CAMBRIDGE EARTH SCIENCE SERIES
Plankton Stratigraphy VOLUME 1 Planktic foraminifera, calcareous nannofossils and calpio...
139 downloads
1116 Views
178MB Size
Report
This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form
CAMBRIDGE EARTH SCIENCE SERIES
Plankton Stratigraphy VOLUME 1 Planktic foraminifera, calcareous nannofossils and calpionellids
Edited by H. M. BOLLI J. B. SAUNDERS K. PERCH-NIELSEN
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Plankton stratigraphy
Edited by
H A N S M. B O L L I JOHN B. S A U NDE R S K A TH A R I N A P E R CH - N I E L S E N assisted by Karin E . Fancett
TllrFiflllo/tM Uttt"HfJolcs """f"utthiby Htnry Ylllm 15J4
TMUni"HrStlylttlsprurttd IUfdpub/tslwdrolllm-IISiy S/IIUJJ84
C A M B R IDGE U N I V E R S I TY P RE S S Cambridge New York
New Rochelle
M elbourne
Sydney
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521367196 ©Cambridge University Press 1985 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1985 Reprinted 1987 First paperback edition (in two volumes) 1989
A
catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 83-25170 ISBN 978-0-521-36719-6 paperback
C A M B R I DGE E A R TH S C IENCE S E R I E S Editors
A. H. Cook, W. B. Harland, N. F. Hughes, A. Putnis and M. R. A. Thomson
Plankton stratigraphy
In this series
Palaeomagnetism and plate tectonics M. W. McElhinny
Jurassic environments A. Hallam
Palaeobiology of angiosperm origins
N. F.
Hughes
Mesozoic and Cenozoic paleocontinental maps A. G. Smith and J. C. Briden
Mineral chemistry of metal sulfides D. J. Vaughan and J. R. Craig
Earthquake mechanics K. Kasahara Phanerozoic paleocontinental world maps A. G. Smith, A. M. Hurley and J. C. Briden
Earth's pre-Pleistocene glacial record M. J. Hambrey and W. B. Harland
A history of Persian earthquakes
N. N. A mbrayseys and C. P. Melville A geologic time scale W. B. Harland, A. Cox, P. G. Llewellyn, C. A. G. Pickton, A. G. Smith and R. Walters
Fossil invertebrates U. Lehmann and G. Hillmer
General hydrogeology E. V. Pinneker
The Great Tolbachik Fissure Eruption S. A. Fedotov and Ye. K. Markhinin
The dawn of animal life Martin F. Glaessner
Atlas of continental displacement 200 million years to the present H. G. Owen
Creep of crystals J. P. Poirier
Contents
Preface
vii
List ofcontributors
viii
Introduction
1
2
Comparison of zonal schemes for different
3
Introduction to the foraminiferal chapters
11
Cretaceous planktic foraminifera
17
fossil groups 4
3
Michele Caron 5
Paleocene and Eocene planktic foraminifera
87
Monique Toummkine & Hanspeter Luterbacher 6
Oligocene to Holocene low latitude planktic foraminifera
155
Hans M. Bolli & John B. Saunders 7
Southern mid latitude Paleocene to Holocene planktic foraminifera
263
D. Graham Jenkins 8
Mediterranean Miocene and Pliocene planktic foraminifea
283
Silvia Laccarino 9
Late Oligocene and Miocene planktic foraminifera of the Central Paratethys
315
FredRogl 10 Mesozoic calcareous nannofossils
329
Katharina Perch-Nielsen 11 Cenozoic calcareous nannofossils
427
Katharina Perch-Nielsen 12 Calpionellids
555
Jurgen Remane
13 Cretaceous radiolaria
573
Annika Sanfilippo & William R. Riedel
14 Cenozoic radiolaria
631
Annika Sanfilippo, M. Jean Westberg-Smith & WilliamR. Riedel 15 Late Cretaceous to Oligocene planktic diatims
713
Juliane Fenner 16 Miocene to holocene planktic diatoms
763
John A. Barron 17 Silicoflagellates
811
Katharina Perch-Nielsen 18 Mesozoic and Cenozoic dinoflagellates
847
Graham L. William & Jonathan P. Bujak 19 Cenozoic and Late Cretaceous ichtyoliths
965
Patricia S. Doyle & WilliamR. Riedel Index
996
Preface We have long had the desire to produce a handbook dealing exclusively with planktic microfossils in their role as strati graphic markers. Though several very useful reference works have appeared in the last decade, we feel that there is still a need for such a book for the use of stratigraphers in industry and academia and for advanced students. The amount of informa tion now available on the various fossil groups is enormous, particularly as a result of the wealth of material that has come from the Deep Sea Drilling Project over the last 15 years. It is also widely spread and not always easy to find, hence our endeavour to get as much as possible together in a single volume. Such a project could only be undertaken by a team of specialists and so 18 paleontologists have worked together to produce this book. We have restricted ourselves to those groups that are used in the dating of deeper water sediments. However, in the case of many taxa (particularly the calcareous ones) their presence in neritic environments allows correlation of these facies also. In fact, because many biostratigraphic studies were completed before the availability of such a wealth of deep sea cores, zonations were largely erected on surface and subsurface sections where the sediments were mostly deposited under bathyal conditions. To keep the length of the book within acceptable limits, authors had to be selective in the number of taxa that could be included and also in the degree of illustration possible. In as many cases as possible we have included not only the marker species but have also drawn attention to morphologically similar forms with which they might be confused. Of necessity, the interpretation of taxa and choice of zonal schemes largely reflects the views of the authors, with which some other authorities may disagree to a certain extent. For reasons of space we have been forced to concentrate on certain key regions where the planktic succession has been worked out best. The editors would like to acknowledge the very good cooperation that they have received from all the contributors. It has been a pleasure to work with Cambridge University Press and we have been exceedingly fortunate in our Press subeditor, Karin Fancett, whose dedication and expertise have been vital to the project.
