international commission on stratigraphy subcommission on...

Jul y 2005

Volume 23 July 2005

sccsI.U.G.S. SUBCOMMISSION ON CARBONIFEROUS STRATIGRAPHY

Carboni fe rous Newsle tter

Table of Contents

CHAIRMAN’S COLUMN ...................................................................................................................... 1SECRETARY / EDITOR’S REPORT 2004-2005 ................................................................................. 2SCCS ANNUALREPORT 2004 ............................................................................................................. 3TASK/PROJECT GROUP REPORTS .................................................................................................. 6

Progress report of the Task Group to establish a boundaryclose to the existing Tournaisian-Viséan boundary ....................................................................... 6

The Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary: summary of progressmade on research goals established at the XV-ICCP Carboniferous Workshop in Utrecht ........... 7

Report of the Task Group to establish a GSSP close to the existingBashkirian-Moscovian boundary ................................................................................................... 8

Report of the Task Group to establish GSSPs at the Moscovian-Kasimovianand Kasimovian-Gzhelian boundaries ........................................................................................... 9

Report of the Project Group “Upper Paleozoic boreal biota,stratigraphy and biogeography” ................................................................................................... 10

Report of the Carboniferous Magnetostratigraphy Project Group ..................................................... 11

CONTRIBUTIONS BY MEMBERS ................................................................................................... 12Correlation of the base of the Viséan Stage in the type

Mississippian region of North America (Sevastopulo and Devuyst) ........................................... 12Report on the First Meetingon Upper Paleozoic

Chronostratigraphy of South America (Azcuy) ........................................................................... 15Are regional stages necessary ? (González) ......................................................................................... 16Carboniferous Correlation Table (CCT)

Karbon-Korrelationstabelle (KKT) (Amler and Gereke) ............................................................ 17Bivalve biostratigraphy of the Kulm Facies (Mississippian,

Early Carboniferous) in central Europe (Amler) ......................................................................... 18Fauna and sedimentation near the Tournaisian-Viséan boundary in deep-water sediments

of the Jangjir Range (Southern Tien-Shan), Kyrgyzstan (Neyevin and Djenchuraeva) .............. 20Viséan-Serpukhovian transition in the Middle Tien-Shan (Orlov-Labkovsky) ................................. 23Advances in understanding of the Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary in the

South Urals and its correlation (Nikolaeva et al.) ........................................................................ 27Correlation of Viséan plant-bearing deposits of the Russian Platform (Mosseichik) ........................ 31Geography and succession of European floras during the Viséan (Mosseichik) ............................... 33Cyclothem [sequence-stratigraphic] correlation and biostratigraphy across

the Moscovian-Kasimovian and Kasimovian-Gzhelian Stage boundaries(Upper Pennsylvanian Series) in North America and Eurasia (Heckel et al.) ............................ 36

Lower Kasimovian (Pennsylvanian) of Donskaya Luka (southern Russia) (Isakova et al.) .............. 44Reminiscences of W.H.C. Ramsbottom (1926-2004) (Saunders) ..................................................... 47

ANNOUNCEMENTS ............................................................................................................................ 49

SCCS VOTING & CORRESPONDING MEMBERSHIP 2005 ........................................................ 51

SCCS OFFICERS AND VOTING MEMBERS 2004-2008 ................................................................ 60

Jul y 2005

CHAIRMAN’S COLUMN

1

This past year has seen slow but steady progress inthe selection o f stage boun daries, as detailed in theindividual reports that follow. TheGSSP proposal for theTournaisian-Viséan boundary is being prepared for theSubcommission vote.The Viséan-Serpukhovian BoundaryTask Group is focusing on a fairly widely dist ributedconodont lineage that has recently been recognized alsoin China, and at the SCCS meeting in Liege, a potentialsection for t he GSSP was reported by Russian workersfro m th e eastern slo pe of the southern Urals. TheBash k ir ian -Moscov ian Boun dary Task Gro up isinvestigatingin greater detailone of the possibleconodontlineages under consideration after two other lineagesweredeemphasized, and work on a new potential lineage isunderway. Th e combined Moscovian-Kasimovian andKasimovian-Gzhelian Boundary Task Group is examiningmore closely the taxonomy involved in the conodontlineages that appear useful for boundary recognition. I havecompiled correlation chartsacross both boundaries basedo n scales of glacial- eustat ic cy clo t h em s plusbiostratigraphy (see article later in this volume). Thesediscrete depositional units provide good potential forcorrelation, but unfortunately at the sametime inhibit theselection of GSSPs becauselowstand exposure breaks thecontinuity of deposition in most region s. The BorealStr atigraphy Pro ject Group is establish ing zones ofbiostratigraph ic correlation across the vast region ofnortheastern Russia. The Magnetostratigraphy ProjectGroup reports on the status of processin g samples fromthe completesuccession acrossthePennsylvanian-Permianboundary in the Big Hatchet Mountains of NewMexico,in a search for the short normal polarity zone known fromthe GSSP in Kazakhstan.

In regard to radiometricdating,an abstract by Schmitz,Davydov, Snyder, Ramezani, and Bowring for the 2005Go ldschm idt Co n ference on High -P recisio nGeochronology [p. A326] reports new ID-TIMS U-Pbzircon ages with p recision s of +0.2-0.4 Ma fromP en nsylvanian -P ermian t uf f beds in fo ssilif eroussuccessions in the southern Urals of Russia. This showsthat progress is being madein resolving the “murky stateof affairs in Carboniferous radiometric dating.”

2005 Liege Meeting

The2005 SCCSMidterm meeting and fieldconferencewas held in Liege, Belgium, May 24-28, ably organizedby Edouard P oty, and hosted by the Departmen t ofPaleontology at the University ofLiege. An informativemeeting was followed by a four-day field trip that visitedmany sections in thetype Dinantian [Tournaisian-Viséan]region of the Meuse River valley. There, the sequence-stratigraphic architecture of this classic succession wasdemonstrated, an d the classic Belgian substages werepresented wit hin this framework, some with redefinedboundaries.Theexcellent guidebook for thisfield trip sooncan be obtained by downlo ading from th e follo wingwebsite address: http://www.ulg.ac .be/paleont/

UpdatedGuidebook for 2001 St. Louis Meeting

The guidebook for the 2001 SCCS Midterm meetingin St. Louis, USA, and fie ld conference in the typeMississippian region of the Mississippi Valley, has beenupdated and published by the Illinois St ate GeologicalSurvey as Guidebook 34. For information on obtainingCD or print copies of this updated guidebook, pleasecontact:

LeAnn Benner, Information Office, Illinois StateGeo logical Surv ey, 61 5 East Peabo dy Drive,Champaign, IL 61820, USA. Telephone:217-244-2414; Email: ben [email protected]

Early Planning for 2007 XVI InternationalCarboniferous Congress in Nanjing

Planning is underway for the 2007 XVI InternationalCarboniferous-Permian Con gress in Nanjing, China.Although plans will not be finalized until late 2005, theusual intense summer heat of central China makes a Junetiming likely.Awebsite soon will be set up,and until thenall inquiries should be directed to Xiangdong Wang of theNanjing Institute of Geology and Paleontology, ChineseAcademy of Sciences, at : [email protected]

Problem ofSCCS Newsletter Funding

A serious pro blem has arisen regardin g the fundingfor printing and distributingthis Newsletter, which I mustbring to your attention.After steady small reductions inthe amount of support, a recent cascade o f funding cutsfrom UNESCO t hrough the IUGS has caused the ICS to

Newsletter on Carboniferous StratigraphyEdited by D.M. Work

IUGS SUBCOMMISSION ON CARBONIFEROUS STRATIGRAPHY / VOL. 23 - 2005

Carboni fe rous Newsle tter2

reduce this year’s budget for all subcomm issions to 75%of the previous year’slevel.This ICS funding has providedmost of the funds that allow the SCCSNewsletter to beprinted and distributed free to allvoting andcorrespondingmembers, and it was significantly augmented by ~$1200through special non-recurring circumstances in 2001 and2002. The only other source of funds over the years hasbeen donation s from a few generous members, whichunfortunately is relatively small in total, and too variablefrom year to year for adequate planning. The recent ICSbudget cut has put the continued publication of thisNewsletter in jeopardy, even in thenear-term. Therefore, Istrongly urge those of you who are able, to make asgenerous a donation as you can afford, if you wish to seethecontinuing publication of the Newsletter. We willhaveto cease publication if lack of funds makes it necessary tocharge for in dividual issues, because we know t hat anumber of you could not afford the cost. Please use theform that is insertedinto the Newsletter, for makingyourdonation. Thank you very much.

PhilipH. Heckel

I want to thank all who provided articlesfor inclusionin Vo lum e 2 3 of the Newslett er on Carbo nif ero usStratigraphy and those who assisted in its preparation. Iam indebted to P. H. Heckel for editorial assistance; andto P. Thorson Work for coordinating the compilation ofthis issue.

Problem ofSCCS Newsletter Funding

A significant reduction in funding fro m ICS has putcontinued publication of the Newsletter in jeopardy (seePhilip Heckel’s message in the Chairman ’s Column fordetails). Please refer to the instructions for donations onthe last page of this issue.

Future Issues of Newsletteron CarboniferousStratigraphy

Theincreasing numberof late submissions isbecominga problem. Nex t year’s Volume 24 will be finalized byJuly 2006, andI request that allmanuscriptsbe sent beforeMay 31—but preferably earlier. Please read the sectionbelow (page 5) regarding submission form at, especiallymanuscript lengt h (no more t han 5 do uble-spacedmanuscript pages without prior approval). Finally, I wouldbe most grateful if all voting and corresponding membersof the SCCS wo uld let me know of any changes to theirmailing and e-mail addresses so that we can update ourrecords.

David M. Work

SECRETARY / EDITOR’S REPORT2004-2005

Jul y 2005 3

SCCS ANNUAL REPORT 2004Membership

The Subcommission had 21 vot-ing members in 2004 [see list at endof Newsletter]. In additio n, corre-sponding membership at the time ofpublication stands at 293 persons and7 libraries.

Officers

Chair:Dr. Philip H. HeckelDepartment of GeoscienceUniversity of IowaIowa City, IA52242U.S.A.Fax: +1 (319)335-1821Email: [email protected]

Vice-Chair:Dr.Geoffrey ClaytonDepartment of GeologyTrinity CollegeDublin 2IRELANDFax:3531-6711199Email: [email protected]

Secretary/Editor:Dr.David M.WorkMaine State Museum83 State House StationAugusta, ME 04333U.S.A.Fax: +1 (207)287-6633Email [email protected]

Task and Exploratory ProjectGroups

Tas k Gro up to establish theTo urn aisi an-Vis éan bou nda ry[which is also the base of the MiddleSeries of t h e Mississip pianSubsy stem ] ch aired by GeorgeSevastopulo (Ireland).

Tas k G rou p to e s ta bli s h aboun dary cl ose to the Vis éan-Serpukhovian boundary [which isalso the base of t he Upper Series ofthe Mississippian Subsystem] chairedby Barry Richards (Canada).

Tas k G rou p to e s ta bli s h aboundary close to the Bashkirian-Moscovian boundary [which is alsothe base of the Middle Series of thePennsylvanian Subsystem] chairedbyJohn Groves (USA).

Tas k G rou p to e s ta bli s h aboundary close to the Moscovian-Kasimovian boundary [which isalsothe base of the Up per Series of thePennsylvanian Subsystem] chairedbyElisa Villa (Spain). This group is alsodealing with a boundary close to theKasimovian-Gzhelian Boundarywit hin t he Up per Ser ies o f th ePennsylvanian Subsystem

Proje ct G ro u p o n Uppe rPaleozoicboreal biota, stratigraphyand biogeography, chaired by MarinaDurante (Russia).

ProjectGroup on Carboniferousmagnetostratigraphy, chaired byMark Hounslow (United Kingdom).

ChiefAccomplishments in2004

As a result of the task gro upm eet in gs h eld at t h e 20 0 3InternationalCarboniferous Congressin Ut recht, wo rk on the Viséan-Serp uk h ov ian, Bash k ir ian -Moscovian,Moscovian-Kasimovian,and Kasimovian-Gzhelian boundarieshas reached the po int where severalinformal proposals on event markersfor t ho se bo un daries have beensubmitted to the t ask groups. Theseproposals are now under intensivediscussion and have engenderedmuchfur th er research . Because th eseactivitiesat the Utrecht Congresshadnot yet produced formalproposals, theSCCS had no formal function at theIGC in Florence in August 2004.

TheNewsletter on CarboniferousStratigraphy,Volume 22, published inJuly 2004, containsreports of the taskgroups fo r 2003 and 9 art icles onvarious topics of interest, including:

Updated chart of 400-ky cyclothemgro upin gs in Midcont inen t No rthAmerica; Stratigraphic distributiono f cr itical am m on o ids aroun da potential level for the Kasimovian-Gzhelian St age bo undary ; Repo rtof the 2004 meeting of the GermanSubco mmission on Carbo nif ero usSt rat igrap h y ; Carbon if ero usbio str at igr aph y o f t he Mo sco wSy neclise; Rev iew an d futurep rosp ects o f Carbon if ero usm agn et o st r a t igr ap hy ; LowerDesmo inesian (m id-Mo sco vian )con odont succession in lower andm iddle Ch erok ee Gro up inMidco n t in en t No r t h Am er ica;Paleophytogeography and stratigraphyo f Mississip pian p lan t-bearin gdepositsof Angaraland; Stratigraphicpotential of stigmarian limestones oft h e Mo sco w co al basin; Nor t hAmerican regional stagenomenclatureacross t he Carbonif erous-Perm ianboundary, for a total of 70 pages.

Work Plan for 2005 andFollowing Years

TheSCCSheld aone-day meetingon May 24,2005, at the University ofLiege, Belgium, fo llowed by a four-day field trip to the type Dinantian[Tourn aisian-Viséan] region in theMeuse Riv er v alley of south ernBelgium.

To urnaisian-Viséan bo undary.This task group in ternally approvedtheproposal to select theGSSP at thePengchong section in southern China,and is nowpreparing a formalproposalfor the SCCSballot on the GSSP .

Viséan-Serpukhovian bo undary.This task group is now focusing workon a conodont lin eage in the genusLochriea as a potential boundary-defining event, and information on apotentialGSSP section in the easternslop e of th e south ern Urals waspresented at the May 2005 Liegemeeting.


Bashkirian-Moscovian boundary.This task group is now focusing ontaxonomic work needed to evaluatethe proposals it received in 2004 forboundary-defining events in severalconodont lineages, particularly thatinv o lv in g Id iog n a th oid espostsulcatus.

M o s c o v i a n -K a s i m o v i a nboundary. This task group will meetin St. Petersburg, Russia, in August2005, to discuss the cyclothem-basedcorrelation chart of strata across thisbo un dary int erval as a basis forevaluating the co nodont and foramlin eages prop o sed as boun dary -def inin g ev en t s, as well as th etaxonomic issues involved.

Kasimovian-Gzhelian boundary.The same task group will discuss the

cyclothem-based correlation chart ofstrata across this boundary interval asa basis for evaluating the conodontlineage in vo lving Id io gna th od ussimulator (which is prop osed as abo un dary -defin in g ev en t ) , an dtaxonomic work on this lineage willbe presented, at t he St. Petersburgmeeting in August 2005.

Progress appears to have beensufficient in all task groups, that theselection of at least all theboundary-defin ing ev en t s fo r th e stageboundaries currently envisioned in theCarboniferous is realistic by the ICSdeadline of2008. However, thestrongglacial- eustat ic co n tro l ov ersedim en tat io n t h at r esult ed inwidespread exposure surfaces acrossentire shelves dur ing the time of at

least t he upper two boundar ies ishamp er in g th e iden tification o fpotentially acceptable GSSPs. TheProject Gro up o n Carbo nifero usMagnetostratigrap hy is focusing onsup plement in g t he pan- tro picalbiostr at igraph ic f ramewo rk , an dev entually will h opefully h elp toin tegrate th e tro pical p lant- richterrestrial succession and the morepo lar fo ssil assemblages int o t hemarine pan-tropical Carboniferousscale. Increasingly precise ID-TIMSmeasurements of U-Pb zircon ages ofvolcan ic tuff beds in the so uthernUrals indicat e pro gress in datingbio st ra t igrap hically con str ainedsuccessio n s across imp o r tan tboundaries.

STATEMENT OF OPERATING ACCOUNTS FOR 2003/2004Prepared by David Work, Secretary

(Definitive accounts maintained in US currency)

INCOME (Oct. 31, 2003 – Oct. 31, 2004)IUGS-ICS Grant 2004 $900.00Donations from Members 628.72Interest 4.17TOTAL INCOME $1532.89

EXPENDITURENewsletter 22 (printing) $665.60Postage for bulk mailings 683.00Mailing/Office Supplies 146.04Bank Charges 148.00TOTAL EXPENDITURE $1642.64

BALANCE SHEET (2003 – 2004)Funds carried forward from 2002 – 2003 $1864.49PLUS Income 2003 – 2004 1532.89LESS Expenditure 2003 – 2004 -1642.64

CREDIT balance carriedforward to 2005 $1754.74

Jul y 2005 5

Donations in 2004/2005:

Publication of the Newsletter on Carboniferous S tratigraphy is made possible with generous donations received frommembers/institutes during 2004-2005 and anonymous donations, combined with an IUGS subsidy ofUS $750 in 2005, andadditional support from a small group of members who provide internal postal charges for the Newsletter wi thin theirrespective geographic regions.

D. R. Chesnut, W. H. Gillespie, B. F. Glenister, P. H. Heckel, T. W. Kammer, Xiangdong Wang, T. Yancey

COVER ILLUSTRATION

Late Pennsylvanian conodonts.

Left: Idiognathodus sp. aff. simulator (Ellison) [left and right Pa elements], X60, Eudora Shale, Missourian/Kasimovian, near Dewey, Washington County, Oklahoma, U.S.A.

Right: Idiognathodus simulator (Ellison) [left and right Pa elements], X60, Heebner Shale, Virgilian/Gzhel ian, quarryat Weeping Water, Cass County, Nebraska, U.S.A. Candidate for event level that defines base of global Gzhel ian Stage.

Illustrations: courtesy ofJ.E. Barrick.

CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE NEWSLETTER

The Newletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy is published annually (in July) by SCCS. It is composed of written contribu-tions from its members and provides a forum for short, relevant articles such as:

*reports on work in progress and / or reports on activities in your work place

*news items, conference notices, new publications, reviews, letters, comments

*graphics suitable for black and white publication.

Contributions for each issue of the Carboniferous Newsletter should be timed to reach the Editor before 31 May in the yearofpublication. It is best to submit manuscripts as attachments to Email messages. Except for very short news items, pleasesend messages and manuscripts to my Email address. Manuscripts may also be sent to the address below on CD preparedwith Microsoft Word (preferred) or WordPerfect but any common word processing software or plain ASCII text file canusually be acommodated. Word processing files should have no personalized fonts or other code. Maps and other illustra-tions are acceptable in tif, jpeg, eps, or bitmap format. If only hard copies are sent, these must be camera-ready, i.e., cleancopies, ready for publication. Typewritten contributions may be submitted by mail as clean paper copies; these must arrivewell ahead of the deadline, as they require greater processing time.

Due to the recent increase in articles submitted by members we ask that authors limit manuscripts to 5 double-spaced pages and 1 or 2 diagrams, well planned for economic use of space.

Please send contributions as follows,

AIR MAIL to: DavidM. WorkMaine State Museum83 State House Station,Augusta, ME 04333, USA

EMAIL to: [email protected]


TASK/PROJECT GROUP REPORTS

Progress report of the Task Group toestablish a boundary close to theexisting Tournaisian-Viséanboundary.F.X. Devuyst and George Sevastopulo

Department of Geology, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland.

Prog re ss o n th e T/V bo u n dary s in ce th e2004 Newsletter

Stable Isotopes

A detailed 13C and 18O curve (unp ublished) wasproduced for thePengchongsection (late Tournaisian [topof S. anchoralis Zone] to early Liv ian [post-entry ofPojarkovella nibelis]) with 101 levels analy zed. 120samples (m ult iple sam ples were t aken t o evaluatehomogeneity an d some late stage veins were sampled aswell) were drilled on polished surfaces wit h a hand drillandanalyzed at the Geology Department, Trinity Collegeby F.X. Devuyst and R. Goodhue. Multiple analyses wereperformed on about 20% of the samples; mean variationwas 0.07‰ for carbon and 0.14‰ for oxy gen, althoughmaximum variations observed were 0.3 ‰ and 0.42‰,respectively. The geological context of the Pengchongsection is not ideal for isotope study,but a significant peakin the 13C, if it existed, would not be missed. Such apeak, however, was not found in the strat igraphic rangecovered, with 13C values varying between ~ +2‰ and+4.4‰. The 18O curv e oscillat es mo re, as can beexpected, bet ween ~ -8‰ and -3‰. These values do notconcern vein and pure dolomite samples. Sections ofapproximately the same age (late Tournaisian to earlyViséan) in southern Belgium, western Ireland, and westernCanada have been sampled and are ready for analysis.

In late June, F.X. Devuyst and H. Hongfei collectedstable isotop e samples from around the base of the S.anchoralis Zonein theLongdianshan section.The goal isto test for thepresence of a peak in 13C identified by M.Saltzman (unpublished data) in southern Belgium whichwould be of great significance for correlation.

Conodonts

Task group members M. Coen,S. T ian, G. Sevastopulo,and E. Groessens recently published two papers on theco no do nt faun as o f t he Lon gdian sh an (Guangxi),Pengchong (Guangxi), and Yudong (Yunnan) sections. Inlate June, F.X. Devuyst andH. Hongfei collected additionalcontrol samples from the upper part of theLongdianshan

section which are currently being processed and studiedby G. Sevastopulo. Thisdata should considerably improveregional and long-distance correlations.

Trilobites

The study and description of trilobites collected in2002 at Yajiao (early Viséan, Liobole) and Longdianshan(late Tournaisian, Brachymetopus) will be p ublished byG. Hahn and R. Hah n in two separat e papers inPa lä o n to lo g isch e Zeitsch rift an d Geolo g ica etPalaeontologica, respectively. Both generaare wellknownin western Europe and the environmental settings andstratigraphic positions correspond.

Foraminifers

A newimproved foraminifer andcoral zonation of thetype Dinantian (Lower Carboniferous o f the Franco-Belgian Basin) by L. Hance,E. Poty, and F.X. Devuyst isin press. The latest Tournaisian foraminifer biozone isbased on the appearance of Eoparastaffella sp. and theearliest Viséan biozone is based on the appearance of E.simplex.

A study by F.X. Devuyst and J. Kalv oda whichdescribes new latest Tournaisian to earliest Viséan speciesof Eoparastaffella from throughout Eurasia anddiscussesthe early evolution of the group will besubmitted shortly.This study demonst rates an unexp ected diversit y ofEoparastaffella species early in the history of the genusand confirms its value for high-resolution biostratigraphyat the Tournaisian/Viséan transition.

In late June, F.X. Devuyst and H. Hongfei collectednewsamplesfrom the latest Tournaisian to earliest Viséanpart of the Pengchong section in order t o obtain morematerial of the primitive E. simplex fauna. These samplesare currently being processed.

StratigraphicNomenclature

A seriesof papers revisingthe stages and substages ofthe type Dinantian in southern Belgium will be publishedin a special volume of Geologica Belgica on “Belgian andBordering Coun tries Stages.” This volume will includepapers on the Tournaisian, Viséan, and Moliniacian by L.Hance, E. Poty, and F.X. Devuyst. Biostratigraphic datafrom the Franco-Belgian Basin are reviewed and thecorrespondence between the base of the Viséan and thebase of the Moliniacian is re-established.

References

Coen, M., E. Groessens, and G. Sevastopulo. 2004. Conodontsand os tracods from the sect ion at Longdianshan (upper

Jul y 2005 7

Tournaisian of Guangxi, China). Bulletin de l’Institut Royaldes Sciences Naturelles de Belgique, Sciences de la Terre,74(suppl.):89-100.

Tian, S., and M. Coen. 2004. Conodont zonation in the Carbon-iferous Yanguanian-Datangian boundary in South China. Geo-logical Bulletin of China, 23(8):737-749. (in Chinese with En-glish abstract)

Hahn, G., and R. Hahn. In press. Kulm trilobites (LowerCarbon-iferous) from S-China. Paläontologische Zeitschrift.

Hahn, G., and R. Hahn. In press. Brachymetopus (Trilobita; Car-boniferous) in China. Geologica et Palaeontologica.

Devuyst, F.X., and J. Kalvoda. [in preparation] Early evolutionof the genus Eoparastaffella (Foraminifera) in Eurasia: the‘interiecta group’ and related forms, late Tournaisian to earlyViséan, Mississippian. Journal of Foraminiferal Research.

Hance, L., E. Poty, E., and F.X. Devuyst. In press. Upper Devo-nian and Mississippian foraminiferal and rugose coral zona-tions of Belgium and Northern France: a tool for Eurasian cor-relations. Geological Magazine.

Hance, L., E. Poty, and F.X. Devuyst. [submitted] The ViséanStage. In L. Dejonghe (ed.), Belgian and Bordering CountriesStages. Geologica Belgica, special volume.

Hance, L., E. Poty, andF.X. Devuyst. [submitted] The TournaisianStage. In L. Dejonghe (ed.), Belgian and Bordering CountriesStages. Geologica Belgica, special volume.

Devuyst, F.X., L. Hance, and E. Poty. [submitted] TheMoliniacianSubstage. In L. Dejonghe (ed.), Belgian and Bordering Coun-tries Stages. Geologica Belgica, special volume.

The Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary:asummaryof progress made onresearch goals established at the XV-ICCP Carboniferous Workshop inUtrechtBarry C. Richards and Task Group

Geological Survey of Canada - Calgary, 3303- 33rd

St. NW,Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2L 2A7.

Thefirst official meeting of the Viséan-Serpukhovianboundary task group was h eld at t he Carbon iferousWorkshop onAugust 13,2003 during the XVInternationalCongress on Carboniferous and Permian Stratigraphy inUtrecht, The Netherlands. Several short- term researchgoals were established at the congress and initial progresshas been made on some of them.

At the onset of the Utrecht workshop, we discussedtheSerpukhovian type section in the Zaborie quarry in theMoscow Basin, focusing on the major dep ositional andbiostratigraphic events recorded by the lower part of thesection. In t he south ern part of the Moscow Basin,including th e Zabo r ie quarry, t he Serpuk ho v ian

disconformably overlies an uppermost Viséan (Venevianregional horizon) limestone intervalcontaining paleosolsandkarstifiedlimestone (Skompskiet al., 1995). SincetheUtrecht meeting, Kabanov (2004), an associate memberof the task group, carefully restudied the type section,confirmingthe unconformablenatureof the lower contact.

The task group hasconcludedthat the first evolutionaryappearance of the conodont Lochriea ziegleri in thelineage Lochriea nodosa – Lochriea ziegleri currentlypresents the best po tentia l for boundary definition.Lochriea ziegleri appears near the middle of theBrigantianSubstage, which is slightly belowthe current base of theSerpukh ovian. Th e lineage, best documen ted fromrelativ ely deep-water sections, has been identified inseveral European sections (Nemirovskaya et al., 1994;Skompski et al.,1995). In addition, one of the task group,Qi Yu-ping, recently recognized the lineage L. nodosa –L. ziegleri and other lineages within the Lochriea groupof species in the Nashui section near the town of Luodian,Guizhou, southern PeoplesRepublic of China (Wang andQi,2003). In theZaboriequarry section, Lochriea ziegleriappears with Lochriea senckenbergica in the basal bed(about 65 cm thick) of the type Serpukhovian (Nikolaevaet al., 2002),but this is not afirst evolutionary appearance.

Because the L. nodosa – L. ziegleri lineageand otherbiostratigraphically important lineages within the Lochrieagroup have not been observed in th e Amer icas, theconodont experts at the Utrecht meeting suggested thatNorth American conodont collections be re-examinedforkey taxa within the group. The latter work has not beenundertaken,but the recent work of team memberAlan Tituson conodont assemblages in several sections of basinalfacies in the Chainman Formation of western Utah andeastern Nevada suggests the recognition of the L.nodosa– L. ziegleri lineage in North America is unlikely. If weuse the first evolutionary appearance of L. ziegleri forboundary defin ition, it will be necessary to use eithergeochemical data or other species (conodont, foraminifer,or ammonoid) that appear concomitantly with theEurasianL. ziegleri to achieve a precise correlation with NorthAmerica. With this in mind, Alan Titus indicated thatammonoidscouldbe used to facilitatea precise correlationbetween Eurasia and North America. Am monoid-basedgeochronology is well developed near the level of theViséan-Serpukhovian boundary because beds n ear theboundary contain numerous very distinct amm onoidmorphotypes.

At the Utrecht meeting, it wasproposed that thefirstevolutionary appearance of the foraminifer “Millerella”tortula might be used for either defining a GSSP near thecurrent Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary or for assisting with


Report of the Task Group to establisha GSSP close to the existingBashkirian-Moscovian boundaryJohn Groves and Task Group

Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa,Cedar Falls, IA 50614, USA.

Summary ofActivities

As of this time last year , conodont specialists inth is task gro up had submitt ed three pro po sals forpotential lower Moscovian boundary markers: 1) theappearan ce of Idio gnathoides po stsulca tus from Id .su lca tu s; 2) th e app earan ce of Declino gn ath od usdonetzianus from D. marginodosus; and 3) the transitionfrom early to late morphotypes ofNeognathodus nataliae.Members of the task group reviewed the proposals andco mm en ted on t he relat ive m er it s o fthe potential marker taxa.The followingis a brief summaryofcomments received.

Appearance of Idiognathoides postsulcatus

This potential marker is attractivein that it isnearlycosmopolitan in its distribution, being known from mostimportant areas except the Moscow Basin and SouthAmerica. Theappearance of Id. postsulcatus in someareasis closer to the traditionalbase of the Moscovian than arethe other two potential markers. Identification by non-specialistscould be difficult because of subtlemorphologicdifferences between thisspecies and itsancestor.

global correlations near the boundary, if the controversyabout thephylogeny of the species is favorably resolved.In the Zaborie section, “Millerella” tortula appears about50 cm above t he base of the Serpukhovian (Gibshman,2001;Nikolaeva et al.,2002). Brenckle andGroves(1981)and Brenckle (1990 ) proposed that “M.” tortula Zellerevolved from Endostaffella discoidea and gaverise to “M.”designata and“M.” advena/cooperi later in theChesterian.Gibshman (2001, 2003), however, proposed the lineage“Endostaffella” asymmetrica – “Millerella ” tortula –Millerella pressa, based largely on specimens from theZaborie quarry in Russia. Since the Utrecht meeting, taskgroup member Paul Brenckle studied the two groups ofspecimens and concluded that the Russian “M.” tortula isnot the same speciesasthe onefrom North America. Evenif the Russian and North American “M.”tortula were thesamespecies, there is no evidence of the Russian ancestral(pre-tortula) forms occurring in NorthAmerica. The firstappearance of “M.” tortula is, therefore, not desirable asa global boundary marker.

In October 2 004, team members Titus and Richardsexamined several sections of the Chainman Formation inwestern Utah in search of ammonoid- and conodont-bearingsections that might permit an exact correlation withEurasian sections preserving first appearances of Lochrieazieg leri. A well ex po sed up per Viséan t o lo werSerpukhovian (Asbian to Pendleian) sect ion at JensenWash, Utah was considered to be the best in the regionandplans have been made to study and sample that sectionin detail for ammonoids, conodonts,and samples for stableisotope(carbon andoxygen)geochemistry. Carbonateramplithofacies o f t he upper Viséan and Serpuk hovianEtherington Formation are beingmeasured at fivelocalitiesin the Canadian Ro cky Mo untains an d sam pled forconodonts, foraminifers, and geochemistry. From thestudyof the Etherington sections, the working group hopes tobetter underst and the carbon stable-isotop e signature ofthe Brigantian and Pendleian succession; in addition thework will provide another opportunity to look for the L.nodosa – L. ziegleri lineage.

References

Brenckle, P.L. 1990. Foraminiferal division of the Lower Car-boniferous/Missi ss ippian in North Ameri ca. C ourierForschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 130:65-78.

Brenckle, P.L., and J.R. Groves. 1981. Evolution of eostaffellidforaminifers in late Chesterian (Late Mississippian) strata ofthe North American Midcontinent. Geological Society ofAmericaAbstracts with Programs, p. 416.

Gibshman, N.B. 2001. Foraminiferal biostratigraphy of theSerpukhovian Stage stratotype (Zaborie quarry, Moscow Ba-sin). Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy, 19:31-34.

Gibshman, N.B . 2003. F oraminifera characteris ti c of theSerpukhovian Stage Sratotypein the Zaborie Quarry (Moscow

area). Stratigraphy and Geological Correlation, 11:39-63. (inRussian, English)

Kabanov, P.B. 2004. SerpukhovianStageStratotypein the Zaborjequarry (Moscow region), Part II. Subaerial exposure profilesand cyclicity. Stratigraphy andGeological Correlation, 12:253-261.

Nemirovskaya, T., M.-F. Perret, and D. Meischner. 1994. Lochrieaziegleri and Lochriea senckenbergica – new conodont speciesfrom the latest Viséan and Serpukhovian in Europe. CourierForschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 168:311-317.

Nikolaeva, S.V., N.B. Gibshman, E.I. Kulagina, I.S. Barskov, andV.N. Pazukhin. 2002. Correlation of the Viséan-Serpukhovianboundary in its type region(Moscow Basin) andthe South Uralsand a proposal ofboundary markers (ammonoids, foraminifers,conodonts). Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy, 20:16-21.

Skompski, S., A. Alekseev, D. Meischner, T. Nemirovskaya, M.-F. Perret, and W.J. Varker. 1995. Conodont distribution acrossthe Viséan/Namurian boundary. Courier ForschungsinstitutSenckenberg, 188:177-209.

Wang, Zhi-hao, and Qi, Yu-ping. 2003. Report on the UpperViséan-Serpukhovian conodont zonation in South China. News-letter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy, 21: 22-24.

Jul y 2005 9

species may be well within the Bashkirian in centralJapan(Omi and Akiyoshi Limesto nes) and well within theMoscovian in cratonicNorth America (type Atokan area).These instances of potentialdiachroniety must be furtherinv estigat ed by exam in in g act ual specim en s an dindependently assessing (by means of multiple fossilgroups) the ages of host strata.

As n o clearly sup erior marker has yet emerged,members of the task group are encouraged to proposeotherevents (biostr atigraphic or otherwise) th at may be usedfor defining the base of the Moscovian Stage. LanceLambert isworking on aproposal involving the conodontNeognathodus atokaensis.

Appearance of Declinognathodusdonetzianus

Thispotential marker possessesa very distinctivemorphology that allows easy identification. It is knownfrom eastern and western Europe (including the MoscowBasin),Alaska (terranes), and South America, but notfrom China or cratonic North America. The geographicdistribution and stratigraphic level of appearance of thispotential marker closely track the Profusulinella–Aljutovella fusulinid transition.

Appearance ofLate Morphotype of Neognathodusnataliae

Thisform is known from eastern and western Europe,but not from the Arctic, Asia or South America. NorthAm er ican rep resen tatives are kno wn but n ot y etdocumented. Although described in the proposal as adistinctive morphotype that is easily identified, somecono dont specialists expressed uncertaint y with thetaxonomicconcepts involvedin thetransition from earlyto late morphotypes.

An in formal an d non-bin ding poll of task groupmembersrevealed strongsupport for continued evaluationof Id. postsulcatus and moderate support for continuedevaluation of D. donetzianus. Most task group memberswho respondedto the poll viewedthe latemorphotype ofN. nataliae asan unsuitable candidate for markingthe baseof the Moscovian.

NextSteps

Virtually allmembers of the task group have expressedinterest in meeting together for discussions and side-by-side comp ariso ns of collections from vario us areas.Although clearly desirable, there are no current plans forsuch a meeting becauseof funding constraints. It is hopedthat the subset of members who will attendtheMoscovian–Kasimo vian boundary Task Group meet in g in St.Petersburg,Russia, later this summer will be able to devotesome time to Bashkirian–Moscovian issues and possiblyexaminerelevant specimens.

