (Berggren & Miller, 1988; = Hankenina aragonensis Zone of Bolli, 1957). Rather confusing! FAD of G. nuttalli (which is NOT the same as Hantkenina nuttalli) is NOW dashed at approximately C21n.8 (Lutetian GSSP publication, Episodes 2011) and is suggested as alternate (base of E8) zonal datum by Berggren and Pearson (2005). This is nearly 3 million years higher than in Berggren-Pearson! Wade et al’11 summarize: "In a detailed magnetobiostratigraphic study of an expanded lower-middle Eocene succession from the western Pyrenees, Payros et al. (2007) examined the divergence of planktonic foraminiferal Zones P9 and P10 and the standard zonation (BKSA95). Unlike BKSA95 which places the boundary between planktonic foraminiferal Zones P9 and P10 within calcareous nannofossil Zone NP14 (Subzone CP12a) and magnetic polarity Chron C22n/C21r boundary, they found the boundary to occur within Zone NP15 (=Zone CP13) and Chron C20r. ... The P9/P10 zonal boundary is therefore a surprising 3.1 myr younger than in BKSA95." AND, the First occurrence of Hantkenina (other base of P10) which was a working definition of base of Lutetian Stage but later found to be significantly higher (may be nearly top of C20r -- maybe 2 myr higher still!). Calibration of these events needs further careful study.
compilation_notes:
refs to add:
linked refs:
preset_duration:
preset_duration_notes:
tracecode	; Q2top from event age; Q1base from event age; Q3a duration from base & top

	age2020	age		event	event_id	pup	in interval	age	age2020
Top:		44.0500	<---	FAD Globigerinatheka kugleri	6309	0.0000	C20r	44.05	00044.0052
Base:		46.2350	<---	FAD Guembelitrioides nuttalli	6312	0.0000	C20r	46.235	00046.2350
base notes	FAD of G. nuttalli (which is NOT the same as Hantkenina nuttalli) is dashed at approximately the base of Chron C20r (or may be ca. 0.2 myr lower at C21n.9 or C21n.8, if use the Lutetian GSSP publication in Episodes, 2011 (Molina at al. 2011), based on Payros et al., 2009) and is the base of revised zone E8 (Wade et al., 2011). This datum-chron correlation is nearly 3 million years higher than in Berggren & Pearson (2005). Wade et al. (2011) summarize: "In a detailed magnetobiostratigraphic study of an expanded lower-middle Eocene succession from the western Pyrenees, Payros et al. (2009) examined the divergence of planktonic foraminiferal Zones P9 and P10 and the standard zonation (BKSA95). Unlike BKSA95 which places the boundary between planktonic foraminiferal Zones P9 and P10 within calcareous nannofossil Zone NP14 (Subzone CP12a) and magnetic polarity Chron C22n/C21r boundary, they found the boundary to occur within Zone NP15 (=Zone CP13) and Chron C20r. ... The P9/P10 zonal boundary is therefore a surprising 3.1 myr younger than in BKSA95." In addition, the first occurrence of Hantkenina (alternate suggested marker for base of P10), which had been a working definition of base of Lutetian Stage, was found to be significantly higher (possibly near the top of Chron C20r; ca. another 2 myr higher). Calibration of these events needs further careful study. [In contrast, the age assignment of these events, hence base-Lutetian, by Berggren and Pearson (2005) was 49.0 Ma = Base C20r.]				comp notes

if you were a logged in editor there would be an input button here

Interval References

Dataset References