Dr J. P. Beckmann was good enough to read large portions of the text for us. We would like to thank both the Federal School of Tech nology in Zurich and the Museum of Natural History in Basel for their help. The illustrative material for the majority of the chapters was prepared in these two institutions- the drawings by Mr A. Uhr and photographs by Mr U. Gerber in Zurich and the wording for figures and charts by Mr R. Panchaud in Basel. We are most grateful to all these people for their skill and good cooperation. Note added in 1989 reprinting
We have taken the opportunity to divide this book into two volumes to facilitate its use. 1989
H. M. B. J. B. S. K. P.-N.
Contributors US Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA Hans M. Bolli, Geological Institute, ETH, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland Jonathan P. Bujak, 1-2835 19th Street NE, Calgary, Alberta T2E 7AZ, Canada M ichele Caron, Geological Institute, University of Fribourg, 1700 Fribourg, Switzerland John A. Barron,
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California 92093, USA Juliane Fenner, Holliinderey 31, D2300, Kiel-Kronshagen, German Federal Republic Silvia laccarino, Geological Institute, University of Parma, 43100 Parma, Italy D. Graham Jenkins, Department of Earth Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, England Hanspeter Luterbacher, Geological Institute, University of Tubingen, 7400 Tubingen, German Federal Republic Katharina Perch-Nielsen, Geological Institute, ETH, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland Jurgen Remane, Geological Institute, University of Neuchatel, 2000 Neuchatel 7, Switzerland William R. Riedel, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California 92093, USA Fred Rogl, Natural History Museum, 1014 Vienna, Austria Annika Sanfilippo, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California 92093, USA John B. Saunders, Natural History Museum, 4001 Basel, Switzerland M onique Toumarkine, Geological Institute, ETH, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland M. Jean Westberg-Smith, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California, 92093, USA Graham L. Williams, Geological Survey of Canada, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia B2Y 4A2, Canada Patricia S. Doyle,
1 Introduction
The last 15 years have been of vital importance in the history of the use of planktic microfossils for the dating of Cretaceous and Cenozoic deep sea sediments. During this time, the Glomar Chall eng er of the Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP) has drilled at a total of 624 sites in almost every ocean basin in the world and brought up Cenozoic and Mesozoic sediment cores from the great majority of them. As the oceans occupy 72% of the surface of the Globe, the results were bound to have a profound effect on geologic thinking. A review of some of the important findings of the first ten years of the project is given in Warme et a!. (1981). Zonal schemes based on planktic foraminifera and calcareous nannofossils were well established and already proven in many land sections, both surface and subsurface, by the time the DSDP began in 1968. They provided the tool for the dating not only of the sedimentary sequences but also of the underlying oceanic crust that was reached at many of the sites. The latter dating has relied heavily on a knowledge of the age of the sediments immediately above the crust because direct dating of oceanic basalts has hardly ever proved possible. Magnetostratigraphy has lately developed into a most impor tant tool but as a magnetic reversal has no unique signature, it has to be identified by other means - for example micro paleontologic - or be recognized in an established sequence that has previously been dated, perhaps by reference to a section on land that has radiometric tie-points. The stratigraphic significance ofthe siliceous microfossils - radiolaria, silicoflagellates and diatoms - was less well known at the beginning of the Deep Sea Drilling Project. For these groups the zonal schemes that have since been established are based to a large degree on DSDP cores. For the calcareous groups the wealth of new sections has enabled a considerable refinement in resolution. The overall result is that there is now a much closer correlation between the fossil groups, both calcareous and siliceous, and this subject is covered in Chapter 2. A recent book edited by B. U. Haq & A. Boersma (1978), Introduction to Marin e Micropal eontology, is useful for its discussion of the biology of the various fossil groups.
2
1: Introduction
However, species are not treated from a stratigraphic viewpoint in any depth. Mention should also be made of Oceanic M icropalaeontology edited by A. T. S. Ramsay (1977). In this collection of papers the chapters are much more individually designed with rather unequal coverage in a stratigraphic sense but with additional topics reviewed (living forms, biogeo graphy, Quaternary climates, etc.). Neogene foraminifera are not covered. The arrangement of the present volume
As the purpose of the book is strictly biostratigraphic, the accent is on species rather than genera and comparative notes largely replace taxonomic descriptions as the latter can be found elsewhere. To aid quick identification, the taxa are named on the illustrations in most cases. Also, it has been possible to standardize magnifications for some fossil groups to facilitate comparison between species. Stratigraphic ranges are given against standard zonal schemes. This causes some oversimplification with too many first and last occurrences happening at exactly the same time. This is known to be the case, particularly since refinement has become possible as better continuous, expanded sections have become available, but it is inherent in charts designed regionally rather than for single sections. For the majority of foraminiferal species we have also included charts arranged on last occurrences or' tops' as it is with this kind of information that oil company biostratigraphers usually have to operate. Standardization can only be carried so far and con-
tributors have found it practical to treat their groups in different ways. Thus, for example, evolutionary lineages are given prominent consideration in the radiolaria, while in the dinoflagellate species, descriptions were considered superfluous and the accent was placed on good illustrations (wherever possible of type material), ranges and comparison of zonal schemes. The chapter on ichthyoliths is included because these small skeletal fragments of fish made principally of apatite are often the only fossils remaining in deep sea clays and thus the only means to date them biostratigraphically. Their strati graphic significance has been established by comparison with other microfossils when they occur together or otherwise by reference to dated sediments above and below those that contain ichthyoliths exclusively. Reference lists are placed at the end of each chapter rather than being combined, as the convenience outweighs the advantage of avoiding a small amount of overlap. On the other hand, the indices for all chapters have been placed together at the end of the book but divided into fossil groups.