Preliminary investigationsinto reported occurrencesof Id. postsulcatus suggest that the appearance of the

Report of the Task Group toestablish GSSPs at theMoscovian-Kasimovian andKasimovian-Gzhelian boundariesElisaVilla and TaskGroup

Depto de Geología, Universidad de Oviedo, Arias de Velascos/n 33005 Oviedo, Spain.

Th e Task Gro up t o establish th e Mo scov ian-Kasimovian an d Kasimovian-Gzhelian bo undaries hascontinued studies on potential levels of correlation andfossil lineages within the interval from the uppermostMoscovian to lower Gzhelian. In August 2004, this groupheld a general meeting at the University ofOviedo (Spain)that was attended by members A. Alekseev, V. Davydov,N.Goreva, P. Heckel, M.L. Martínez Chacón, C. Méndez,T. Nemy rovsk a, L. C. Posada, S. Rem izova, R. M.Ro dríguez, K. Uen o, and E. Villa. Discussio ns andworkshops during this meeting have led to substantialprogressin correlation that is summarized asfollows:

Moscovian-Kasimovian Boundary

The task group hasestablished many paleontologicaland sedimentological links at different levels throughsections and areas that are distributed worldwide. Thepaleontological links are mainly based on conodonts, butfusulines p lay an im por tant subsidiary role. Thesepaleo nto logical link s allo w cor relation of specif icstratigraphic sequences (cyclothems), as is shown in thearticleby P.H.Heckel and13 coauthorslater in thisvolume.Two levels offer potential for correlation relatively nearthecurrent boundary.

1).Alevelofcorrelation very closeto the present lowerKasim ovian boun dary in Eurasia and within the lateDesmoinesian in Nor th Am erica could be t raced bycombining the occurrence of two troughed conodont

Knownoccurrencesof potential

marker taxa Don

ets

Bas

in

Mos

cow

Bas

in

Ura

ls

Gre

atBr

itain

Nor

the

rnS

pain

Cen

tral

Japa

n

Sou

thC

hina

Ala

ska

(terr

ane

s)

Arc

ticC

anad

a

Sou

thA

mer

ica

cra

ton

icN

orth

Am

eric

a

Id. p ostsulcatus + + + + + + + + +D. donetzianus + + + + + +N. natalia e + + + +


Report of the Project Group “UpperPaleozoic boreal biota, stratigraphyand biogeography”M.V. Durante

Geological Ins titute, Russian Academy of Sciences,Pyzhevsky per., 7, Moscow, 119017, Russia.

Last year’s investigatio ns mainly concern UpperPaleozoic biostratigraphy of the Boreal area in centralnortheast Russia, where theefforts ofmost participantsintheproject (V.G. Ganelin,M.V. Durante,S.S. Lazarev,A.S.Bjakov) were concentrated.

species, “Streptognathodus” subexcelsus and Swadelinaneoshoensis. However , the suitability of this level isdiminishedby the fact that in both the Midcontinent andthe Moscow Basin, both taxa appear abruptly above adisconformity with no obvious antecedent in the flatmorphotypes in the underlying strata. Moreover, neitherof thetwo conodont speciesoccur in all relevant areas.

Theappearanceof typical species of the fusuline genusProtriticites (forms exhibitingdistinct wallporosity) takesplace around this boundary. Theseforms are known fromall Eurasian regions, and more primitive forms have beenrecorded in western USA[Wahlmann et al., 1997, CushmanFoundation forForaminiferal Research Special Publication,36, p.163-168], but the appearanceof the various formsmay be diachronous when compared to the conodontdistribution [as shown by Heckel et al., and by Isakova etal. in articles later in this vo lume]. In addition , therecognition of this structural featurein the wall can dependgreatly on facies and preservation.

2).A potential marker at the first appearance of theconodont Idiognathodussagittalis (which would raisethebase of the Kasimovian to a level somewhat higher thanthe current one) seems to be promising, especially ifconsidered in conjunction with the fusuline Montiparus.Idiognathodus sagittalis has been identified in most areas,specifically the Donets Basin (limestone O1) from whichit was named, MoscowBasin (Mid-Neverovo Formation),Southern Urals (Dalniy Tyulkas-2 section, beds 34-35),Cantabrian Mountains (Las Llacerias section, bed 9035),andAmerican Midcontinent (Checkerboard-South Mound,Exline, Hertha, and Swope cyclothems).

Problems to beresolvedmainly concern the somewhatdiachronous appearance of I. sagittalis, asit appearslaterin the Moscowand Donets Basinsthan in North America,probably due to facies constraints. It is also necessary toclarify the statusof older tentatively identified specimensin several sections.

The fusuline Montiparus can play a relevant role inreinforcing correlation at levelsaroundthe first appearanceof I. sagittalis, since species belonging to this widelydistributed and more easily identified Eurasian genus havebeen reportedalso from the western USA [most recentlyby Davydov et al. in the abstracts for the 1999 InternationalCarboniferous-Permian Congress in Calgary, and laterconfirmed by others]. Montiparus is also present in theArct ic pro vince, where fusuline assemblages sh owtransitional features that can provide clues for linkingEurasian andNorth American provinces.

Kasimovian-Gzhelian Boundary

The characterization of the lower Gzhelian boundaryseemsto be best based on the occurrence of the conodont

Idiognathodus simulator [sensu stricto] at a number ofrelevant sections in areas representing both theAmericanand Eurasian paleobiogeographic provinces. This level issituated in the Oread cyclothem (Midcontinent), Finiscyclothem (Texas), Shumway cyclothem (Illinois Basin),UpperRusavkino Formation (MoscowBasin), Bed 4/2 ofthe Usolkasection (South Urals), and O7 limestone(DonetsBasin). Problems remaininginvolve taxonomic work beingcarried out by J.E. Barrick, D.R. Boardman, and P.H.Heckel, aimed towarddistinguishing I. simulator [s.s.] fromits ancestor termed I.aff. simulator, which occurs belowitin most areas.

Correlation may be reinforced in Eurasia by theappearance of advanced forms of the fusuline Rauseritesrossicus at a level very close to the appearance of I.simulator [s.s.]. This fusuline has been so far reported fromthe Moscow Basin, Samarskaya Luka and Trans-Volgaregion, northern Timan, Timan-Petchora, and Urals regionof Russia, northern Fergana,Darvas, northern Greenland,CarnicAlps, Cantabrian Mountains,and the Donets Basin(wheremore primitive forms are reportedfrom olderbeds).Therefore, the advanced form of Rauserites rossicus maybe a toolof prime importance for correlation to be used inEurasia in conjunction with Idiognathodus simulator.

Coming Steps

DuringtheOviedo meeting,membersof the task groupagreed to further study lineages involvedin the proposedmarkersandto samplesomecritical intervals in moredetail.P.H. Heckel began to compile a more refined correlationacross both boundary intervals based on scale of glacial-eustaticcyclothems andtheirbiostratigraphy, aimedtowardresolving theexisting problems,which appearslater in thisvolume.

To continue discussions and laboratory workshopsthegroup will meet again at the VSEGEI in St. Petersburg,Russia from August 8th to August 13th, 2005, at a meetingorganized by SCCSmember Olga Kossovaya of VSEGEI.

Jul y 2005 11

Northeast Russia is a large region co ntaining theVerkhoyan mountain system and the Omolon and Okhotamassifs, together with adjacent troughs. During 2003-2004,newversions of correlation charts were presented for allof these areas, based on marine faunas (brachiopods,pelecypods, partly forams) and fossil plant assemblages.Unfortunately, only some zones can be traced throughoutall of northeast Russia. Other zones require additionalstudy.

1. Last yearvery significant progress was achieved inthe study ofbrachiopod morphology andsystematics.

V.G. Ganelin ex tended th e reinvestigation o f theLinoproductidae, which dominates Perm ian northeastAsian communities. The new genus Omolona, which wasderived from the genus Terrakea, was described, and newspecies of the latter genus were recognized. Some arestrongly remin iscent of Australian species of the samegenus, andprovide a possible basis for correlation betweenthe Boreal and Gondwana regions.

S.S.Lazarev revised themorphology and systematicsof two groups of boreal brachiopods.One of these belongsto t he family Sch renkiellidae (Lino product oidea).Mo rph ological analysis of th is fam ily permit s t herecognition of two newgenera and the reconstruction of aphyletic lineage that consists of the genera Krekarpia–Balakhonia–Elalia–Schrenkiella. T he second group(Horridoniini) is widely distributed throughout theBorealregion. Two phyletic lineages were reconstructed into thesubgroups Sowerbina and Horrioniina, and three newgenera (Kornellia, Vigda lia, Sowerbina) were described.These systematic and phylogeneticfindings are importantfor stratigraphy andcorrelation within the Boreal region.

2. Bivalve studies by A.S.Bjakov also contributed tothe Upper Paleozoic zonal succession of northeast Asia.Last year’s investigations enabled Bjakov to subdivide theEarly Permian Paleoneilo parenica Zone into four newzones. Bjakov also determinedthat the youngest Permianbivalve zon e in n ort heast Russia is Ch anghsingian(uppermost Permian of theTethyan scale) in age. It shouldbenoted, however, that paleobotanical data from the samelevel suggests an uppermost Kazanian–lower Tatarian age.

N.I. Karavaeva and G.R. Nestell (University ofTexasat Arlingt on, USA) hav e prep ared for publication adescr ip tio n o f 48 new sp ecies of P erm ian forams(Lagenidae) from referencesections in the Omolon massif.

M.V.Durante revised collections of fossil plantsfromdifferent levels in the thick Upper Paleozoic terrigenousVerkhoyan complex from the Verkhoyan mountain system.Asuccession o f plant assemblages with Angara affinitieshas been recognized there. The Verkhoyansk assemblages

Report of the CarboniferousMagnetostratigraphyProject GroupM.W. Hounslow

Centre for Environmental Magnetism and Palaeomagnetism,Lancaster Environment Centre, Geography Department,Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster, LA1 4YW, U.K.

The number of membersof the project group issmalland we would welcome any in terested persons or partieswho are interested in utilizingor evaluating Carboniferousmagnetostratigraphy. We would particularly welcomeinformation from thosestratigraphersworking on specificsections where magnetostratigraphy could be attemptedto improv e int ernational correlation s and help theobjectives of the SCCS. Wewould also welcome any newsof possibly unpublished information on specific sectionswhere magnetostratigraphy has been attempted, so as todisseminate as widely as p ossible bot h positive andnegative magnetostratigraphic results to the project group.

Two projects are activeat this time.The first of thesebeing undertaken by Kate E. Zeigler1, Spencer G. Lucas2,Roberto S. Molina-Garza3, and John W. Geissman1(1Dept.of Ea rth and Planetary Sciences, Un iversity o f NewMexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131; 2NewMexico Museumof Natural History and Science, 1801 Mountain Rd NE,Albu querque, NM 8710 4; 3Cen tro de Geosciencias,Campus Juriquilla UNAM, Queretaro, Mexico, 76230)onthe magnetostratigraphy of the Pennsylvanian-Permiantransition at NewWell Peak, southwestern NewMexico.

The Big Hatchet Mountains in southwestern NewMexico contain excellent outcrop expo sures of the

arevery important fordeterminingtheage ofAngara LatePaleozoic plant assemblagesbecause of their associationwith marine faunas. Recently Durante ext ended therevision of Verkho yan plant collect ion s, and lat erdescriptions of Upper Paleozoic Verkhoyan fossil plantswill be p repared.

These paleontological investigations will neccessitatethe preparation of a new version of the Boreal UpperPaleozoic zonal succession, which will form the basis foroverall Boreal correlation.

Y.V. Mosseichik’s paper “Paleophytogeography andstratigraphy ofMississippian [Lower Carboniferous]plant-bear in g dep o sit s o f Angaralan d” (Newslet ter o nCarboniferousStratigraphy, 22:47-56) is based on a reviewof several mo nographs and contains a review of UpperPaleozoic fossil plants and stratigraphy in the differentregions of Angaraland. New ap proaches to Angaranphytogeography are also demonstrated in this paper.


Pennsylvanian to Permian (Morrowan to Wolfcampian)Horquilla Form ation . At New Well P eak in the BigHatchets, the Horquilla section is approximately 1000 mthick and consists of intercalated limestones and marineshales, all ofwhich dip to the southeast. This section is ofgreat importan ce as it is one of the few stratigraphicsections in t he western USA where sedimentation wasapparently continuous across the Pennsylvanian-Permianboundary (Wilde, 2002). Avariety of studies are currentlybein g un der tak en o n th ese st r a ta , in cludin glithostratigraphy, fusulinid and conodont biostratigraphy,macroinvertebrate biostratigraphy, isotopic analyses, andmagnetostratigraphicwork.The magnetostratgraphicworkis to identify in the section the short duration normalpolarity magnetozone(s) which appear to characterizethePennsylvanian- Permian transition in the Permian GSSPAidaralash section, and other sections (see Hounslowetal.,Newsletter on CarboniferousStratigraphy, 22:35-41).

For magnetost ratigraphic analyses, we drilled eachlimestone bed in the ~ 180-m-thick Horquilla section,resulting in 42 sites. To date, we have subjected a smallsubset of the samples (approximately 30 specimens) toprogressive t hermal demagnetization to 290º C and asecond subset of six specimens has been treated with

CONTRIBUTIONS BY MEMBERSViews and interpretations expressed / presented in

contributions by members are those of individual authors / co-authorsand are not necessarily those of the SCCS and carry no formal SCCS endorsement.

Correlation of the base of the ViséanStage in the type Mississippianregion of North AmericaGeorge Sevastopulo and F.X. Devuyst

Department of Geology, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland.

The process of selection of a GSSP for the base of theViséan Stage is at an advanced stage:the proposal that thebase should be defined in the Pengchong stream section,Guanxi,China will besubmitted to the Subcommission onCarboniferous Stratigraphy before the appearance of thenext issue of the Newsletter. The proposed level in thePengchong section has been chosen to coincide with thefirst appearance of the foraminifer Eoparastaffella simplexin t he ev olution ary lin eage of Eo pa ra staffe lla, abiostratigraphical datum that allows accurate correlationwith other sections in Eurasia , notably elsewhere insouthern China,northern Iran, theformerUSSR, theCzechRepublic, Belgium, and Ireland.

Ho wever , t he Eo pa ra sta ffella lineage, and, inparticular , E. sim plex, does n ot occur in the ty peMississippian region (or elsewhere) in North America.Other useful biostratigraphicaltools for locating strata thatspan the baseof the Viséan in Eurasia – the transition fromMestognathus prebeckmanni to M. beckmanni in theyoungest Tournaisian andthefirst (cryptic) appearanceoftheconodont Gnathodushomopunctatus just above thebase– also cannot be applied in the typeMississippian region.

Previous picks of the base of th e Viséan in theMississipppi Valley range from the base of the Osagean(Collinson et al., 1962, p.14; 1971, Table1) to the baseofthe Warsaw (Mamet and Skipp, 1970). However, thecommon occurrences in Europe andthe Mississippi Valleyof taxa such as the conodont Scaliogathus dockali (Laneand Ziegler, 1983; Lane and Brenckle, 2005) and theforaminifer Viseidiscus (Brenckle et al., 1982) makes itpossible to bracket the stratigraphical interval in thetypeMississippian region in which the baseof the Viséan shouldbe sought. The target strata should be the Burlington

alternatingfield demagnetization to 100 mT. Initialresultso n bo t h subsets of sp ecim ens sh ow well-definedmagnetizations, but the vectors are nort h-directed andsteeply inclined, indicating a much younger magneticoverprint is present in these strata.We willcontinuethermaldemagnetization treatment on one subset of specimens inorder to determine whether or not an original magneticsignal can be detected in these strata. Hopefully thereshould be morepositive results by the end of the year.

Reference

Wilde, G.L. 2002. The Newwellian Substage; rejection of theBursumianStage. Permophiles, 41:53-62.

The second item of news is that Alexei Khramov(VNIGRI, St Pet ersburg, Russia) has set abo ut seeing if itis possible to refine, usingmodern laboratory techniques,theBashkirian-Moscovian magnetostratigraphy which hean d h is group p ro duced in t he early year s o fpalaeomagnetic research from the Donets Basin. Otherrecent workers’ initial attemptsat validating some of theseresults have p roven unsuccessful, and there is an urgentr equir em en t t o ex p ress th ese ap p aren tly go o dmagnetostratigraphic results in a modern stratigraphicframework,with up-to-date experimentaltechniques.

Jul y 2005 13

Limestone Formation (and itslateralequivalent, theFernGlen Format ion) and the lower p art of the KeokukLimestoneFormation.

In the recently publishedguidebook for the SCCS2001field conference in the type Mississippian region (Heckel,2005), two horizons aresuggestedfor the baseof theViséan.The first , which was in favour at thetime of the field tripin 2001, isdiscussed in the context of the section at DennisHollow, Illinois (Brenckle et al., 2005, p. 35), where thebase of theViséan is placed within theFern Glen Formationat a level within Lane and Brenckle’s (2005) ConodontFaunal Unit 4L (anchoralis–latus Zone; latus Subzone),just below the lowest record of Scaliognathus anchoralisanchoralis. The reasoningbehindthiscorrelation was thatLane and Ziegler (1983) believed that Scaliognathusanchoralis anchoralis, the subspecies of Sc. anchoralisprevalent in the Midcontinent region of North America,evolved from Sc. anchoraliseuropensis, typicalof the lateTournaisian ofEurasia, and had replaced it by the Viséan.There are two lines ofargument to suggest that the latterhypothesis is incorrect.

First , both Lane and Ziegler (1983, Table 1) andCarman, (1987, fig. 4) showedthat in two adjacent sectionsin New Mexico, the upper limit of the two subspecies isthe same, and Carman showed that the range of Sc. a.europensis overlaps that of Bactrognathus lanei t heeponymous species of Faunal Unit 4U, the lanei Subzone.In Europe, Sc. a. anchoralis and Sc. a. europensis occurtogether in the Carnic Alps and both have their highestrecorded occurrence at the same horizon with the firstoccurrence of Gnathodus texanus (Schonlaub andKreutzer,1993) and just below Gnathodus symmutatus (Perri andSpalletta, 1998). Geraghty (1996)hasshown that the latteris a junior synonym of Gn. homopuctatus. Belka (1985)recorded both Sc. a. europensis and Sc. a. anchoralis inPoland and showed (fig. 3) the last occurrence of each atthe same horizon.

Second,severalof theother conodontsof Faunal Units4U and 5 of Laneand Brenckle (2005) have their highestoccurrence in the Tournaisian of Eurasia. The range ofselected taxa in the Mississippi Valley are shown in Figure1; their ranges in Eurasia are discussed below.

Polygnathus communis communis isnot known fromthe Viséan in Eurasia. Generally the top of its range iswell below the top of the Tournaisian (see, for example,Conil et al.,1989, fig.1 for asynthesis of information fromBelgium).

Do lio gna thus la tus en ters with Sc . an ch oraliseuropensis, occurs sporadically within theanchoralis Zone,and has its last o ccurrence just below that of Sc. a .europensis in Belgium (Conil et al., 1989, fig.1).

Pseudopolygnathuspinnatus occurssporadically frombelowthe anchoralis Zone to belowthe highest occurrenceof Sc. a. europensis in Europe (see, for example, Belka,1985, fig. 3). In condensed pelagic sequences (see, forexample, Perri and Spalletta,1998, Table 2) Ps. pinnatusand Sc. anchoralis have their last occurrencesat thesamehorizon.

Eotaphrus burlingtonensis is numerically not veryabundant in Europe but has been recorded from manyregions within the middle to upper part of the anchoralisZone(Belka,1985; Butler, 1973; Conil et al., 1989;PerriandSpalletta, 1998).

Po lyg nathu s m ehli f ir st o ccurs just below t heanchoralis Zone in Irelan d and Britain an d rangessubstantially above the base of the Viséan (Sevastopuloand Nudds,1987; and our unpublished records).

Gnathodus p seudosemiglab er has been recordedwidely in Europe but theremay be some inconsistency ofidentification of this and other speciesof Gnathodus. Firstoccurrences have been recorded from as low as the lowerboundary of the anchoralis Zone (for examples, seeBelka,1985;Perri and Spalletta,1998)but in somecases are higherwithin the anchoralis Zone (for example, see Belka andGroessens, 1986; Butler, 1973). The species ranges wellabove the base of the Viséan. In Belgium and Ireland,faunas from above the last occurrence of Sc. anchoralisbut belowGn. homopunctatus commonly are dominatedby Gn. pseudosemiglaber (BelkaandGroessens, 1986;andour unpublished records).

Gnathodus texanus may also have been interpreteddifferently in different regions. Its lowest occurrence inBelgium hasbeen recorded by Belkaand Groessens (1986)from just belowthe anchoralis Zone, but in Poland(Belka,1985) its earliest o ccurrence def ines the base of theGn athod us texan us Zo ne, imm ediat ely abo ve t heanchoralis Zone.

There clearly is not an exact equivalence of the rangesof the taxa listed abovein theMississippi Valley and Eurasia(to what extent thisreflects taxonomic practices remainsto beestablished). On balance, however, it seems unlikelythat the boundary can be any lower than the base of Laneand Brenckle’s (2005) Faunal Unit 6, the Gn. bulbosusSubzone. However, as a working hypothesis, the base ofFaunal Unit 7, the Gnathodus texanus Zone, is preferred,as suggested by Lane and Brenckle (2005, p. 78, fig. 48).

Recent work on ammonoids by Work and co-workersis relevant to the correlation of the base of the Viséan intheMississippi Valley sincefaunasfrom the Midcontinentregion are accompanied by conodonts assigned to thebulbosus Subzoneand the texanus Zone(Work andMason,


Figure 1. Range of selected conodonts in theMississippi Valley adapted from Lane and Brenckle (2005, fig. 51). Firstcolumn - Formation s; second column - Members of the Burlington Formation (excluding the lower Dolby CreekMember); third column - Faunal Units.

Brenckle, P.L., H.R. Lane, P.H. Heckel, and E.G. Rankey. 2005.Stop descriptions, p. 1-54. In P.H. Heckel (ed.), Stratigraphyand Biostratigraphy ofthe Mississippian Subsystem (Carbon-iferous System)in its Type Region, the Mississippi River Val-ley of Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa. Illinois State GeologicalSurvey Guidebook, 34.

Brenckle, P.L., F. Marshall, S. Waller, and M. Wilhelm. 1982.Calcareous microfossils from the Mississippian Keokuk Lime-stone and adjacent formations, upper Mississippi River valley:Their meaning for North American and international correla-tion. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 15:47-88.

Carman, M.R. 1987. Conodonts of the Lake Valley Formation(Kinderhookian-Osagean), Sacramento Mountains , NewMexico, USA, p. 47-73. In P.L. Brenckle, H.R. Lane, and W.L.Manger (eds.), Selected Studies in Carboniferous Paleontol-ogy and Biost rati graphy. Courier F orschungs inst it utSenckenberg, 98.

Collinson, C., C.B. Rexroad, and T.L. Thompson. 1971. Con-odont zonation of the North American Mississippian, p. 353-394. In W.C. Sweet and S. Bergstrom (eds.), Symposium onConodont Biostrat igraphy. Geological S ociety of AmericaMemoir, 127.

Collinson, C., A.J. Scott, and C.B. Rexroad. 1962. Six chartsshowing biostratigraphic zones, and correlations based on con-odonts from the Devonian and Mississippian rocks of the up-

2003, 2004). However, the rich fauna from the lowerMount Head Formation, British Columbia (Work et al.,2000) that was assigned an early Viséan age on the basisof associated foraminiferal faunas, is more probably oflateTournaisian age. The rich foraminiferal faunaswerereported to contain Viséan species of Eoparastaffella(Mamet in Work et al., 2000). One of us (F.X.D.) hasreviewed all t he thin sections on wh ich Mamet ’sdeterminations of Eoparastaffella were based and hasfound that the foraminifers concerned are species ofEoendothyranopsis. Conodonts recorded by Higgins inWork et al. (2000) aremore likely to beof lateTournaisianage.

References

Belka, Z. 1985. Lower Carboniferous conodont biostratigraphyin the northeastern part of the Moravia-Silesia basin. ActaGeologica Polonica, 35:33-60.

Belka, Z., and E. Groessens. 1986. Conodont succession acrosstheTournaisian-Viséan boundary beds at Salet, Belgium. Bul-letin de la Société belge de Géologie, 95:257-280.

Butler, M. 1973. Lower Carboniferous conodont faunas fromthe Eastern Mendips, England. Palaeontology, 16:477-517.

Jul y 2005 15

per Mississippi Valley. Illinois State Geological Survey Circu-lar, 328, 32 p.

Conil, R., E. Groessens, M. Laloux, and E. Poty. 1989. La limiteTournaisian/Viséen dans la région-type. Annales de la SociétéGéologiques de Belgiques, 112:177-189.

Geraghty, D. 1996. A study of some Lower Carboniferous con-odonts. Unpublished PhD thesis, University ofDublin.

Heckel. P.H., (ed.). 2005. Stratigraphy and biostratigraphy oftheMississippian Subsystem (Carboniferous System) in its typeregion, the Mississippi River Valley ofIllinois, Missouri, andIowa. Illinois State Geological Survey Guidebook, 34, 105 p.

Lane, H.R., and P.L. Brenckle. 2005. Type Mississippiansubdi-visions and biostratigraphic succession, p. 76-105. In P.H.Heckel (ed.), Stratigraphy and Biostratigraphy of the Missis-sippian Subsystem (Carboniferous System) in its Type Region,the Mississippi River Valley of Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa.Illinois State Geological Survey Guidebook, 34.

Lane, H.R., and W. Ziegler. 1983. Taxonomy and phylogeny ofScaliognathus Branson & Mehl 1941(Conodonta, Lower Car-boniferous). Senckenbergiana Lethaea, 64:199-225.

Lee, K.G., W.I. Ausich, and T.W. Kammer. 2005. Crinoids fromthe Nada Member ofthe Borden Formation (Lower Mississip-pian) in eastern Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 79:337–355.

Mamet, B., and B. Skipp. 1970. Lower Carboniferous calcare-ous foraminifera: preliminary zonation and stratigraphic im-plications for the Mississippian of North America. 6èmeCongrès Int ernational de Strati graphie et de Géologie deCarbonifère, Compte Rendu, 3:1129-1146.

Perri, M.C., and C. Spalletta. 1998. Conodont distributionat theTournaisian/Viséan boundary inthe CarnicAlps (southernAlps,Italy), p. 225-245. In H. Szaniawski (ed.), Proceedings of theS ixth European Conodont Sympos ium (EC OS VI),Palaeontologia Polonica, 58.

Schönlaub, H.P., and L.H. Kreutzer. 1993. Lower Carboniferousconodonts from the Cima di Plotta section (CarnicAlps, Italy),Jahrbuch der Geologischen Bundesanstalt Wien, 136:247-269.

Sevastopulo, G. D., and J.R. Nudds. 1987. Courceyan (earlyDinantian) biostratigraphy of Britain and Ireland; coral andconodont zones compared, p. 39-46. In P.L. Brenckle, H.R.Lane, and W.L. Manger (eds.), Selected Studies in Carbonifer-ous P aleontology and Bios trat igraphy. C ouri erForschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 98.

Work, D.M., and C.E. Mason. 2003. Mississippian (MiddleOsagean) ammonoids from the Nada Member of the BordenFormation, Kentucky. Journal of Paleontology, 77:593-596.

Work, D.M., and C.E. Mason. 2004. Mississippian (LateOsagean)ammonoids from the New Providence Shale Member of theBorden Formation, north-central Kentucky. Journal ofPaleon-tology, 78:1128-1137.

Work, D.M., W.W. Nassichuk, and B.C. Richards. 2000. LowerViséan ammonoids from the lower Mount Head Formation,east-central British Columbia. Geological Survey of CanadaBulletin, 541, 71 p.

Report on the First Meeting on UpperPaleozoic ChronostratigraphyofSouth AmericaCarlos Azcuy

Depto. de Ciencias Geológicas Pabellón 2, CiudadUniversitaria1428 Núñez, BuenosAires, Rep. Argentina.

T he Fir st Meetin g o n Up p er P aleo zoicCh rono stra tigr aphy of South America was h eld inGramado, Brazil, November 10, 2004, as part of the XIReuniôn de Paleobotânicos ePalinologos. Thefollowingresearchers were present: from Argentina, Marilín Vergel,Pedro Gutierrez, Hugo Car rizo, Mercedes di Pasquo,Cecilia Rodriguez Amenábar, and Carlo s Azcuy; fromUruguay, Angeles Beri; and from Brazil, Paulo Alves deSouza. CarlosAzcuy served as coordinator.

At t h is m eet in g t h e suitabilit y o f ap p lyin gchronostratigraphic units established in western Europe,Russia, and th e United States to the Upper Paleozoic ofSouth America was considered. The proposal is based onthe knowledge that these units have been defined on thebasis of fossil associations that do not occur in this part ofGondwana.All the participants considered the proposalas a good opp ortunity to begin working together in acoordinated plan of activities conducive to establishing aregio nal chro nostratigraphy. In order t o obtain thatobjective, MDP proposed that all existingpaleontologicaland radiometr ic data o n Upp er Paleozo ic basins beassembled. The suggested methodology will includecompiling on amap of South American basins data on allk no wn localit ies with fo ssils an d abso lut e ages,accompanied by corresponding bibliographical references.

In this first meeting, it was decided to subdivide thistask in order to allow other specialists who had notparticipated in the meetingthe opportunity to coordinatetheirown research with thevarious basin working groups.The first results of this project will be p resented at theXIII Simposio Argentino de Paleobotánica y Palinologíawhich will be held in Bahía Blanca, Argentina (May 22-26,2006).This isa contribution to the IGCP 471.

SouthAmerican Upper PaleozoicBasins

Parnaiba: Roberto Iannuzzi and Henrique Melo

Amazonas:Henrique Melo

Madre de Dios: Mercedes di Pasquo (MDP), RobertoIannuzzi, Carlos Azcuy, Marilín Vergel, Suárez Soruco,and Jaime Oller

Pa ran á: Paulo Alves de Souza, Ro ber to Iannuzzi,Rosemary Rhon, and Angeles Beri


Chacoparaná: Marilín Vergel and Pedro Gutierrez

Tarija: Mercedes di Pasquo and Jaime Oller

Arizaro: CarlosAzcuy, Mercedes diPasquo, and FlorencioAceñolaza

Paganzo: CarlosAzcuy,Hugo Carrizo, and NoraSabattini

Uspal lata-Igl esia: Hugo Car rizo, Cecilia RodríguezAmenábar, Car los González, Arturo Tabo ada, GabrielaCisterna, and Nora Sabattini

San Rafael : SilviaCésari and Pablo Pazos

Tepuel-Genoa: Hugo Carrizo, Art uro Taboada, CarlosGonzález, and Nora Sabattini.

Are regional stages necessary?

Carlos R. González

Dirección de Geología, Fundación Miguel Lillo, Miguel Lillo251, 4000 Tucumán, Rep. Argentina.

The bipartit ion of the Carboniferous System adoptedby the International Commission of Stratigraphy for theworld stratigr aphic chart is impractical in Gondwana.Correlation with thePaleoequatorialrealm, from the LateViséan to the Early Permian inclusive, is n ot possible bypaleontologic means because ofendemism of thebiota.AsHeckel (2001)noted, Angara andGondwana“will need toretain regional subdivisions above the upp er part of theMississippian.” This is especially the case in Argentina,wh ere absolute ages are insufficient and som ewh atimprecise, and do not give the certainty of paleontologicmethods. Moreover, dating sequences of this intervalfrequently initiates endless discussionsabout theirpositionwithin the world stratigraphic scale, especially of thoseunits that are suspected to contain the Mid-Carboniferousand Carboniferous-Permian boundaries. For practicalreasons, it would be more desirable, and reliable, to referthese sequences to regional stages, rather than attemptingdebatable correlations with the paleoequatorial standards.

The Gondwana glaciations are the most outstandingeventsof the LatePaleozoic.During this “iceage” climaticchanges and sea-levelfluctuations werethe most importantfactorsthat induced the origin, evolution, and extinctionof endemic taxa (Roberts, 1981; González, 1997), andmarine faunas reflect variationsof sea-water temperature.The best known of these are closely associated withglaciations, such as the Middle Carboniferous Levipustulafaunaand theEarly Permian Eurydesma fauna.However,other less well known assemblages are also indicators oftemperature.

Marin e sequences show a changing succession oflith ofacies and biofacies that were clearly linked to

paleoclimatic events. They suggest that major climaticchanges occurr ed rapidly in terms of geologic time. Themost significant of these occurred at the beginning andend of the “ice age,” and at the beginning and end of theUpper Pennsylv anian interglacial. Minor variations intemperature caused discreteglaciations, but these werenotso significant as to greatly affect faunal composition. Aftereach major climatic change, a distinct faunal assemblageflourished during lapses of more or less stable, glacial ornon-glacial, climatic conditions, untilanewclimaticchangeoccurred. In the Carboniferous-Permian sequences ofArgentina, five MajorFaunal Groupscan be distinguishedwhich are closely associated with each climatic stasis.These have proved to beeffective biostratigraphic unitsata regional scale. Based on these Major Faunal Groups, Iproposed (González,1993)apreliminary sequenceof regionalstagesfor the CarboniferousandEarly Permian. These canbe matched wit h Australian faunas, which are, in turn,constrained by absolute age dates (Roberts et al., 1995;Claoué-Long et al., 1995) and allowa reliable correlationwith the paleoequatorial standards. In this regard, the Mid-Carboniferous boundary occurs somewhere within theSerpukhovian-Bashkirian Levipustula Zone.

Both paleoclimatic eventsand their associated faunasare adequate for the subdivision of the lapse between theLate Mississip pian and the Early Permian in the SouthAmerican Gondwana area.

A significant advance was achieved dur ing the FirstMeetingon UpperPaleozoic Chronostratigraphy of SouthAmerica, held in Gram ado, Brazil, in 2004. On thisoccasion, a concrete position was finally adopted followinga proposal by Carlos Azcuy (this issue), wh ich led to theformation of working groups that will address problemsof SouthAmerican Gondwanabiostratigraphy. The faunalsubdivision proposedin 1993 may serveas astarting pointfor future discussion s on regional stages.

References

Claoué-Long, J.C., W. Compston, J. Roberts, and C.M. Fanning.1995. Two Carboniferous ages: a comparison ofSHRIMP zir-con dating with conventional zircon ages and 40Ar/39Ar analy-sis, p. 3-21. In Geochronology: Time Scales and Global Strati-graphic Correlation. SEPM Special Publication, 54.

González, C.R. 1993. Late Paleozoic faunal succession in Ar-gentina. Comptes Rendus XII ICC-P, 1:537-550.

González, C.R. 1996. The Mid Carboniferous boundary and thebeginning of the glacial age in Argentina. Newsletter on Car-boniferous Stratigraphy, 14:12.

González, C.R., 1997. Late Carboniferous Bivalvia from west-ern Argentina. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 31:193-214.

Heckel, P.H. 2001. New proposal for series and stage subdivi-sion of Carboniferous System. Newsletter on CarboniferousStratigraphy, 19:12-14.

Jul y 2005 17

Roberts, J. 1981. Control mechanisms of Carboniferous brachio-pod zones in eastern Australia. Lethaia 14:123-34.

Roberts, J., J.C. Claoué-Long, and P.J. Jones. 1995. AustralianEarly Carboniferous time, p. 23-40. In Geochronology: TimeScales and Global Stratigraphic Correlation. SEPM SpecialPublication, 54.

Carboniferous Correlation Table(CCT) Karbon-Korrelationstabelle(KKT)Michael R. W. Amler and Manf red Gereke

Institut für Geologie und Paläontologie, FachbereichGeowissenschaften, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Hans-Meerwein-Str., D-35032 Marburg, Germany.

Sincethe early attempts at a stratigraphic subdivisionof Carbon ifero us rocks, m any correla tion charts ofquestionable m erit have been proposed for the differentbiostratigraphic zonations and lithologicsuccessions of theCarbon iferous. For this purpo se, the results of t heCongresses on Carboniferous Stratigrap hy since 1927proved to be quite helpful, but difficulties are stillobvious(e.g., Paproth, 1969). In western Europe (i.e., therealm ofthe Carboniferous Limestone Shelf Facies), small-scaledifferences in litho- and biofacies complicate the task. Incentral Europe (i.e., the realm of the Kulm Facies), theseattempts are hampered by extremevariations in thickness,sedimentary unconformities, magmatic ex trusions, andtectonic influences. Additio nally, gaps in knowledge andlack of paleon tological revision of many fossil groupslargely prevent ed the publication of reliable correlationcharts. Consequently, many workers had to manage theirown attempts o r, for the Dinantian (i.e. , the EuropeanLower Carboniferous), use the table published by theArbeitsgemeinschaft für Dinant-Stratigraphie (1971).