References Haq, B. U. & Boersma, A. 1978. Introduction to Marine Micropaleontology. Elsevier, 376 pp. Ramsay, A. T. S. (ed.) 1977. Oceanic Micropalaeontology. Academic Press, vol. I, pp. 1-808, vol. 2, pp. 809-1453. Warme, J. E., Douglas, R. G. & Winterer, E. L. (eds.) 1981. The Deep Sea Drilling Project: A decade of progress. Spec. Pub/. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral., 32, 1-564.
3
2 Comparison of zonal schemes for different fossil groups The purpose of this chapter is to present comparative charts of the various zonal schemes for different fossil groups as used in the present work. The results for the Late Mesozoic are given in Fig. I and for the Cenozoic in Fig. 2. The subdivision of Late Mesozoic and Cenozoic rock sequences began in Europe with the erection of the Cretaceous Period by A. d'Halloy in 1822, of the Eocene, Miocene and Pliocene Epochs by Lyell in 1832, and of the Pleistocene by Lyell in 1836. The Oligocene was added by Beyrich in 1854 and the Paleocene by Schimper in 1874. The subdivision of these major units into a series of stages was also undertaken in Europe in the latter half of the last century. A few additional subdivisions have been proposed more recently, particularly for the younger part of the Neogene. Stages have also been proposed in other parts of the world to fit local stratigraphic conditions; for example in California and New Zealand. To tie later work into the classical stratigraphy requires comparison with European stratotypes, many of which are poor in microfossils, particularly planktic species, as they were chosen for their macrofossil content and were usually rich molluscan horizons. Recent work using all fossil groups, particularly including calcareous nannofossils, and now adding other tools such as magnetostratigraphy, is yielding more reliable placement of the stratotypes. Recent state-of-the art reviews are given in Harland et a/. (1982), Haq (1983) and Berggren et a/. (I 983a, b, c). Stage designations are generally not considered in the present book, though exceptions are made for the Mediter ranean (Chapter 8) and Paratethys (Chapter 9) where they are particularly frequently used by stratigraphers. Foraminifera
The Cretaceous stratotypes were defined in sediments of epicontinental sea origin rich in megafossils including pelagic forms such as ammonites and belemnites but poor in planktic foraminifera. It has been necessary to go to other, more favourable areas to correlate from ammonite assemblages to planktic foraminiferal assemblages. Such regions include: the Vocontian trough in SE France, the North Tunisian platform
4
2: Comparison of zonal schemes for different fossil groups
and the platform of the western interior of the United States of America. In the Cenozoic, first attempts were made to compare the European stratotypes with other facies in different parts of the world using molluscs. Though this produced a gross correlation, in detail it has caused considerable confusion over the years as, for example, in the placing of the Miocene/Pliocene boundary in tropical areas. The presence of larger foraminifera such as the nummulites and the orbitoids in many type areas has enabled these to be used extensively to bridge the gap and larger foraminiferal zones are still in wide use. Planktic foraminiferal species were almost entirely ig nored as markers until the 1940s because morphologic differ ences between species were not appreciated, leading to the description of relatively few, mostly long-ranging taxa. A change in attitude was forecast by Grimsdale (1951) who compared the ranges of 41 Tertiary planktic species from the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean with their equivalents in the Middle East. This was the beginning of a strong commitment by micropaleontologists first in oil companies but soon also in universities and geological surveys, to the zonation of Creta ceous and Tertiary rock sequences using planktic foraminifera. Sediments laid down under tropical to warm temperate paleoconditions were the first to be tackled due to their high species diversity but later work has spread to higher northern and southern latitudes. The low latitude zonal schemes used in Chapters 5 and 6 were erected largely in Trinidad with additional zones added from Venezuela and from Caribbean DSDP sites 29, 31, 147, 148 and 152. Zones used in Chapter 8 for Mediterranean Neogene faunas were erected in that area while those for southern mid latitudes (Chapter 7) were almost all erected in New Zealand. In the Caribbean, the first dating in both Late Mesozoic and Cenozoic was done using megafossils, predominantly molluscs but also other groups such as corals, echinoids and sponges, with larger foraminifera also playing a prominent role. Against this framework, the rock sequences were dated and then, wherever possible, zoned using foraminifera - first benthic and then planktic forms. Though the correlation with megafossils worked reasonably well at older levels, some confusion was caused in the later Neogene where greater provinciality of megafossils made long-range correlation less reliable. Calcareous nannofossils