With support from the German Subcommission onCarboniferous St ratigraphy, th e aut hors published aCarboniferous Correlation Table (CCT;Amler and Gereke[eds.], 2002, 2003) basedon thesame system and principlesas th e highly successful Devon ian Correlation Table(Weddige, 199 6). Unlike the Devonian, however, theCarboniferousdisadvantageously lacks the framework ofa high-resolution conodont zonation.Actually, a precisemulti-str atigraphy is necessary to enable reliable andaccuratecorrelation.Furthermore, thecurrent internationalsubdivision of theCarboniferous lacks ratified GSSPs, andthe upper boundary of the system/period remains largelyunknown.

In the first two issue of the CarboniferousCorrelationTable published in Senckenbergiana lethaea (Frankfurt/Main) Vol. 82 (2002) and 83 (2003) we presented thebiostratigraphicsubdivision of the Mississippian in basinal

(Kulm) facies with regional stratigraphic correlationcolumns for the Rhenish Basin (Amler and Gereke [eds.],2002, 2 003). Regarding the inco mplete sedim entarysequence,no complete biozonation hasyet been establishedfor theMississippian of central Europe, either because offragmentary faunal or floralcontent oreven general lackof biota. Local and regionalbiostratigraphic zonations ofthe Kulm sequence are based on goniatite successions,trilobites, and radiolarians(Korn, 1996; Hahn and Hahn,1974; Braun and Gursky, 1991;Braun and Schmidt-Effing,1993; and earlier references therein), but seem to bevirtually unknown outside Germany. A litho logic andbiostratigraph ic correlation of Carboniferous limestoneshelf and Kulm sequences is restricted to interfingeringareas or large scale carbonate turbidites derived from theshelf edge that spreadacross the basin or, at least, parts ofit (Paproth,1969; Bender et al., 1993 and earlier referencestherein). However, serious correlation difficulties anduncertainties are still present dueto the scarcity ofcommonindex fossils, contrasting with the fine-scaled conodontzonat ion of the Upper Dev onian, wh ere correlationproblems occur only in p ure red shale sequences.

Th e fo llowing par ts, which are currently underpreparation for a 2005 issue,will include the subdivisionsof the shelf facies as well as those of the Pennsylvanian.We would like to encourage all our colleagues working inbio- and litho stratigraphy or worldwide correlation tocreat e and pro vide us wit h t heir o wn column s forpublication in forthcoming issues.

Th e rules and in structio ns largely follow tho secompiled by Weddige (1996, p. 268; 2000,p. 685) for theDevonian Correlation Table. We would like to stress thateach column represents an individual element, is registeredindividually under the name of the compiler, and must becited as such. Consequently, the compiler , who does notnecessarily need to be the author of the zonation, isresponsible for therespectivecolumn (see Weddige, 2000,p. 686). In each subsequent issue of the CCT previouslypublished columns may app ear in a revised version.Commentaries to individualcolumns may be published asseparate“Annotations” in Senckenbergiana lethaea.

M.G. had the idea of applying the co ncept of thesuccessful Dev o nian Co r rela tio n Table t o t h eCarboniferous. First drafts of columns were compiled byM.A.and M.G. in cooperation with the authors. Thefinalarrangement an d layout of the columns was carried outby M.G. after extensive coordination with thecontributingauth o r s. As t h e rep resent at iv e o f t h e Germ anSubcommission on Carboniferous Stratigr aphy, M.A. isresponsible for the contined publication of future issuesof the CCT. Sp ecial thanks for informatio n and criticalco mmen ts are due to Diet er Korn (Berlin), Diet er


Bivalve biostratigraphy of the KulmFacies (Mississippian, EarlyCarboniferous) in central EuropeMichael R. W. Amler

Institut für Geologie und Paläontologie, FachbereichGeowissenschaften, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Hans-Meerwein-Str., D-35032 Marburg, Germany.

Within the framework of theresearch project “Bivalvebiostratigraph y of the Kulm Facies (Mississippian) ofcent r al Europ e,” sup po r t ed by t h e Deut sch e

Meischner (Gö ttingen), Karl-Heinz Ribbert (Krefeld),Dieter Stoppel (Hannover), and DieterWeyer (Berlin).M.Hellwig (Marburg) generously helped wit h hard- andsoftware.

References

Amler, M.R .W., and M. Gereke (eds. ). 2002. Karbon-Korrelationstabelle (KKT) – Carboniferous Correlation Table(CCT). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 82:691-709.

Amler, M.R .W., and M. Gereke (eds. ). 2003. Karbon-Korrelationstabelle (KKT) – Carboniferous Correlation Table(CCT). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 83:235-247.

Arbeit sgemeinschaft für Dinant-St ratigraphie. 1971. Diest rat igraphische Gli ederung des Dinantiums und seinerAblagerungenin Deutschland. Newsletters on Stratigraphy, 1:7-18.

Bender, P., H.-G. Herbig, H.-J. Gursky, and M.R.W. Amler. 1993.ExkursionenA2 und B2. Beckensedimente im Oberdevon undUnterkarbon des östlichen Rheinischen S chiefergebi rges –Fazies , Paläogeographie und Meeresspiegelschwankungen.Geologica et Palaeontologica, 27:332-355.

Braun, A., and H.-J. Gursky. 1991. Kieselige Sedimentgesteinedes Unter-Karbons im R henoherzynikum – eineBestandsaufnahme. Geologica et Palaeontologica, 25:57-77.

Braun, A., and R. Schmidt-Effing. 1993. Biozonation, diagen-esis and evolution of radiolarians in the Lower Carboniferousof Germany. Marine Micropaleontology, 21:369-383.

Hahn, G., and R. Hahn. 1974. Die stratigraphische Gliederungdes Kulms nach Trilobiten. 7e Congrès International deStratigraphie et de Géologie du Carbonifère, Krefeld 1971,Compte Rendu, 3:161-165.

Korn, D. 1996. Revision of the Rhenish Late Viséan goniatitestratigraphy. Annales de la Société Géologique de Belgique,117:129-136.

Paproth, E. 1969. DieParallelisierung von Kohlenkalkund Kulm.6e Congrès International de Stratigraphie et de Géologie duCarbonifère, Sheffield 1967, Compte Rendu, 1:279-292.

Weddige, K., (ed.). 1996. Beiträge zu Gemeinschaftsaufgabender deutschen Subkommission für Devon-Stratigraphie, 1:Devon-Korrelationstabelle. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 76:267-286.

Weddige, K. 2000. The Devonian Correlation Table – guidelinesand implications. Senckenbergiana lethaea, 80:685-690.

Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation),a f irst biostratigraph ic subdiv ision based on bivalveassociations and index species has been proposed for themar ine late Famen nian to Serpuk hovian/Bashkir ian(Namur ian) sequence in th e Rh enoh ercy nian Basin(“Cypridina Shale” and Kulm Facies) of western andcentralEurope(Amler, 2002, in press2004). Thiszonationof the o pen m arine realm is intended to assist andcomplement traditional and revised regio nal zonationsbased on conodonts, goniatites, radiolarians, andtrilobites(compiledin Amler and Gereke, 2002).

Theanalysis of the vertical and horizontaldistributionof Kulm bivalves is based on a systematicand taxonomicrevision of late Paleozoic bivalvescarried out over the lastdecade. An overview was published in Amler (1998). Incontrast to bivalves of theCarboniferous Limestone ShelfFacies, the Kulm taxa predominantly occurred basin-wide

Fig. 1. Chaenocardiola haliotoidea (ROEMER), rightvalve, internal mold;Kulm Shales from Aprath(Wuppertal), Germany; index speciesof theChaenocardiola haliotoidea Zone.

Fig. 2. Ptychopteria (Actinopteria) sulcata (M’COY), leftvalve, internal mold;Kulm Shales from Aprath(Wuppertal), Germany; index species of the Posidoniacorrugata–Actinopteria sulcata Zone.

Jul y 2005 19

driven by their planktic larval stages an d their mostlypseudoplanktic life habits(Amler, 1992). In addition, theyserve particularly well for bio strat igrap hic analy sesbecausetheir phylogenetic development was not markedlyinter rupted at the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary(Amler, 1989,1995, 1996a,1999).

In the latest Famennian and earliest Mississippianbasinal facies, members of the Guerichia venusta group(Guerichia venusta s. str., Guerichia ratingensis [= G.ven u stiform is] , an d Gu erich ia m a ria nn a e ) ar ebio stra tigr aphically im portant and character ize theGuerichia venusta (s. str.) Zone, the Guerichia ratingensisZone, and the Guerichia mariannae Zone.

In the Mississippian Kulm Facies, members of theEupt er io morph ia (Pterioidea, Av iculop ect in oidea,Buch io idea) do m in at e abov e all o th er gro up s;biostr atigraphically impor tant taxa are Ptychopteria(Actinopteria) lepida, Ptychopteria (Actinopteria) sulcata,Streb loch ond ria praetenuis, Du nba rella mo sensis,Dunbarella yatesae, Posidonia becheri,Posidonia kochi,Po sid onia co rru gata, Po sid on ia tra pezoedra , andPosidonia membranacea.

The Late Tournaisian to Serpukhovian sequence canbe subdivided into six zones, mostly characterized by thejoint occurrence of at least two species: Chaenocardiolahaliotoidea Zone,Posidonia becheri–Dunbarella mosensisZone, Posidonia becheri–Posidonia kochiZone,Posidoniaco rrug ata–Actin op teria su lcata Zo ne, Po sido niatrapezoedra–Actinopteria lepida Zone, and Dunbarellayatesae Zone.Dueto the incompletesedimentary sequenceof Middle Tournaisian to Middle Viséan age, generalinformation gaps exist for faunal or floral content and aprecise biozonation.

A correlation of the bivalve zones wit h the revisedgoniatite zonation of Korn (2 002) is quite reliable.Correlation with the current radiolarian zonation (Braun2002) is also possible, but remains quite imprecise becausethat zonation, too, is not dense.However, no satisfactorycorrelation is yet possible wit h the cur rent standardzonation by foraminifersof the Carboniferous LimestoneShelf Facies.

In th e future, the dat a base will be completed,supplemented, an d verified by intensive sampling ofreferencesections, by multi-stratigraphicalcorrelation, andby analysis of further material from other outcrops andsect io ns. Ot h er biv alv e t ax a m ay p ro ve t o bebiostratigraph ically important in the near future aftercompletion of the systematic and taxonomic revision ofUpper Devonian and Carboniferous bivalves.

References

Amler, M.R.W. 1989. Zur Entwicklung der Bivalven an der De-von–Karbon-Grenze. Programm 59. Jahres t agung derPaläontologischen Gesellschaft, p. 16 (abstract).

Amler, M.R.W. 1992. Nekro- oder Taphocoenose – Das Kulm-Meer und seine B ivalven. Nachri cht en der DeutschenGeologischen Gesellschaft, 48:46-47 (abstract).

Amler, M.R.W. 1995. DieBivalvenfauna des Oberen FamenniumsWest -Europas . 1. Einführung, Li thos t rat i graphie,Faunenübersicht, Systematik 1. Pteriomorphia. Geologica etPalaeontologica, 29:19-143.

Amler, M.R.W. 1996. DieBivalvenfauna des Oberen FamenniumsWest-Europas. 2. Evolution, Paläogeographie, Paläoökologie,Syst emat ik 2. P al aeotaxodonta und Anomalodesmata.Geologica et Palaeontologica, 30:49-117.

Amler, M.R.W. 1998. Early Carboniferous bivalves of the cen-tralEuropean CulmFacies, p. 51-57. In P.A. Johnston and J.W.Haggart (eds.), Bivalves:An Eon ofEvolution – PaleobiologicalStudies Honoring Norman D. Newell. Univerisity of CalgaryPress, Calgary.

Amler, M.R.W. 1999. Extinctionand radiation of bivalves in theLate Devonian, p. 2-3 (abstract). In L. Harper, J. Taylor, andA. Crame (eds.), Paper and poster abstracts. - Biology and evo-lution ofthe Bivalvia, 14-17. Sept. 1999, Cambridge. (Mala-cological Society, London).

Amler, M.R.W. 2002. ColumnB016cm02: Bivalven-Zonen, p.697. In M.R.W. Amler and M. Gereke (eds.), Karbon-

Fig. 3.Posidonia becheri BRONN, left valve, internalmold; Kulm Shales from Herborn, Germany; indexspecies of the Posidonia becheri–Dunbarella mosensisand Posidonia becheri–Posidonia kochi Zones.


Fauna and sedimentation near theTournaisian-Viséan boundaryin deep-water sediments of the Jangjir Range(Southern Tien-Shan), KyrgyzstanAleksandr V. Neyevin and Aleksandra V. Djenchuraeva

State Agency on Geology and Mineral Resources of KyrgyzRepublic, KMEGEI, ErkindikAvenue, 2, Bishkek, 720300,Kyrgyzstan.

The position of the Tournaisian-Viséan boundary wasagreed at the VI International Carboniferous Congress(ICC) in Sheff ield, in 1967, to coincide with the firstappearance of the foraminifergenus Eoparastaffella.

South China h as been chosen as the mo st promisingregio n fo r do cum ent in g t h e ap pearan ce o f th eEoparastaffe lla simplex morphotype 1 – morphotype 2transition, and consequently, the establishment of the GSSPfor the base o f the Viséan Stage (Hance et al., 1997;Devuyst et al., 2003).

Study of sections in shallow-water facies in theUrals,west ern Euro pe, Ch in a, and No r th Am er ica hasdemonstrated th e significance of pelagic fo ssils (such ascono donts, ammon oids, etc.) as the key groups forestablishment of the boundary and for the resolution ofproblems in co rrelation of heterofacial sections fromdifferent regionsof the world(Kulaginaet al.,2003).Areashaving sections of deep-water facies are more appropriateforestablishment of thechronological boundaries,becauset hese sectio ns h av e sm all t hick ness an d co nt ainassemblages of key faunas.

The new data presented here on Tournaisian-Viséanboundary cono donts and foraminifers were received bytheauthors in 2004. These investigationswere part of the

program on com piling the working legend for the large-scale geologic map of the Jangjir Range and adjoiningterritory (Fig.1). This territo ry contains deep-watersediments of t he ancient Turkestan paleo ocean. Earlierauthors(Djenchuraeva, Neyevin,andVorobyev, 2001)hadattempted to establish this boundary in shallow-watersectionsof the Ulan carbonateplatform in the KokshaaltauRange, but there were not enough substantiated data there.

Th e Mississip pian deep-water sediments of t heKokshaal sector of the Southern Tien-Shan are representedby several facies types exposed in a num ber of nappesthrusted toward the south (China). From north to south,th e follo win g t ypes are established: Kensu ch ert y-carbonate,Ulan-Bozoi carbonate,Aksai cherty-carbonate-terrigenous, Sarybeless carbonate, and West-Kokshaalcherty- terr igen ous (Biske et al. , 20 03). Dur ing theMississippian, this vast area of the Turkestan paleooceanwas a deep-water pelagic region (Kensu,Aksai, and West-Kokshaal types) with local development of carbonateplatforms(Ulan-Bozoi type) andshoals (Sarybeless type).

The studied sections belong to the Kensu type, in themost deep-water area of theTurkestan paleoocean. For thefirst time, conodonts have been discoveredin this regionin the Mississippian cherty-carbonate sediments (ArashanFormation), and for thefirst time, the Tournaisian-Viséanboundary has been identified based on co nodonts. Dataon foraminifers were also received.

In order to reconstruct the history o f paleobasindevelo pm en t, a det ailed ap p ro ach t o st udyin gsedimentologic andbiologic changes is necessary as a basisfor identifyingevent-stratigraphic levels.Thedevelopmentof sedimentary basins has an intermittent nature, and theirhistory represents periods of relatively stable conditionsinterrupted by episodes of quick abiotic r econstructions(Koren’ et al., 2000). These events are displayed on globaland regional scales, andtheir succession is being identifiedthrough detailed studies of sedimentary p aleobasins. Onthe regional scale, abiotic reconstructions, which alwaysare accompaniedby lithologicindicators, ledto theregionalbiologic events. They are manifest by a sharp decrease orincrease in biomass, taxono mic diversity, et c. Globalclimate changesand sea-levelvariation in the world oceanarethe main causes ofabiotic events. Thelast factor leadsto transgressions and regressions,and to the the formationof sedimentologic datums.

Reduction of the Turkestan paleoocean area whichbegan during th e Mississippian, led to its closure in themiddle of thePennsylvanian.Thisprocess was interruptedat times by short-term transgressive cycles. One such cycleincludes the base of the Viséan.

Korrelationstabelle (KKT) – Carboniferous Correlation Table(CCT). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 82.

Amler, M.R.W. In press2004. Bivalvebiostratigraphy ofthe KulmFacies (Early Carboniferous, Mississippian) in central Europe.Newsletters in Stratigraphy, 40:1-26.

Amler, M. R. W. and M. Gereke (eds. ). 2002. Karbon-Korrelationstabelle (KKT) – Carboniferous Correlation Table(CCT). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 82:691-709.

Braun,A. 2002. Column B013cm02: Radiolarien-Zonen, p. 696,708. In M.R.W. Amler and M. Gereke (eds.), Karbon-Korrelationstabelle (KKT) – Carboniferous Correlation Table(CCT). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 82.

Korn, D. 2002. Column B011cm02:Ammonoideen-Zonen undGeno-Zonen, p. 695, 707. In M.R.W. Amler and M. Gereke(eds.), Karbon-Korrelationstabelle (KKT) – CarboniferousCorrelation Table (CCT). Senckenbergiana lethaea, 82.

Jul y 2005 21

About 10 sections were measured in the studied area,wherethe changefrom Upper Tournaisian cherty-carbonateand cherty sediments to Lower Viséan massive litho- andbioclastic carbonate rocks was observed.

Two sections(Kainar I andKainar II) arepresented inthispaper. These sections were measuredalong the KainarRiver (left tributary of the Atbashi River) . Study of theco nodonts allows reco gnit ion of th e Mississippiancon odont zonat ion. Additional data are in cluded onforaminifers (see Figs. 1, 2).

Thelower part of the Kainar I section (Fig. 2)consistsof platy multicolored cherts with beds of greenish-graycherty shales andgray thinly-laminatedmudstones of LateTournaisian age (Gnathodus typicus and Scaliognathusanchoralis Zones). These sedim ents are conformablyoverlain by black massive litho- and bioclastic grainstonesof Early Viséan age (Gn. texanus Zone).

TheKainar II section (Fig.3) contains the higherpartof the stratigraphic sequence, includingall conodont zonesof the Viséan and Serpukhovian. In this p aper, only theViséan part is presented (Gn. texanus, Gn. bilineatusbilineatus, and Lochriea nodosa Zones). The base of thesection (Gn. texanus Zone) also consists ofblack massivelitho- and bio clastic grainstones which co ntain rich andvaried conodo nt and foraminiferal assem blages. Thesesediments are conformably overlain by greenish-gray, gray,and black cher ty siltstones, and rarely, cherts. Thinly-laminated gray mudstones andlithoclastic grainstones aredevelopedamong them.

Conclusions

1. In deep-wat er sediments of the studied area in theJangjir Range of the Southern Tien-Shan, the base of theViséan coincides with the beginning of a short -termt ransgression wh ich is ch aract er ized by cr ino id-foraminiferal and clastic-detrital carbonate rocks. Thisevent is regional in nature, is clearly reflectedby changesin lit ho lo gy, and h as been been co n f irm ed bybiost ratigrap hic mean s. This event can serve as theprincipaldatum for identification of theTournaisian-Viséanboundary as well as for interregionalcorrelations.

2. The Kainar I and Kainar II sections contain a richconodont succession near this boundary. Nine UpperTo urnaisian to Serpuk ho vian co no don t zon es arerecognized, in ascending order: Siphonodella isosticha,Gnathodus typicus,Scaliognathusanchoralis,Gn. texanus,Gn.bilineatus bilineatus, Lochriea nodosa, L.ziegleri, Gn.bil. bollandensis, and Gn. postbilineatus. Foraminifersarealso identified.

3. Deep-water , sub-Tournaisian-Viséan boundarysediments of t he Jangjir Range need addit ional detailedstudy includin g complete description of t he foraminiferfaunas. These data will allowmore exact biostratigraphiccharacterization of the boundary and ultimately will leadto correlation of the conodont and foraminiferal zones ofthedeep-water sediments of the Southern Tien-Shan withheterofacial sections in other regions of theworld.

References

Biske, Yu.S., A.V. Djenchuraeva, A. V. Neyevin, and T.Yu.Vorobyev. 2003. Stratigraphy of the Middle-Upper Paleozoicand paleogeography of the t ransit ional area: Turkest an

75 80

40

K A Z A K H S T A NAlmaty

Bishkek I ssyk-kyl

NarynK Y R G H Y Z S T A N

CH

IN

A

OshUZBEKISTAN

Bishkek50km

I s s y k - k u l

NarynNaryn r.

A t b a s h y

C hatyr - ku l

C

AN

IH

Aksai

Kainar

Fig.1 Location of theKainar I and Kainar II sections

Jul y 2005 23

paleoocean – Tarim continent (Tien-Shan). Stratigraphy andGeological Correlation, 11(6):46-59.

Davydov, V.I. 2002. Carboniferous System and the current statusofits subdividions. Ekaterinburg (Russia): Izd. UrO RAN, p.72-91.

Devuyst, F.-X., L. Hance, H. Hou, X. Wu, S. Tian, M. Coen, andG. Sevastopulo. 2003. A proposed Global Stratotype Sectionand Point for the base of the Viséan Stage (Carboniferous): thePengchongsection, Guangxi, South China. Episodes, 26:105-115.

Djenchuraeva, A.V., A. V. Neyevin, and T.Yu. Vorobyev. 2001.New data on conodonts and foraminifers from the Tournaisian-Viséan boundary beds ofthe Kokshaaltau Range (South Tien-Shan, Kyrgyzstan). Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy,19:26-28.

Hance, L., P.L. Brenckle, M. Coen, et al. 1997. The search for anewTournaisian-Viséan boundary stratotype. Episodes, 20:176-180.

Koren’, T.N., E.M. Bugrova, V.A. Gavrilova, et al. 2000. Event-stratigraphic levels in the Phanerozoic ofRussia and their cor-relation potential. St.-Petersburg (Russia). VSEGEI Publish-ing House, 172 p.

Kulagina, E.I., N.B. Gibshman, and V.N. Pazukhin. 2003. Fora-miniferal zonal standard for the Lower Carboniferous of Rus-sia and its correlation with the conodont zonation. RivistaItaliana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 109:173-185.

Viséan-Serpukhovian transition in theMiddle Tien-ShanOlga Orlov-Labkovsky

Department of Zoology, Museum of Zoology, Tel-AvivUniversity, Tel-Aviv 69978, Israel.

Introduction

Viséan and Serp uk ho vian depo sit s ar e widelydev eloped in the Middle Tien-Shan. Th e st rata arerepresentedby a more than 800-m-thick, continuousmarinecarbonate sequence with rich fossil assemblages in theChatkal-TalassMountains, Middle Tien-Shan (Uzbekistanand adjacent countries). These deposits were formed in amarinesedimentary basin within an inner carbonateshelfplatform, an outer carbonate platform, anda basinalsetting.The Viséan-Serp ukhovian boundary fo r this regionalstratigraphic scheme (Table 1) is discussed below.

In this repor t we analyze two continuous sectionscontaining th e Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary: 1) theMashat section (TalassAlatau Range ) which was depositedon th e inn er platfo rm and is r ich in brachio pods,foraminifers, algae, and corals; and 2) the Paltau section(Chatkal Range) which was deposited in a basinal settingan d co ntains a rich fo ssil assemblage con sist ing ofconodonts, foraminifers, and ammonoids.

Locality and LithologicComposition

The Mashat section (Talass Alatau Range) shows acontinuoussequence of depositsfrom the Upper Viséan tothe lower part of theBashkirian. TheViséan-Serpukhovianboundary strata (Aksu and Mashat Formations) consist ofgrey, thick- and massive-bedded, organic limestone.Ooid,algal-foraminiferal, algal-crinoidal, and crinoidal-detritallimestone beds occur in between, and yield foraminifers,corals, algae, and brach iopod coquinas (Fig. 1).

The Paltau section (Chatkal Range) in cludes stratafrom the upper part of the Upper Viséan to the top of theSerpukhovian (Paltau and Aurakhmat Formations). TheUp per Viséan sequen ce co n sist s o f carbo nat econglomerates (in the lower part) and bedded organic-detrital and crinoidal-detrital limestone with interbeddedthin-bedded limestone. Overlying upperm ost Viséan tolower Serpukhovian depositsconsist of alternating thin-bedded limestone with gradational lamination and organiclimestone with interbedded turbidites (Fig. 2).

ForaminiferalAssemblages

T h e late Viséan fo ram in ifer al assem blages(Endothyranopsis crassa Zone) include many species(62percent) common to both sections: Earlandia elegans,Pseudo ammo discus volg ensis, Fo rsh ia mikhailovi,Ja nishewskin a sp., En do th yra similis, Sp in othyrapauciseptata, Omphalotis omphalota, Endothyranopsiscrassa, Archaediscu s moelleri, and Nodosarcaediscussa leei . Th e sp ecies Neo arch aediscus pa rvus an dParastaffella cf. illustria appear in the upper part of theEndothyranop sis crassa Zone. Archaediscu s moellerigigas, Bradyina rotula, Globoendothyra corbensis, andOmphalotis infrequentis occur only in the Mashat section;while Earlandia? orientalis,Archaediscusgrandiculus,A.convexus, Paraarchaediscus syzranicus,Pseudoendothyraconciina, and Eostaffella constricta are restric ted to thePaltau section.

The base of t he Serpukhovian is determined by thefirst appearance of the following foraminifers: Biseriellap arva , Pseu d o g lom o sp ira elega n s, Brad yin acrib ro sto m ata , Neoa rch a ed iscu s reg u laris,Astero a rch a ediscus ru go su s, A . b asch kiricu s,Rugosoarchaediscus agopovensis, R.rhombiformis, andTetrataxis minuta. The Viséan species Planoendothyraspirillinoides,Globoendothyra globules, and Parastaffellaillustria also o ccur in bo th sect io n s. Th e earlySerpukho vian foraminif eral assem blages of the twosections are differentiatedby Howchinia gibba longa andPseudoendothyra sublinis, which occuronly in the Mashatsect ion ; an d b y Mo n ota xino id es p riscu s,


Tabl

e1.

Stra

tigra

phic

sche

me

ofth

eVi

séan

-Ser

pukh

ovia

ntr

ansi

tion

inth

eM

iddl

eTie

n-Sh

an.

Jul y 2005 25

-


Asteroa rcha ediscus p a ra ovoides, and Eosta ffe llaparastruvei, which are restrictedto thePaltausection.EarlySerpukhov ian assem blages of the Neoarcha ed iscusregularis– Biseriella parva Zone are represen ted byabundant and diverse foraminifers with numerous species(about 85 percent) common to both sections.

Viséan-Serpukhovian Boundary

The boundary is observed in lithologically relativelymonotonousstrata in both the Mashat and Paltau sections.The boundary is determined o n the basis of foraminifersin the Mashat section (see “ForaminiferalAssemblages”)and on ammono ids, conodonts, and foraminifers in thePaltau section (Fig. 2). Two ammonoid assemblages are

amm

onoi

ds-

Jul y 2005 27

found in bed 1 4 in the Paltau section (14 and 14’). Thebed 14 assemblage contains Dombarites parafalcatoidesand Megapronorites sp.Thesespecies indicate correlationwith the late Viséan Hypergoniatites–Ferganoceras Zone(or P

2of western Europe).Ammonoids of bed 14’ include

Dombarocanites sp., Tympanoceras sp., and Dombaritesparatectus, which indicate correlation with the earlySerpukhovian Uralopronorites–Cravenoceras Zone(orE

1ofwestern Europe). Early Serpukhovian conodonts of theLoch riea crucifo rm is Zon e, in cluding Loch rieacruciformis, Parag nathodus commuta tus, and P. cf.honopunotatus, arefound 25 cm lower than the ammonoidsof the Uralopronorites–Cravenoceras Zone (E

1).The base

of the Serpukhovian Neoarchaediscus regularis–Biseriellapa rva fo raminifer Zo ne o ccur s abov e th e ViséanHypergoniatites–Ferganoceras ammonoid Zone (P

2),but

belowthe Serpukhovian Uralopronorites–Cravenocerasammonoid Zone (E

1). The base of t he Serpukhovian

Neoarchaediscus regularis–Biseriella parva foraminiferZone is situated 20 cm belowthe Serpukhovian Lochrieacruciformis conodont Zone.

Conclusions

1)Ammonoids, conodonts, and foraminifers showasimilar,but not coincident Viséan-Serpukhovian boundaryin the Middle Tien-Shan.

2) Foraminif er assemblages are similar in differentpart of the same marinebasin, which increases theirvalueas indicators of theViséan-Serpukhovian transition.

References

Bensh, F.R., Z.S. Rumyantseva, andO.I. Sergunkova. 1996. Tien-Shan and Pamir, p. 122-153. In C. MartínezDíaz, R. H. Wagner,C. F. Winkler Prins, and L. F. Granados (eds.), Carboniferousof the World. Vol. 3, IUGS Special Publication, 33 (IGME,Madrid & NNM, Leiden).

KagarmanovA.Kh., and L.M. Donakova (eds.). 1990. Carbonif-erous System. In Resolutionof the Interdepartmental RegionalStratigraphic Meeting on the Middle and Upper Paleozoic ofthe Russian Platform with Stratigraphic Schemes. VSEGEI,Leningrad, 41 p. (in Russian)

Nemitovskaja, T.I., and I.M. Nigmadzanov. 1991. Reorganiza-tion of conodont associations at the Lower/Middle Carbonif-erous boundary, p. 44-46. In N.U. Kruchinina and T.L.Modzolevskaya, Ecosystematic Reorganization and Evolution:Abst racts–37 Session All-Union Paleontological Society,Leningrad. (in Russian)

Nikolaeva, S.V., and I.M. Nigmadzanov. 1991. New data aboutthe age ofthe Khodzhirbulak Suite in connection with the prob-lem ofthe boundary Lower and Middle Carboniferous. Bulle-tin MOIP, Geol., 65:128. (in Russian)

Orlova, O.B. 1994. The Serpukhovian and Bashkirian Stages ofthe Middle Tien-Shan, p. 58-59. In Recent Data on the Paleo-zoic Biostratigraphy of the Russian Platform and Folded Ar-eas ofthe Urals and Tien-Shan. (in Russian)

Orlov- Labkovsky, O. 2002. The Serpukhovian Stage in theMiddle Tien-Shan Mountains (Uzbekistan and adjacent coun-tries), p. 796-801. In V.H. Len, C.M. Henderson, and E.W.Bamber (eds.), Carboniferous and Permian ofthe World. XIVInternational Congress on the Carboniferous and Permian.Canadian Society ofPetroleum Geologist Memoir, 19.

Orlov-Labkovsky, O., F.R. Bensh, andN.M. Mikhno. 2003. Re-vision of Carboniferous foraminiferal zonation of Middle andSouth Tien-Shan, p. 386-389. In Abstracts, XV InternationalCongress on Carboniferous and Permian Stratigraphy, Utrecht,Netherlands.

Sergunkova, O.I., F.R. Bensh, andZ.S. Rumyantseva. 1979. Thebasic characteristic ofthe stratigraphy of Middle Asia, p. 220-227. In Regional Stratigraphy ofthe Carboniferous ofthe Timeof Continents. VIII International Congress on CarboniferousStratigraphy and Geology (Moscow). (in Russian)

Sergunkova, O.I. 1989. Cyclic of the sedimentary accumulationthe LowerCarboniferous in Chatkal -Talas Basin inthe MiddleTien-Shan (on the basis ofthe analysis of brachiopods), p. 4-17. In Biostratigraphical Research in Uzbekistan. (in Russian)

Advances in understanding of theViséan-Serpukhovian boundary in theSouth Urals and its correlationS.V. Nikolaeva1, E.I. Kulagina4, V.I. Pazukhin2, N.A.Kucheva3, T.I. Stepanova3, N.N. Kochetova2, N.B.Gibshman2, E.O. Amon3, V.A. Konovalova1, and G.F.Zainakaeva2

1Paleontological Institute, RussiaenAcademy of Sciences,

Profsoyuznaya 123, Moscow, 117868 Russia.2Russian University ofOil and Gas, Dept. Geology, Leninsky

Prospect 65, Moscow, Russia.3Institute ofGeology and Geochemistry, Pochtovyj Lane 7,

Ekaterinburg, 620151, Russia.4Institute of Geology, Ufa Research Center, Russian Academy

of Sciences, ul. Karla Marksa 16/2, Ufa, 450000 Russia.

The Serpukho vian Stage is presently the focus ofstratigraphic research because the definition of its lowerbo undary is o ne o f th e high prio rity tasks of t heCarboniferous Subcommission.A newthree-yearprojectof the Russian Academy of Sciences aims to achieve abetter underst anding of major correlation levels withinthe Serpukhovian (particularly its lower boundary).

The type Serpukhovian section at Zaborie in theMoscowBasin is composed of shallow-water carbonatesand clay and is incomplete (Gibshman, 2001). ThelowerSerpukhovian boundary in Zaborie is po orly exposed,while the uppermost Serpukhovian is completely absent.The Verkhnyaya Kardailovkasection on the eastern slopeof the South Urals isa very strong potential candidatefora GSSP for the base of the Serpukhovian Stage (Nikolaevaet al., 2001, 2002). Here, deep-shelf micritic limestones


with cephalopods and thin-shelled ostracodes contain allthe orthostratigraphic groups in a continuous successionof zones span ning the Viséan-Serpukho vian boundaryinterval.

In this section the Upper Viséan and Serpukhovianconsist of relatively deep-water condensed carbonates richin ammonoids, conodonts, and ostracodes, but containingonly rare foraminifers. The section has been studied ingreat detail, all beds are described, and zones based onfo ur biostr at igr ap hically critical fossil groups areestablished.

The section has been known fordecades, but only lastyear our research team uncovered the Viséan-Serpukhovianboundary intervalin a seriesof four overlapping trenches(Figs. 1, 2 ). We identified a com plete successio n ofconodont, foraminiferal, ammonoid, and ostracode zonesin a single outcrop and were able to correlate them.Altogether, the section exposes acomplete sequence fromthe Lower Viséan to the Moscovian. The Lower Viséanandlowermost Tulian limestones are mainly bioclasticandare underla in by Up per To urn aisian –Lower Viséanvolcanic-clastic rocks. Then, following a 6-m unexposedin terval, a co ndensed Up per Viséan-Serpukho viancarbonate sequence is exposed.

It is possible to identify threeregional stages (so-calledhorizons) in the Serpukhovian in the Kardailovka section(Kosogorskian, Khudolazovian, and Yuldybaevian).

Th e Venevian Horizon includes micro bioclast icstructures wit h ammonoids and conodonts, thin-shelledostracodes, and sm all euryfacial fo ram inifers. T hebeginning of the Serpukhovian was mark ed by deeper-water sedimen tation (wackestones and microbioclasticpackstones). Beds occasionally contain large bioclaststransported from zones of high energy. Fossils include

ammonoids, conodonts, and thin-shelled ostracodes, butfewbenthic forms. In Khudolazovian timeshallower-watersedimentation resumed. Fossils include algae, foraminifers,bryozoans, and brachiopods. At this time small crinoid-bry ozoan bio herms (beds 22 -24) were form ed. Thesedimentary setting indicates a relatively high energyenvironment at the carbonateshelf margin. By the end ofKh udolazo vian time t he basin deepened and sho wsindications of lowenergy. Once again micritic limestonewith abundant thin-shelled ostracodes, ammonoids, andconodonts was deposited.