For the Jurassic, the correlation scheme used is the one of Barnard & Hay (1974), who correlated calcareous nanno fossil events with the ammonite zones in England, France and Germany. For the Cretaceous, the calcareous nannofossil zones of Sissingh (1977) were correlated by him with stages based on the coccolith content of the stratotypes in France and northwest
Europe and nearby sections as well as material from western Asia and New Jersey. For the Cenozoic, correlation between the CN/CP zones of Okada & Bukry (1980, based on Bukry, 1973, 1975) and the NN/NP zones of Martini (1971) is taken from the authors themselves. Bukry (1973, 1975) based his zonation mainly on deep sea sections from low to mid latitudes, whereas Martini (1971) mainly used land sections from Europe, Cali fornia and the Caribbean. Correlation with the N/P foramini feral zones is taken from Berggren eta!. (1983a). Calpionellids
There is as yet no detailed ammonite zonation of the Late Tithonian with which the calpionellid zones can be correlated. First attempts in this direction have been made by Barthel et a!. (1966) and by Enay & Geyssant (1975) in the Subbetic Zone of southern Spain. In the Berriasian, on the other hand, calpionellid and ammonite zones have been calibrated in great detail using material collected bed by bed from the same sections, in SE France by LeHegarat & Remane (1968) and in the Subbetic Zone by Allemann, Griin & Wiedmann (1975). Valanginian zonations were correlated in the same manner by Busnardo, Thieuloy, Moullade, et a!. (1979). Radiolaria
The Cretaceous radiolarian zones are rather tenuously aligned with stages via co-occurring calcareous microfossils as determined from the results of Deep Sea Drilling Project Legs 3, 10, 14, 32, 41 and 62 (Maxwell, von Herzen, eta!., 1970; Hayes, Pimm, et a!., 1972; Worzel, Bryant, et a!., 1973; Larson, Moberly, eta!., 1975; Lancelot, Seibold, eta!., 1978; Thiede, Vallier, eta!., 1981), and from a new investigation of the Cismon section (appendix to Chapter 13 of this volume). Since practically none of the stratotypes of the Cenozoic stages contain siliceous microfossils, radiolarian zonal bound aries must be related to epochs indirectly by correlations with calcareous microfossil zonations. The most consistent body of information for this purpose is provided by Bukry's routine contributions to the Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project, and this source has been used in relating radiolarian events to nannofossil zones (Sanfilippo, Westberg & Riedel, 1981). That compilation, based on the published results from DSDP Legs 10 through 50, forms the basis for positioning most of the radiolarian zonal boundaries in Fig. 2. At the upper end of the column, however, Quaternary zonal bound aries (two of them with braces indicating intervals of uncer tainty) are based on results from DSDP Leg 68 (Prell, Gardner, et a!., 1982). At the lower end of the column, the bottom of the Bekoma bidartensis Zone is positioned according to information from DSDP Legs 10 and 15 (Worzel, Bryant, eta!., 1973; Edgar, Saunders, eta!., 1973). Also in Fig. 2, the Early/Middle Eocene boundary is
CALCAREOUS NANNOFOSSILS
PLANKTIC FORAMINIFERA
STAGE
AGE
01 NOFLAGELLATES
RADIOLARIA
171
161
CALPIONELLIDS 181
Dmogymnium euclaense
MAASTRICHTIAN Amphipyndax tylotus
Odontochitina aperculata
CAMPANIAN
w f-
.. ..J
SANTONIAN
Cordosphaeridium truncigerum
Theocampe urna
-------
I
Vl
::> 0 w u
..
f-
w
a:
u
I
Cal!aiosphaeridium asymmetricum -
CONIACIAN
0/igosphaeridium pulcherrimum
TURONIAN
CENOMANIAN
Ouadrum gartneri
I
''""'''IJ'""" ,_,..,.,,.,.:'.:.:..:'---i CC10
� '_�__:"" _�· � �· �-�-·"' --!-------�--" ALBIAN
u�;;_;:�:�-;����·;n
�--':'' "�11'"'
��
CC9
sis
I
UJ
�;���;;;� ���;; � ;
,
l
8 AR A EM 1 AN
l-----
HAUTER IV tAN
-
�
Xenasc s cera to/des . Carpodmium obliqwcostatum
E:
CC7
§ f-------1 ] � Protoellipsodinium spinocristatum � -S·'t::
Prediscosphaera columnata
·
Chiastozygus fitterarius
�r.rull'. 71 '_ ::-;- --:- bandyca - Calocyclas L f------l Areosphaeridium diktyop/okusPentadinium /aticinctum �pocanistrum'' az� Asterolampra marylandica '-�---------- - - Podocyrtis goetheana Dictyocha hexacantha Podocyrtis chalara Brightwellia imperfecta Podocyrtis mitra Hemiau/us gondolaformis Mw Eatonicysta ursulae Podocyrtis amp/a z Distatodinium ellipticum w Hemiaulus a latus ��Thy_r_socy_rr_�_ '_"aca u _ _ n_tha ----�PyxU�caR�u�t �av���--------� 0 _ _ _ � w Dictyocha Dictyoprora mongo/fi� e� ri Triceratium kanayae Naviculapsis spinosa Theocotyle cryptocephala foliacea - ------- - --- - Craspedodiscus oblongus Phormocyrtis striata Naviculopsis Buryella clinata E robu ta Homotryblium tenuispinosum �----1 Craspedodiscus ijndulatus Hafniasphaera septata Bekoma bidartensis f-=-=:c:::::::= _'?_ r-------------f--Naviculopsis constrictus Hemiau/us inaequilateralis L r- - -- -- - --- -- r----1 Ceratiopsis speciosa Apectodinium parvum Sceptroneis sp. A f-� w - --- - - - - --- - u UNZONED M� ..J r------------� Corbisema hastata f--0.. Odontotropis klavensii Ceratiposis diebelii Palaeoperidium pyrophorum
Pseudoeunotia dolio/us
0..
__________ _
__ ______ __ _ _
_j·�
_
____
�
: : : � : : : : :�
�
A
_J
____ --�-
___ _
-
__ _
2: Comparison of zonal schemes for different fossil groups
8
placed within the NP 14 nannofossil zone whereas on radiolaria it would be placed within the Phormocyrtis striata Zone and thus at the NP 13/NP 14 zonal boundary. Diatoms
Diatom stratigraphy in the Paleocene (Gombos,1976) is still at a very early stage. Further study of the paleogeographic distribution of the proposed marker species and their strati graphic ranges might result in changes. Early Early Eocene diatomaceous sediments have not yet been found in deep sea cores. Because of that,the top of the H em iaulus ina equilateralis Zone and the base of the Crasp edodiscus undulatus Zone (Gombos, 1976, 1982) have not been defined. Low and middle latitude diatom zones for the late Early Eocene and Middle Eocene (Fenner,1984) are correlated with radiolarian and calcareous nannofossil zones in Atlantic and Caribbean DSDP sites. Correlation with planktic foraminiferal zones was only possible at a few of these sites (94,356,390A). For the Late Eocene,diatom ranges have come entirely from DSDP Site 366 on the Sierra Leone Rise (Fenner,1984). Diatom zones for the low latitude Oligocene (Fenner, 1984) are based on many DSDP sites with long sediment sections in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and in the Carib bean. The stratigraphic ranges of the diatom marker species seem reliable. They were placed against radiolaria,calcareous nannofossils and planktic foraminifera. Correlation of latest Oligocene to Quaternary low latitude diatom zones with planktic foraminiferal,calcareous nannofossil and radiolarian zones is after Barron (1984) and Barron et a!. (1984) and is synthesized from correlations at DSDP Sites 71,77,158,495,503,504,572,573,574 and 575 in the eastern and central equatorial Pacific Ocean. Silicoflagellates
The silicoflagellate zones were correlated with the cal careous nannofossil CN/CP zones by Bukry (1981) and his suggestions are followed here. He erected his zonation for tropical and subtropical oceanic areas based on cosmopolitan and low latitude silicoflagellate distribution in DSDP cores. Dinoflagellates
The dinoflagellate zonation shown in Figs. 1 and 2 was erected by Williams (1977) as a worldwide synthesis of several zonations previously applied by authors to various areas. Age justification for these zones is as follows. Late Triassic dinoflagellate zones have been recognized in the Arctic,New Zealand and Australian Karnian-Rhaetian, and in the northwest European Rhaetian. The ages of these zones are based primarily on spores and pollen, with some additional data from Monotis faunas in the Arctic. Age control for Jurassic dinoflagellate zones is based
extensively on the occurrence of ammonites and hence the Jurassic dinoflagellate zones erected for northwest Europe, Portugal and the Arctic correlate directiy both with the standard ammonite zonations of Arkell (1956) and Casey (1973) and also with local ammonite zonations such as that of Mouterde eta!. (1965) in areas such as Portugal. Additional data on the ages of particular sections,especially in the Arctic, are furnished by other fossil groups including pelecypods, ostracodes,foraminifera and spores. Age control for the Cretaceous dinoflagellate zones in surface sections is based extensively on ammonites in England, France, Romania and the Arctic. However, in some surface sections such as Speeton in England,ammonites only occur at certain horizons so that other fossil groups including belem nites, brachiopods and pelecypods are used locally to determine the age of strata. Cretaceous subsurface sections rely exclu sively on microfossils for age control. These mostly comprise planktic and benthic foraminifera, tintinnids, calcareous nannofossils,ostracodes,spores,pollen and ammonite aptychi. In addition to the fossils listed above,echinoids have been used extensively to date Late Cretaceous surface sections upon which dinoflagellate zonations are based. Age control for Paleogene and Neogene dinoflagellate zones is based largely on the occurrence in these sections of planktic foraminifera and calcareous nannofossils. Thus there is direct correlation with the standard Cenozoic planktic foraminiferal and calcareous nannofossil zonations. In high latitude areas such as the Norwegian-Greenland Sea, age control is primarily provided by siliceous microfossils including silicoflagellates,diatoms and radiolarians. Radiometric and magnetic polarity data
To correlate zonal schemes with radiometric ages and magnetic polarity reversals, authors of the various chapters used the latest data available at the time when they prepared their charts. Van Hinte (1976) was used for the Cretaceous and Ness, Levi & Couch (1980) for the Cenozoic. Just before completion of the book, newer data became available from Harland eta!. (1982) and Berggren eta!. (1983a,b,c). This new information, along with the earlier figures, has been incor porated in Figs. 1 and 2 of the present chapter where we have included, together with the paleomagnetic data, the million year values of Har1and eta!. for the Mesozoic (Fig. I) and of Berggren et al. for the Cenozoic (Fig. 2).
References Allemann, F., Catalano, R., Fares, F. & Remane, J. 1971. Standard calpionellid zonation (Upper Tithonian Valanginian) of the western Mediterranean Province. Proceedings II Planktonic Conference, Roma, 1970, 2, 1337-40. Allemann, F., Griin, W. & Wiedmann, J. 1975. The Berriasian of Caravaca (Prov. of Murcia) in the subbetic zone of Spain and its importance for defining this stage and the
2: Comparison of zonal schemes for different fossil groups