At the end of the Late Serp ukhov ian t he basinshallowed, while en ergy increased. The Yuldubaeviancontains beds of bryozoan-crinoidgrainstones/packstoneswith algae, foraminifers, and brachiopods. Microfaciesindicate a sedimentary setting at themargin ofa bryozoan-algal bioherm on the upperpart of the carbonate platform.

The Upper Viséan–Serpukhovian part of thesectioncontains the following zones:

Foraminifers

Beds with Endostaffella asymmetrica.

(1) Eolasiodiscusdonbassicus Zone.(2) Eostaffellina paraprotvae Zone.(3) Monotaxinoidestransitorius Zone.

Ostracodes

(1) Beds with Cribroconcha magna(2) Beds with Pseudoparaparchitescelsus(3) Beds with Aurigerites solitarius

Ammonoids

(1) Beyrichoceras–Goniatites Genozone. Goniatitessphaeroides and Goniatites crenifalcatus are found intrench 2 at two levels about 20 cm apart. We suggest

Jul y 2005 29

correlation with the Upper Asbian-basal Brigantian ofwestern Europe.

(2) Hypergoniatites–Ferganoceras Genozone. Foundat three levels1 m above sample with Goniatites in trench3. These are Neogoniatitesmilleri,ProlecaniteslibrovitchiRuzhencev, and ?Lyrogoniatites sp. T he base of thisgenozone approximates a level within the uppermostBrigantian.

(3) Uralop ro no rites– Craveno cera s Geno zo ne.Ammonoids of this genozonefirst occurabout 1 m abovetheprevious ammonoid level.This genozone includes over25 m of section and spans the entire Kosogorskian andlo wer Kh udo lazovian. Th e most t ypical sp ecies isDombarites tectus. This assemblage indicates the upperpart of the Uralopronorites-Cravenoceras Genozone andcorresponds to the Pendleian.

(4) Lower Fayettevillea–Delepinoceras Genozone.

Ammonoids of this genozone are found at two levels inbed 25 (interval of 6 m), the lower being 1 m above thehighest ammonoids of the Uralopronorites-CravenocerasGeno zo ne. Th is gen ozo n e in cludes t he upp erKhudolazovian. The distance between assemblages 3 and4 is about 1 m. This assemblage corresponds to the lowerpart of theArnsbergian.

(5) Upper Fayettevillea–Delepinoceras Genozone.Ammonoids of this genozone occur about 2 m aboveassemblage 4. This assemblage includes the Yuldybaevianand correlates with the upper E2 Zone in Europe and theEumorphoceras girtyi, Cravenoceratoides nititoides, andDelepinoceras thallasiode Zones in America.

Conodonts

Over 90 samples were taken (average weight 2 kg); 85contained conodonts. The collection contains over6200specimens, mostly Gnathodus and Lochriea. The zonal


coverage rangesfrom the upper Gnathodus texanus Zoneto the lower Declinognathodusnoduliferus Zone.

1. Gnathodustexanus Zone (2 m)2. Gnathodusaustini Zone (30 cm)3. Gnathodus bilineatusbilineatus Zone (6 m)4. Lochriea mononodosa Zone(1.5 m)5. Lochriea nodosa Zone (63 cm)6. Lochriea ziegleri Zone(23.5 m). Thiszone

includesthe Kosogorskian and Khudolazovian.7. Gnathodusbilineatusbollandensis (14 m).This

zone includes the upper part of the Khudolazovian andtheYuldybaevian.

8. Declinognathodusnoduliferus Zone (20 cm).Thezonal subdivision of the boundary interval is based onthe evolutionary lineageof the genus Lochriea (from L.nodosa to L. ziegleri).

Conclusions

(1) Based on this study the correlation of the regionalstages (horizo ns) previously established in the RussianPlatform and the Urals is updated.

(2) The Venev ian in the South Urals is dated by theconodonts Lochriea nodosa and L. mononodosa andam mo noids o f t he Hypergo niatites–Ferg an ocerasGenozone. Theseammonoids are similar to those from theViséan C in Germany and t he lower P2 in the UK(uppermost Brigantian).Correlation with theornatissimumZone in Texas is also possible.

(3) The base of the Serpukhovian equates to the baseof the Kosogor skian and corresponds to t he base of theLochriea ziegleri Zone. Thislevel in thetypeSerpukhoviansection in Zaborie is close to the appearan ce of theforaminifers “Millerella ” tortula and Neoarchaediscuspostrugosus, which may beuseful for correlation with theChesterian.

(4) The base of the Uralopronorites–CravenocerasGenozoneat Verkhnyaya Kardailovka is about 75 cm abovethe first app earance of Lochriea ziegleri. However, it isevidently not the oldest Uralopronorites–Cravenocerasamm on o id faun a, because th e m ix ed assem blagecontaining uppermost Viséan and lowermost Serpukhovianammonoidtaxa reportedby Ruzhencev andBogoslovskayafrom Dombar and Kzyl-Shin has not yet been found atVerkhnyayaKardailovka.

(5) Theintervalof beds 22-24 (all of theKosogorskianan d t h e lo wer p ar t of t he Kh udo lazo v ian )(=Uralopronorites–Cravenoceras Genozone) correlatestothe Å

1Zone and probably the Tumulites varians Zone in

America. Species Cravenoceras of similar age are foundin the Tarusian and Steshevian in the MoscowBasin.

(6) The base of the Khudolazovian coincides with theappearance of the foraminifer Eostaffellina paraprotvae.It is reliably correlated to the upper Steshevian in theMoscow Basin. T he upper Khudolazovian containsamm onoids of th e lower part of th e Fayettevillea–Delepin ocera s Gen ozo ne (= E. pa ucin od um – E.rotuliforme in America and the Lower Arnsbergian inEurope).

(7 ) Th e Yuldubaevian is dated by amm on oidscharacteristic of the upper part of the Fayettevillea–Delepinoceras Genozone. Eumorphocerastransuralense,which is similar to Eumorphoceras speciesfrom the E2 inEurope, suggests correlation with the UpperArnsbergianan d th e Eumo rp hocera s g irtyi, Craveno ceratoid esnititoides, and Delepinocerasthallasiode ZonesinAmerica.The foraminifer Monotaxinoides transitorius suggestscorrelation with the Zapaltyubinian of the Donets Basinandthe upper part of the UpperArnsbergian Cf 7 ZoneintheDinant Basin.

TheSerpukhovian Stageis a distinct biochronologicalunit characterized by specific stages in the evolution ofseveral orthostratigraphic groups, including ammonoids,conodonts, and foraminifers.Although the type section ofthe Serpukhovian is in shallow-water facies, it can nowbereliably correlated with deep-water sequencesin theSouthUrals. The zonal subdivision of the Serpukhovian is wellunderstoodboth in its typearea andin the Urals. The lowerboundary of the Serpukhovian in the Uralsis based on thefirst appearance of Lochriea ziegleri, which in this case isconstrainedby both ammonoids and foraminifers.

Acknowledgments

The study is supported by the Russian Foundation forBasic Research,project no. 04-05-65022.

References

Gibshman, N.B . 2001. Foramini feral biostratigraphy of theSerpukhovian Stage Stratotype (Zaborie quarry, Moscow Ba-sin). Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy, 19:31-34.

Nikolaeva, S.V., E. I. Kulagina, V.N. Pazukhin, and N.N.Kochetova. 2001. Integrated Serpukhovian biostratigraphy inthe South Urals. Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy,19:38-42.

Nikolaeva S.V., N.B. Gibshman, E.I. Kulagina, I.S. Barskov, andV.N. Pazukhin. 2002. Correlation of the Viséan-Serpukhovianboundary in its type region(Moscow Basin) andthe South Uralsand a proposal of boundary markers (ammonoids, foramini-fers, conodonts). Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy,20:16-21.

Jul y 2005 31

Correlation of Viséan plant-bearingdeposits of the Russian PlatformYulia V. Mosseichik

Geological Institute, RussianAcademy of Sciences, Pyzhevskyper., 7, 119017, Moscow, Russia.

Research on the development of Mississippian florasin the Euramerican palaeofloristic realm recognizes twomain phases with theirboundary in the middleof theViséanStage.Several authors (e.g., Novik, 1974; Lemoigne,1988)have noted that during thisinterval in the tropical belt theimpoverished flora of Devonian–Early Viséan timechangedinto the more diverseflora of Namurian-Stephanian aspect.

An alysis o f th e flor ist ic sequences o f Euro pe(Mosseichik, in press) shows that LateTournaisian–EarlyViséan time is marked by the predominance of the small-cushion lepidophytes Archaeosigillaria, Lepidodendropsis,Sublepidodendron, Lepidodendron spetsbergense, and L.losseni, etc., primitive sphenopsids (e.g.,Archaeocalamitesradiatus), andplants with fern-likefoliageof theAdiantites,Triphyllopteris, and Fryopsis type.

Beginning in the Late Viséan and ranging into theSerpukhovian (Namurian A), lepidophytes with large leafcush ion s (e .g., Lepid o den d ro n ob o vatu m , L.volkmannianum, Sublepidophloios, Sigillaria, etc.) becamedom in an t . Simultan eously, t h e f irst sp h en o p sidMesocalamites appeared, and the early gymnospermsbecamewidespread. Thefrondsof progymnosperms, ferns,and pteridosperms became more diverse, and such formsas Lyginopteris,Neuropteris, and Pecopteris appeared.

This trend in the development ofvarious plant groupsandthe correspondingdominance-pattern changes (thePan-Euramerican floristic change)can beobserved in practicallyallEuropean Mississippian floras. It is probably connectedwith theirgrowth in similar landscapeconditions on coastallowlands and plains. Therefore it could have led to similarevolutionary changes, even in geographically isolatedfloras.

During the middle Viséan, the epicontinental seas onthe Russian Platform were reduced, and the strait betweenthis land mass and the west–middle European islands wasclosed. The resulting formation of newsites andmigrationpaths stimulated widespread plant dispersal, particularlyamong the early gymnosperms.

Thestages of floraldevelopment mentioned abovearereflected in the Triphyllopteris (Late Tournaisian–EarlyViséan) and Lyginopteris bermudensiformis–Neuropterisan teced en s megafloral Zon es (Late Viséan– EarlySerpukhovian) which were established by Wagner (1984)in the continental plant-bearing deposits of Europe andNorth America. Theboundary between them correspondsto the III

a/III

bgoniatitezonal boundary.

The recognition of these stagesin Euramerican floraldevelopment allows correlation of the Viséan plant-bearingdeposits of the Russian Platform coal basins as well asrecognition of analogs of Wagner’s (1984) megafloralzones.

MoscowCoal Basin

Two regional megafloral zones can be recognized intheViséan of the Moscowcoal basin: the Gryzlovia meyenii

Fig. 1. Correlation of Viséan megafloral zones of the Moscow coal basin with conodont and foraminiferzones (Alekseev et al., 2004).

Stag

e Suites Megafloral zones Foraminifera zones(Alekseev et al., 2004)

Conodont zones(Alekseev et al., 2004)

Lochriea ziegleriVenevsskaya Eostaffella tenebrosa–Endothyranopsis sphaerica Lochriea nodosa

Mikhailovskaya Eostaffella ikensis

Aleksinskaya Eostaffella proikensis–Archaediscus gigas

Sublepidodendronshvetzovii

Endothyranopsis compressa

Gnathodus bilineatus

Tulskaya Endothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressaEndothyranopsis compressa

BobrikovskayaGryzlovia meyenii

Vis

éan

Radaevskaya

No fauna


Zone and the Sublepidodendron shvetzovii Zone (Figs. 1,2;Mosseichik, 2004).

The Gryzlovia meyenii Zone can be correlated withthe upper (Viséan) part of the Triphyllopteris Zone, andthe Sublepidodendron shvetzovii Zone can be correlatedwith the basal (Viséan) part of Wagner’s Lyginopterisbermudensiformis–Neuropteris antecedens Zone. Thegrounds for these correlations are given in Mosseichik(2003).

Pripiat’Depression

In the Pripiat’ depression the Pan-Euramerian floristicchangecan be observed in thechange betweenAssemblages2 and 3, established by Radzivill (1989) at the boundarybetween the Kaolinovaya andUglenosnayaSeries (Fig.2).

It isconfirmed by the predominancein the UglenosnayaSeries of diverse Lyginopteris and Neuropteris, includingL. berm uden sifo rmis an d N. an teceden s, as well asMeso calamites and t he large-cush io n lep idop hy teLep id od en dro n ob ovatum . T hese plan ts replaceLepidodendron spetsbergense, Adiantites antiquus, A.machanekii, Rhodea moravica, and Meyenia prypiatiiwhich characterize the underlyingKaolinovayaSeries.

The basal part of the Assemblage 2 range intervalcorresponds to the Zhelezistaya Series, and should not becorrelatedwith the Viséan becauseof the predominance ofLepidodendropsis remains which are characteristic of theTournaisian part of the Triphyllopteris Zone.

The absence in Assemblage 3 of several elementsthatarecharacteristic of theNamurian andappear in the upperpart of the Lyginopteris bermudensiformis–Neuropteris

antecedens Zone of Wagner isclear evidence of the Viséanage ofAssemblage 3.

Lvov-Volyn’Coal Basin

A zonalsubdivision based upon plant remains has notbeen established for the Lvov-Volyn’ coal basin. Novik(1974), however, reported the floristic content of theVladimirskaya, Ustiluzhskaya, Poritskaya, Ivanichskayaandother suites.

In the Vladimirskaya and Ustiluzhskaya Suites thelarge-cushion lepidophyte Lepidodendron obovatum occursand in the Vladimirskaya Suite Mesocalamites roemeriappears. In the PoritskayaSuite, an abundance ofvariousLyg ino p teris ( including L. b erm u d en sifo rm is) ,Mesocalamites, and Diplothmema occurs,asdoesthe Pan-Euramerian zonal species Neuropteris antecedens.All ofthese reflect the gradual occupation of territory in thedepression by western European plants, and all three suitescan becorrelated with the Lyginopteris bermudensiformis–Neuropteris antecedens Zone (Fig.2).

Th e flor istic ch aracterist ics of t he o verlyingIvanichskayaSuiteare close to thoseof the PoritskayaSuite.However, Cordaites principalis, a form which in southernEurope is known only from Namurian A upward, appearsin the Ivanichskay a Suite. T his is evidence for theSerpukhovian ageof the IvanichskayaSuite.

Donets Coal Basin

Mississippian plant remains are known from the Ñ12

(Â) Suite in the Donetz coalbasin. Novik (1974) recognizedtwo plant assemblages in thisinterval, 1 Aand I B, whichwere later transformed by Fissunenko (1991) into the

Fig. 2. Correlation among Viséan plant-bearing units of the Russian Platform coal basins and the megafloralzonalscale of Wagner (1984).

Europe and NorthAmerica

(Wagner, 1984)

Pripiat’ depression(Radzivill, 1989)

Lvov-Volyn’coal basin

(Novik, 1974)

Donets coal basin (Novik, 1974;Fissunenko, 1989)

Moscow coal basin(South flank)

Stage

Goniatitezones

Megafloralzones

Series Floristicassemblages

Suites Suite Megafloral zones Suites Megafloral zones

Serpu-khovian E1

No pl ant remains Ivanichskaya

Fryopsis polymorpha –Dipl othmemapatentissi mum (zone1B)

No plant remains

Poritskaya

С12(В)

Presigillariajongmansii–Lygi nopteris fragil is(zone 1А)

UstiluzhskayaVladimirskaya

Venevskaya

Mikhailovskaya

Aleksinskaya

Lygi

nopt

eris

berm

uden

sifo

rmis

–N

euro

pter

isan

tece

dens

Ugl

enos

naya

para

liche

skay

a

Ass

embl

age

3

strata withNeuropterisantecedens

strata withLyginopterisbermudensiformis

Sublepidodendronshvetzovii

Tulskaya

BobrikovskayaGryzlovia meyeni i

Viséan

III

III

III

II

Kaolini-tovaya

strata withRhodea moravicastrata withMeyenia prypiatii

Tournai-sian

II-

Trip

hyllo

pter

is

Zhelezis-taya A

ssem

blag

e2

strata withLepidodendropsis

No plantremains

No plant remains

No plant remains

Jul y 2005 33

Presigillaria jongmansii–Lyginopteris fragilisand Fryopsispolymorpha–Diplothmema patentissimum megaf loralZones, respectively.

The Presigillaria jongmansii–Lyginopteris fragilisZone contains abundant remains of the large-cushionlepidophytes Lepidodendron obovatum , L.veltheimii, andL. volkmannianum , diverse Mesocalamites, and numerousspecies of Lyginopteris(among them, L.bermudensiformis)and Neuropteris. This is evidence for the existence of arich and diverse flora, which apparently was formed bymigrants from western Europe. On the basis of plantassemblage similarity, t he Presigilla ria jo ngmansii–Lyginopteris fragilis Zone can be corr elated with thePoritskaya Suite of theLvov-Volyn’coal basin (Fig. 2).

Th e assemblage o f the Fryo psis po lym orph a–Diplothmema patentissimum Zone is similar to that of theprevious zone, but includes species such as Alloiopterisquercifolia, Lyginopteris stangeri, and L. larischii whichare characterist ic of the Early Nam urian. It allowscorrelation with the upper part of Wagner’s Lyginopterisbermudensiformis–Neuropteris antecedens Zone, orevenwith the following Lyg inop teris bermud ensiform is–Lyginopteris stangeri Zone, which together correspond tothe basal part of theSerpukhovian (Fig. 2).

References

FissunenkoO.P. 1991. Zonal phytostratigraphic scale ofthe Lowerand Middle Carboniferous of Donets coal basin. GeologicalZhurnal, 3:55-64. (In Russian)

Lemoigne, Y. 1988. La flore fossi le aux cours des tempsgeologiques. Pt. 3. Geobios, 1(num. spec. 10):161-384.

Mosseichik, Yu.V. 2003. Correlationofthe Moscow BasinLowerCarboniferous with the Carboniferous megafloral zones of theEuramerican palaeophloristic region. Newsletter on Carbonif-erous Stratigraphy, 21:29-32.