Jurassic-Cretaceous boundary. Colloque sur !a limite Jurassique-Cretace, Lyon, Neuchatel, sept. 1973. Mem. Bur. Rech. geol. minieres, 86, 14-22. Arkell, W. J. 1956. Jurassic Geology of the World. Hafner Publishing Co., New Y ork, 806 pp. Banner, F. T. & Blow, W. H. 1965. Progress in the planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Neogene. Nature, 208, 1164-6. Barnard,T. & Hay, W. W. 1974. On Jurassic Coccoliths: A tentative zonation of the Jurassic of Southern England and North France. Eclog. geol. Helv., 67, 563-85. Barron,J. A. 1984. Late Eocene to Holocene diatom biostratigraphy of the equatorial Pacific Ocean, DSDP Leg 85. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Proj., 85 (in press). Barron, J. A., Keller, G., Dunn, D. A., Kennett,J. P., Lombari, G., Burkle, L. H. & Vincent, E. 1984. A multiple microfossil biochronology for the Miocene. In: S. M. Savin (ed.), Cenozoic Paleoceanography Synthesis (CENOP). Mem. geol. Soc. Am. (in press). Barthel, K. W., Cediel, F., Geyer, 0. F. & Remane, J. 1966. Der subbetische Jura von Cehegin (Provinz Murcia, Spanien). Mitt. Bayer. Staatssamml. Palaeontol. hist. Geol., 6,
167-211. Berggren, W. A.,Kent, V., Flynn, J. J. & Van Couvering, J. A. 1983a. Cenozoic Geochronology,(preprint). Berggren, W. A., Kent, V. & Van Couvering, J. A. 1983b. Neogene geochronology and chronostratigraphy. In: N. J. Snelling (ed.), Geochronology and the Geological Record. Geological Society of London, Special Paper (in press). Berggren,W. A.,Kent,V. & Flynn, J. J. 1983c. Paleogene geochronology and chronostratigraphy. In: N. J. Snelling (ed.), Geochronology and the Geological Record. Geological Society of London, Special Paper (in press). Berggren, W. A. & Van Couvering,J. A. 1974. The Late Neogene. Biostratigraphy,geochronology and paleoclimatology of the last 15 million years in marine and continental sequences. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 16, 1-215. Blow, W. H. 1969. Late Middle Eocene to Recent planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy. Proceedings First International Conference on Planktonic Microfossils, Geneva 1967, 1, 199-422. Bolli, H. M. 1957a. Planktonic foraminifera from the Oligocene-Miocene Cipero and Lengua formations of Trinidad, B.W.I. Bull. U.S. nat/. Mus., 215, 97-123. Bolli,H. M. 1957b. Planktonic foraminifera from the Eocene Navet and San Fernando formations of Trinidad,B.W.I. Bull. U.S. nat!. Mus., 215, 155-72. Bolli, H. M. 1970. The foraminifera of Sites 23-31,Leg 4. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Proj., 4, 577-643. Bolli, H. M. & Bermudez,P. J. 1965. Zonation based on planktonic foraminifera of Middle Miocene to Pliocene warm-water sediments. Boletino Informativo, Asoc. Ven. Geol., Min. y Petr., 8, 119-49. Bolli, H. M. & Premoli Silva, I. 1973. Oligocene to Recent planktonic foraminifera and stratigraphy of the Leg 15 Sites in the Caribbean Sea. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Proj., 15, 475-97. Bukry, D. 1973. Low-latitude coccolith biostratigraphic zonation. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Proj., 15, 685-703. Bukry,D. 1975. Coccolith and silicoflagellate stratigraphy, north-western Pacific Ocean,Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 32. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro}., 32, 677-701.
9
Bukry, D. 1981. Synthesis of silicoflagellate stratigraphy for Maestrichtian to Quaternary marine sediment. Spec. Pub!. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral., 32, 433-44. Busnardo, R.,Thieuloy, J.-P., Moullade, M., et a!. 1979. Hypostratotype mesogeen de l'etage valanginien (Sud-Est de !a France). Ed. Cent. nat!. Rech. sci., 6, 1-143. Casey, R. 1973. The ammonite succession at the Jurassic-Cretaceous boundary in eastern England. In: R. Casey & P. F. Rawson (eds.),The Boreal Lower Cretaceous. Geological Journal, Special Issue, 5, 193-266. Edgar,N. T.,Saunders, J. B., et a!. 1973. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Proj., 15,1-1137. Enay, R. & Geyssant, J. R. 1975. Faunes tithoniques des chaines betiques (Espagne meridionale). Colloque sur !a limite Jurassique-Cretace, Lyon,Neuchatel, sept. 1973. Mem. Bur. Rech. geol. minieres, 86, 39-55. Fenner, J. 1984. Eocene-Oligocene planktic diatom stratigraphy in high and low latitudes. Micropaleontology (in press). Gombos, A. M. Jr 1976. Paleogene and Neogene diatoms from the Falkland Plateau and Malvinas Outer Basin, Leg 36, Deep Sea Drilling Project. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro}., 36, 575-687. Gombos,A. M. Jr 1982. Early and middle Eocene diatom evolutionary events. Bacillaria, 5, 225-42. Grimsdale,T. F. 1951. Correlation, age determination and the Tertiary pelagic foraminifera. Proceedings Third World Petroleum Congress, The Hague, sec. 1, 463-75. Haq, B. U. 1983. Jurassic to Recent nannofossil biochronology: An update. In: B. U. Haq (ed.), Nannofossil Biostratigraphy. Benchmark Papers in Geology, 18, 358-78. Harland, W. B., Cox,A. V., Llewellyn, P. G., Pikton, C. A. G., Smith,A. G. & Walters, R. 1982. A Geologic Time Scale. Cambridge Earth Science Series, Cambridge University Press,131 pp. Hayes, D. E., Pimm, A. C., et a/. 1972. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Proj., 14, 1-975. Lancelot,Y., Seibold, E., et a!. 1978. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro}., 32, 1-980. Larson, R. L., Moberly, R., et a/. 1975. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro}., 32, 1-980. Le Hegarat, G. & Remane,J. 1968. Tithonique superieur et Berriasien de bordure cevenole. Correlation des ammonites et des calpionelles. Geo bios, 1, 7-70. Martini,E. 1971. Standard Tertiary and Quaternary calcareous nannoplankton zonation. In: A. Farinacci (ed.), Proceedings II Planktonic Conference Roma, 1970, 2, 739-85. Maxwell, A. E., von Herzen, R., et a/. 1970. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Proj., 3, 1-806. Mouterde, R., Ruget, C. & Moitinho de Almeida, F. 1965. Coupe du Lias au sud de Condeixa. Com. Serv. geol. Portugal, 48, 16-91. Ness, G., Levi, S. & Couch, R. 1980. Marine magnetic anomaly time-scales for the Cenozoic and Late Cretaceous: A precis, critique, and synthesis. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys., 18, 753-70. Nigrini, C. 1971. Radiolarian zones in the Quaternary of the Equatorial Pacific Ocean. In: B. M. Funnell & W. R. Riedel (eds.), The Micropalaeontology of Oceans, pp. 443-61, Cambridge University Press. Okada, H. & Bukry, D. 1980. Supplementary modification and introduction of code numbers to the low-latitude coccolith biostratigraphic zonation. Marine Micropaleontol., 5, 321-5.
10
Prell, W. L., Gardner,J. V., eta/. 1982. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro)., 68, 1-495. Sanfilippo, A., Westberg, M. J. & Riedel, W. R. 1981. Cenozoic Radiolarians at Site 462, Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 61, Western Tropical Pacific. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro)., 61, 495-505. Saunders, J. B., Bernoulli, D., Miiller-Merz, E., Oberhiinsli, H., Perch Nielsen, K., Riedel, W. R., Sanfilippo,A. & Torrini, R. Jr 1984. Stratigraphy of the late Middle Eocene to Early Oligocene in the Bath Cliff section, Barbados, West Indies. Micropaleontology, 30, 390-425.
2: Comparison of zonal schemes for different fossil groups
Sissingh, W. I 977. Biostratigraphy of Cretaceous calcareous nannoplankton. Geo/. M ji nbouw, 56, 37-65. Thiede, J., Vallier, T. L., eta/. 1981. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro)., 62, 1-1120. van Hinte, J. E. 1976. A Cretaceous time scale. Bull. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geo/., 60, 498-516. Williams, G. L. 1977. Dinocysts. Their paleontology, biostratigraphy and paleoecology. In: A. T. S. Ramsay (ed.), Oceanic Micropalaeontology, pp. 1231-1325. Academic Press, London. Worzel,J. H., Bryant, W., eta/. 1973. Initial Rep. Deep Sea drill. Pro)., 10, 1-748.
11
3 Introduction to the foraminiferal chapters
The planktic foramjnifera are treated in Chapters 4 to 9. Chapter 4 deals with the Cretaceous on a worldwide basis.
Chapter 5 covers the Paleocene and Eocene in low latitudes and northern mid latitudes, including the Mediterranean and Alpine areas, with the southern mid latitudes being dealt with in a part of Chapter 7. Chapter 6 covers the Oligocene io Holocene of low latitudes only, as progressivelatitudinat diversification becomes increasingly apparent through the Neogene. Thus, distinct regions have been treated separately, the southern mid latitudes in a part of Chapter 7, the Mediterranean in Chapter 8 and Central Paratethys in Chapter 9.
P articular features of some chapters
Though all the foraminiferal chapters give the same type
of information as regards discussion and illustration of taxa,
definition of zones and presentation of distribution charts, it
bas been found necessary to treat different regions and
different parts of the stratigraphic column each in its own way. In Chapters 4, 5 and 6, in particular, we have used more
space for discussion, illustration and comparison of taxa as
these are the forms with the greatest worldwide application in stratigraphy. Taxa have not been treated in strict alphabetic order in Chapters 5 and 6 but have been discussed under
groups showing similar morphologic characters.
In Chapter 7 on the southern mid latitudes, additional
information has bee n given on paleoceanography, paleo temperature and species . diversity to explain some of the particular conditions that pertain to that region.
In Chapter 8 on the Mediterranean region, the history and stratigraphic position of Neogene stages is given briefly with a calibration of the biostratigraphic zonation of their stratotypes.
Chapter 9, dealing with the Oligo-Miocene of Central
Paratethys, shows that planktic foraminifera have their strati
� Parateth�an sta� j/F
grap�c value even where ��lions for their �st�� margmal. Here too, space ts g�ven to
these
are poorly known outside Europj:
widely used
but
are
stratigraphic tools for many workers.
the most
3: Introduction to the foraminiferal chapters
12
Discussion and illustration of taxa
The basic style ofthe chapters as regards information on taxa is similar throughout. There is a reference to the type and, where applicable. to any neotype or lectotype: important
synonyms are listed. The taxonomic notes are not primarily
descriptive as such in form ation can be found in the original
publication or reproduced in the Catalogue of Foraminifera
(Ellis & Messina, 1940 with continuing supplements). Instead,
names are placed beneath the figures where the primary type
is also indicated. FuiJ details regarding the provenance of the
specimen is to be found in the appropriate legend.
Generic assignments
The grouping of species within genera has shown many changesover the years. but thishas not affet:ted the stratigraphic
value of the taxa. In the present volume we do not generally
greater weight is given to a discussion of those features of a
discuss generic matters for Cenozoic taxa as other works
taxon that distinguish it from morphologically similar forms.
are readily available (Stainforth et a/., 1975; Blow, 1979).
The optimal stratigraphic use of any taxon depends on
new ones have been erected in recent years. It has therefore
its accurate identification. The inclusion of specimens that do not conform to the established limits of any taxon may
Cretaceous genera are less well served part1cuJarly as numerous been considered helpful to include in Chapter 4 a description
adversely affect its use. The great variability found in many
and brief discussion of the Cretaceous genera recognized
planktic foraminifera] species resulting from morphologic
therein.
variation and also differences between growth stages may
The use of generic names in Chapter 6 on low latitude
make the delineation of a species difficult. This is especially so
Oligocene to Holocene forms is more conservative than that
in lineages where change s i gradational through time, in which
adopted in Chapter 5 on the equivalent P aJeocene and Eocene
case assignment to a particular taxon may be somewhat
forms. This is b�ause the recent generic changes and additions
arbitrary.
in the lower part of the Cenozoic are more wideJy accepted
depends has to be _the primary type and therefore, as a general
than those in younger horizons..
The centraJ form on which the identification of a taxon
rule, we have figured holotypes, neotypes and lectotypes.
Direction of coiling
Additional specimens are illustrated if the original figure is
The preferred direction ofcoilingin trochospiral planktic
particularly poor or ifa range ofvariability needs to be shown.
foraminifera can be used as a stratigraphic indicator in certain
The degree ofvariability around the central typeallowed in a taxon varies from one worker to another. We try to discuss this aspect though, for reasons ofspace, the details may have been published elsewhere. Examples oflineages or groups of species dealt with in this way include Globorotalia mayeri,
instances. Through the Cretaceous up to about the end of the
Albian all species show random coiling. A rapid change takes place around the base of the Cenomanian and from there to
the top of the Maastrichtian virtually all trochospiral species
90%
Globorotalia opima, Globorotaliafoltsi and Turborotalia cerro
show a very strong preference of well over
where the developmental changes through time have been well
coiling.
cases ofphylogenetic relationship between taxa we consider to
PaJeocene to Eocene interval coiling is random at the beginning,
azulensis. The last two examples we consider to be lineages
documented and can be considered to be proven. Some other
for dextral
The more complex patterns for the Cenozoic were
compiled by &lli (1971) and are here updated in Fig. I. In the
be still speculative. Some of those proposed by Jenkins (1971)
after which many species display a strongpreference for either
and Blow (1979) are discussed in Chapter 6, but others
sinistral or dextral coiling. There is a repetition of this pattern
had completed our work.
coiling s i replaced by a preferred direction in many species.
proposed by Kennett & Srinivasan (1983) appeared after we
With few exceptions a taxon is discussed and illustrated only once, in most cases in the chapter that covers the area
in the Oligocene to Holocene intervaJ where, again, random During the latter phase some taxa, such as Pulleniatna i and the memirdiform group ofG!oborotalias, may show abrupt rever
from which it was originallydescribed. lfit is widely used it will
saJs in direction of coiling. For certain groups, such as the
also appear on the range charts or on the zonaJ sclremes in
menardiform Globorotalias, the detailed pattern of coiling
other chapters.
reversals is known to be different from one ocean to another.
We consider that a uniform magnification for illustra
Where coiling trends are stratigraphically significant
tionsisa basic requirement forreliableinterspeci6ccomparison.
they are noted in Chapter 6 but will not be found in other
To make the resulting picture easily comparable with what is
chapters.
seen down the microscope yet big enough to show essential
detail, we have chosen a magnification of x 60. For a few forms
we have added an enlarged photograph while for othen, details are shown at a considerably higher magnification.
To aid quick d i entification and comparison of taxa,
Stratigraplaic riDgeS The distribution ofall taxa discussed in the text is shown
on one or more of the range charts. In Chapters 7, 8 and 9,
where the number of taxa is limited, ranges are given on a
3: Introduction to theforaminiferal chapters
ZONES
'
AGE
I
I
� w
G ob tot
UJ u 0
t
"'
I."IJ";(.irt.'hr>Oide-$
�. tj . z w u 0 w
...) 0..
a
1
c d Sil r
S
E
ffliOCtfH(a
l v.Oii
t
Gs. rrrlcb. fillulosus
G'oboro r�l'"
�r artt
g de
ma ae
Globorotalia r.unJI:IOla
----
r�rit
Globorotalia ifCosraens•s
--
Globororaila menard" Globorotalia mayerr Globtgenr.oidi!S ruber
M
z w u 0
Glcbcsyd£ax srainforrhi
M l.forozov�la
I
G. scirula s
l
Globrgerinatella ritwera
TruncccJtulmoides
l
-
Globorotalia miocemca
Glob01ctaliil
E
- 5.1
11.3
- 14.4
L
M 32.8
0 E
1--L -
malgJritae
41
M
z w u
� - 50.3 E
N i7
GlobOIOtillia acostaensis
N 16
GlobOiotalia mtnard,i
N
Globororalia mayeri
N 14
L
0 w ..J
M �I.S
< Q,
me na rdii s. I.
G. puncticulati
��
/
suterae b l t quus extremus · devt G bulloi
G.
�iwus
t"""j:j12
G. siakensis
r--N11
N8
P.glomerou
N7
G. rrifobus s. I.
Cataprydnu mi nlonhi
N6
Cataps�drax dissimilir
N5
Globi�inoid" ;ximordius
N4
G. dehiscMs dehi.-s•
C. d;ssimilis
P22/N3
� 21iN2 P 20/N1
wbqu ad m u s
0. SUMalis
G.al�s
G. trilobcn
U nt WIS/1
t lts suura
G. kug16i
G. woodiconnect• G. woodi MX>di G. deh�SU�TS
G. opima opima
G. eu 6Pf(l(} ra G. M�giporoides
G.
G. mniimolutl
P 14
T. rohri
T. c. pomerolil
Orbuli noide$ beckmanni
P 13
0. beckmanni
Morouw�ll lehMri
p 12
M.lehneri
Globigtrina�klr. subconglobata
p11
G. s. subconglobatl
nu aalli Hlnlltnim t
PlO
H.nua.lli
T. cerroazultmis s. I.
Aurinifll penracamef3tl
P9
A. pent�amerata
Morozowlla NlfiOMnsis
P8
"'· aragontnsis
Moroztwllla formou fonnosa
P7
fll. formosa formosa
Morozovrlla tdgari
P6
Morozove/11 rrl•scoensis
M.
P5 P4
PIMOIOWitt!puri/11 pusi/11
Morozrwelta mgulatl Morozrwella uncilllta
G/obigtri111 tugUbilll
subbotin�
M.edgari
curoazulmris
T.
c. po�emis
T. c. frontrJs:a
G./Jrms G. linaperta
T. incotnpkua G. index A primftitta.
M. t:ntw
P.
wilcoJ tnlli
r-- 1ro
ptdollri .. o.vrn ....,., ,. .
;.,;,on ,;,u bwftorli
�·
brtr;itnsis
�tis ob«'r; r
r--108
primuM
�·
dwtiourfmis olftrl-•
fon.o/1mh
AI'TIAN
,cia
I--llS-
,.,.,...
Jig��!
Gulf
� tV)IM � IlJtf f =
l