Mosseichik Yu.V. 2004. Correlation of Viséan deposits of Mos-cow coal basin and the other coal basins of the Russian Plat-form based on macroflora, p. 162-165. In M.V. Durante, I.A.Ignatiev (eds.), Plant World in Space and Time. GEOS, Mos-cow. (In Russian)

Mosseichik Yu.V. In press. Viséan flora of the Moscow coal ba-sin in the picture of phytogeography of this age. (In Russian)

Novik, E.O. 1974. Regularities of the development of Carbonif-erous flora of the southofEuropean part ofthe USSR. NaukovaDumka, Kiev. 140 p. (In Russian)

Radzivill A.A. 1989. Early Carboniferous flora of the Priapiat’depression and its stratigraphical significance. Kiev. 17 p. (InRussian)

Wagner, R.H. 1984. Megafloral zones of the Carboniferous, p.109-134. In Neuvième Congr. Int. S trat igraph. Geol.Carbonifère. Washington and Champaign-Urbana. May 17-26,1979. Compte Rendu. Vol. 2. Biostratigraphy.

Geographyand succession ofEuropean floras during the ViséanYulia V. Mosseichik

Geological Institute, RussianAcademy of Sciences, Pyzhevskyper., 7, 119017, Moscow, Russia.

Thepeculiarities of the land paleophytogeography ofViséan tim e were f irst det erm in ed by th e level ofevolutionary development of plants. The Mississippianforms had much lesseffective adaptations for reproductionand dispersal than higher gymnosperms and angiosperms,which conditioned the phytochorion [provincial] structurein the Mesozoic–Cenozoic.The reproduction process ofthe ear lier, mainly spore-bearin g forms was stronglyconnected to water supply.Accordingly, they wererestrictedin t heir distribution t o wet lowland sites. The earlygymnosperms (calamopiteans, lagenostoms, etc.) wereadapted to drier conditions due to the presence of a seed.They appeared only at theend of the Devonian, apparentlyevolved from lowland communities, and had begun tocolonize the slopes of river valleys and accumulativedepressions. Therefore, solid plant cover comparable withthat of recent time probably did not exist.

Recent plant dispersal factors such as zoochory wererareor of lit t le importance.The placors, mountain ridges,and marine basins were apparently insuperable obstaclesfor plant migration and dispersal. Probably the plantmigration paths extended along seashores and throughconnected intermountain depressions.

Thelowmorphologicdiversity of Mississippian plantsisreflectedin their rather lowtaxonomic differentiation atthe supra-generic level. Therefore, distinctions in genericand species composition of the localfloras shouldbe usedfor phytochorion characterization.

Paleofloristicrealms and regions of theMississippiancan berecognized on thebasisof mutual floral developmentwithin the limits of large-scale geographically isolatedterritories of continental and subcontinental scale.Thesephyto choria should be characterized by high sp eciesendemism as well as by the presence of endemic generaand higher taxa, but supra-generic endemism may not beobserved.

In this report the boundariesof paleofloristicprovincesanddistricts are not only interpolated between fossil plantlo calities, but are also subject t o a m ore co mplexrecon structio n th at co nsiders th e cor resp o ndin gpaleogeographical background.

The modified Zuerich-Montpellier schooltechnique forcomparison of taxonomic lists from various localitieswasapplied.


Evolutionary Trends and General Scheme ofPaleofloristicZonation

I t is ex pedient to con struct t wo schem es o fpaleofloristic zonation for the territory of Europe in theViséan : for th e Ear ly Viséan , t he up per p ar t o fTriphyllopteris Zone of Wagner (1984); and for the LateViséan, t he lo wer part o f Wagner’s Lyg ino pterisb ermu densiformis– Neurop teris an tecedens Zo ne.Significant floristic changes took place at the boundarybetween these two zones (Novik, 1974; Lemoigne, 1988)which were connected with therestructuring of thegeneralpaleogeography of theEuramerican paleocontinent as wellas with large-scale evolutionary innovations.

Lep idop hy tes with small leaf cush io ns (e.g. ,Lepidodendropsis, Sublepidodendron, Lepidodendronspetsbergense, etc.)were replaced in themiddle Viséan byforms with larger leaf cushions, such as Lepidodendronveltheimii, L. obovatum, and Sublepidophloios. The rapiddevelopment of early gymnosperms took place, and thefirst cordaiteans appeared.Thefronds ofprogymnosperms,ferns, and gymnospermsgreatly diversified. Instead of thesimpleleaves of the Triphyllopteris type, the variousgeneraLyginopteris, Neuropteris, Pecopteris, etc., developed.Thefirst mesocalamites also appeared at this boundary.

In the Viséan, the territo ry of the Euramericanpaleocontinent and adjacent islands apparently belongedto the tropical Euramerican paleofloristic realm which ischaracterized by high endemism at the species andhighertaxonomic levels.

Two paleofloristic areas are recognized within theEuramerican realm: North-American andEuropean, whichsincethe Devonian had been separatedby the Caledonianmountain ranges. These areas have almost no commonspecies, as first noted by Novik and Fissunenko (1979).

Early Viséan

Dur ing t he Early Viséan, differences in f loristiccompo sition are manifest between t he northern andsouthern regions of Europe, as first noted by Radczenko(1957).

Rather rich fossil plant localities of this ageare knownfrom southern Europe, where during the Early Viséan alarge island or archipelago was situated (Fig. 1). Severalcommon elements allow theselocal floras to be combinedinto the South-European paleofloristic province.Amongthese, lepidophytes such as Lepidodendron lossenii andplants with fern-like foliage of the Sphenopteridiumdissectum , Triphyllopteris, and Fryopsis type dominated.

There are few known localities with Early Viséan florasin northern Europe (Fig. 1).These are scattered along theperip hery of th e European part of the Euramerican

paleocontinent in several accumulative lowlands. Thesefossil floras includenumerous local endemic species. Theirdifferences probably resulted from geographical isolation,caused by barriers such as the Baltic shield placors andCaledonian mountain structure.

A distinct paleofloristic district probably existed in theterritory of every such lowland.At thesametime, they sharesev eral common elements in cludin g Lep idod endronspetsbergense and various Adiantites. However, there arenone of the characteristic South-European forms citedabove.All of these factors allow the floras of the North-European land masses to be combined into the North-European palaeofloristic province.

Late Viséan

The South-European province still existed during theLate Viséan (Fig. 1). At that time the flora of Scotlandacquired a number of common elements from the South-European province, which apparently became connectedwith the beginningof the closing of themarine basin thatdividedthe South- and North-European land masses. Them ain par tic ipan ts in t his flo r ist ic chan ge werepteridosperms such as Adiantites, Sphenopteridium (S.dissectum, S. pachyrrachis, S.crassum, S. speciosum), andRhodea (R. machaneckii, R. gigantea), etc.Thepresenceof these common species allows Scotland to be includedin the South-European province.

At thesame time, in comparison with theEarly Viséan,ev ery lo cal flora of th e South-European pro vin ceexperienced an increase in endemism at the generic andspecies levels.

On the newly exposed territory of the Lvov-Volyn’andDonets coal basins (Fig. 1) a rich flora developed, whichcharacterizes theDonets paleofloristicprovince.Apparentlyth e pt er ido sp erms Lyg in op teris, Neu ro pteris, an dDiplothmema, and, possibly, lycopsidsof theLepidophloiostype, migrated from the South-European province andradiated here.

The Donets province also embraces the flora of thePripiat’ depression, which was much impoverished incomparison with the floras of Donets and Lvov-Volyn’coalbasins. The Donets province for Viséan–Namurian timewasfirst established by G.P. Radczenko (Einor et al.,1964).

Late Viséan floras are known from northern WalesandGloucestershire which include endemic lepidophytes witha small leaf-cushion including Eskd alia va riabile , E.fim brio phylla, Lepidodendro n ( ?) perfora tum, an dLepidodendropsis (?) jonesi, andplants with monotonousfronds of the Rhacopteris type. These floras drasticallydiffer from other coeval floras of Europe and even fromth e adjacent flo ra of Scotland. They conf irm t he

Jul y 2005 35

paleogeographic reconstructions of an island here. Theterritory of this island probably belonged to a separatepaleofloristic district.

Th e territ ory of t he North -European provin cediminishedowing to theenlargement of the South-Europeanprovince and the formation of the Donets province. It isimpossible to trace its boundaries precisely because theLate Viséan floras in this region are known only from theMoscow coal basin. Among the widespread forms thereare represen tatives of Adian tites, S phenopteris, andArchaeocalamites radiatus. It should be notedthat theflorasof theMoscowcoalbasin didnot experiencethewidespreadradiation of plants with fern-like foliage of the Adiantites,Lyginopteris, Neuropteris, and Diplothmema type thatcharacterizes theSouth-European andDonetsprovinces.

Fig. 1. Schemes of phytogeographical zonation of Europein the Viséan [Palaeogeographical background from:“Palaeogeography Atlas…” (2000) and “Atlas…” (1961)]Local floras: 1 – South flank of Moscowcoal basin; 2 – Northwest flank of Moscowcoal basin; 3 – Scotland; 4 –East Greenland; 5 – Spitzbergen; 6 – Kiselovsky coal basin; 7 – Pripiat’depression; 8 – Germany (Doberlug-Kirchhain, Delitzsch); 9 – Saxony (Kossberg bei Plauen); 10 – Lower Silesia and Moravia; 11 – Middle Vosges; 12– Northwest Spain; 13 – CarnicAlps; 14 –Lvov-Volyn’coal basin; 15 – Donets coal basin; 16 – North Wales; 17 –Gloucestershire

Concluding Remarks

Viséan phytogeography is characterized by severalmarkedfeatures.Among these are:

1) Aut ocht ono us dev elo pm en t of sm all, localphytochoria (paleofloristicdistricts), accompaniedby anincrease in endemism at the generic and species levels;

2) Origination of newlocal phytochoriadue to plantmigration processes;

3) Formation of larger phytogeographical units ofsubregional scale (provinces) as a result of the expansionofearly gymnosperms (calamopiteans, lyginopterids,etc.).

Th e ch anges in p aleogeo graphical pat terns areparticularly connected with marine transgressions andregressions. The closing of straits and the formation of“land bridges” were of great importance.


Theanalysis ofViséan Euramerican realm florasbringsmore precision to ourconcept of the early stages of globalflorogenetic process. Until nowit had been characterizedasa“differentiation,” that is, the formation ofphytochoriaof lower andlower rank within thelimitsof the plant realmsthat existed at that time. Now it becomes clearer thatregardlessof this concept, the process of formation of thePaleozoic phytochoria at their early stages apparentlyproceeded “from below,” that is,originatingfrom the smallfloristic unities that had developed autochthonously invariousparts of thelarge geographically isolatedterritoriesof continental and regional scale.

The Mississippian radiation of gymnosperms led togradual formation of the larger phytochoria (provinces)owing to the migration and ecogeneticexpansion of theseplants.

References

Atlas of lithology-palaeogeographical maps of the Russian plat-formand its geosyncline framing. Scale 1:5000000. Pt. 1. 1961.(In Russian)

Einor, O.L., N.P. Vassiliuk, M.V. Vdovenko, K.G. Vojnovsky-Kriger, N.N. Dunaeva, and G.P. Radczenko. 1964. Biogeogra-phy of the territory of Soviet Union in the Carboniferous Pe-riod, p. 195-210. In Problems of Regularities and Forms ofDevelopment ofthe Organic World. Nedra, Moscow. (In Rus-sian)

Lemoigne, Y. 1988. La flore foss ile aux cours des tempsgéologiques. Pt. 3. Geobios, 1:161-384.

Novik, E.O. 1974. Regularities of the development of Carbonif-erous flora of the southofEuropean part ofthe USSR. NaukovaDumka, Kiev. 140 p. (In Russian)

Novik, E.O., and O.P. Fissunenko. 1979. To the problem ofCar-boniferous phytogeography. Kiev, 54 p. (in Russian)

Kaz’min, V.G., and L.M. Natapov(eds.). 2000. Palaeogeographyatlas. Moscow. (In Russian)

Radczenko, G.P. 1957. To the problem offirst appearance ofphy-togeographical and climatic zonality in northern Eurasia, p.42-63. In Problems ofPalaebiogeography and Biostratigraphy.Gosgeoltekhizdat, Moscow. (In Russian)

Vakhrameev, V.A., I.A. Dobruskina, E.D. Zaklinskaja, and S.V.Meyen. 1970. Palaeozoic and Mesozoic floras of Eurasia andphytogeography ofthis time. Nauka, Moscow, 424 p. (in Rus-sian)

Wagner, R.H. 1984. Megafloral zones of the Carboniferous, p.109-134. In P.K. Sutherland and W.L. Manger (eds.). NeuvièmeCongrès International de Stratigraphie et de Géologie duCarbonifère. Washington and Champaign-Urbana. May 17-26,1979. Compte Rendu. Vol. 2. Biostratigraphy.

Cyclothem[sequence-stratigraphic]correlation and biostratigraphyacross the Moscovian-Kasimovianand Kasimovian-Gzhelian Stageboundaries (Upper PennsylvanianSeries) in North America and EurasiaPhilip H. Heckel1, Aleksandr S. Alekseev2, James E.Barrick3, Darwin R. Boardman4, Valery V. Chernykh5,Vladimir I. Davydov6, Holger C. Forke7, Natalya V.Goreva8, Friedrich W. Luppold9, Carlos A. Mendez10,Tamara I. Nemyrovska11, Katsumi Ueno12, Elisa Villa10, andDavid M. Work13,

1University ofIowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA;

2Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia;

3Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA;

4Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, USA;

5Russian Academy ofSciences, Ekaterinburg, Russia;

6Boise State University, Boise, Idaho, USA;

7Berlin, Germany;

8Russian Academy ofSciences, Moscow, Russia;

9Landesamt fuer Bodenforschung, Hannover, Germany;

10University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain;

11Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, Kiev, Ukraine;

12Fukuoka University, Fukuoka, Japan;

13Maine State Museum, Augusta, Maine, USA.

Introduction

In the revi sed guidel ines for es t abl i shing globalchronostratigraphic boundariesby the International Commissionon Stratigraphy (ICS), Remane et al. (1996) emphasized boththe importance of selecting a marker event ofoptimal correlationpotential for establishing the Global Boundary StratotypeSectionand Point (GSSP) that defines a stage boundary, and also theprinciple that correlation ofthe strata encompassing the boundarymust precede definition of the boundary. Many authors havenoted that global correlation of Pennsylvanian rocks i s difficultbecause of development of biotically distinct regions, not onlythe climatically distinct Gondwana andAngara poleward realms,but also the fragmentat ion of the pantropical realm byAppalachian-Variscan orogenic closing of tropical waterways.This led to establishment of three different regional systems ofchronos trati graphic names: in western Europe where thePennsylvanian is largely to totally terrestrial, on the RussianPlatform where it is entirely marine carbonate and shale, and inMidcontinent NorthAmerica where it is an alternation ofmarinecarbonate and shale with terrestrial clastics and coal, the stratathat compose the stratigraphic sequences termed cyclothems,which are recognized as products of glacial eustasy (Heckel,1994).

The Middle to Late Pennsylvanian Midcontinent successionof widespread cyclothems (which are typically separated from

Jul y 2005 37

one another by exposure surfaces) has been correlated acrosslarge parts of the central, east ern, and southern United Statesand now into part of the western Unit ed States, using thedistinctive succession of conodont faunas within the successivecyclothems in what Ri tter et al. (2002) termed “ sequencebiostratigraphy.” Recognizing global control of glaci al eustasy,modern Russ ian stratigraphers have now identified the exposuresurfaces separating cyclothems in the Moscow region and havebegun to correlate the cyclothems across the Russian Platform(Kabanov, 2003; Kabanov and Baranova, in press). Cyclothemscan also be recognized in the Donets Basin of Ukraine andadjacent Russia, where marine carbonate and shal e alternate withterrestrial clasticsand coal. Thestage names originating inRussiaare now used for the global stages because their fusuline faunasare s imilar enough to be readily recognized across much ofEurasia at least at the generic l evel, whereas the North Americanfusuline faunasare mostly provincial. Recent progress in workingout the conodont successions in North America, and eastern andsouthern Europe has shown that whil e a fai r amount ofprovinciali sm exists, there are l evels where distinctive taxa arefound across most of the region. Therefore it is appropriate toestablish a correlation ofthe glacial-eustatic cyclothems amongthe regions where they are recognized, specifically midcontinentNorthAmerica, the Russian Plat form, and the Donets Basin, andextend it t o other regions where the fossil succession has beendescribed even though cyclothems are either not yet recognizedor not well-defined. This includes the western slope of thesouthern Urals where the succession is marine carbonate andshale, and the Cantabrian area of northern Spain and the CarnicAlps of the Austrian-Italian-Slovenian border area, which arethe only parts ofwestern Europe that have marine faci es into thelate Middle to Late Pennsylvanian, and where the succession ismainlymarine carbonate and shalewith some coarser siliciclasticsin the lat ter area.

To establi sh the most reasonable correlation, the followingassumptions are made: [1] Because they are glacial-eustatic, thescale of each cyclothem, that is, its relative lateral extent andwater depth attained, should be roughly the same globallycompared to that of the adjacent cyclothems. This assumes thatlocal differential tectonism act s too slowly (1-2 m. y.) to maskthe pattern in the more frequent fluctuations in sea level (100-400 k.y.) t hat resulted in the particular succession of major,intermediate, and minor cyclothems, which is well documentedin Midcont inent North America and correlated into Texas(Boardman and Heckel, 1989) and the Illinois and AppalachianBasins (Heckel, 1994, 2002). This should be true for the cratonicMidcontinent and Russian Platform, but may be less so in theDonets Basin where compressional forces may have affected thestrata during deposition in the aulacogen. [2] Major cyclothemswith the greatest lateral extent of marine facies and the deepest-water facies on the shelves should be the most readily correlated,both because they contain deeper-water as well as shallow-waterfossils , and because they would have allowed the great estinterchange of conspeci fic organisms across the inundatedshelves of the pantropical realm. [3] Conodonts and ammonoidsare the primary fossils used to correlate the cyclothems becausethey were l ikely largely pelagi c, whereas the benthic and moreprovincial fusulines are used as secondary aids in correlation.

[4] Major cyclothems are recognized in the Midcontinent bymeans of their conodont-rich dark phosphatic shale facies thatresulted from water deep enough and far enough from shorelineto significantly reduce detrital dilution and lead essentially tosediment s tarvation. Major cyclothems are recognized in theMoscow Basin ofthe Russian Platform and in the Donets Basinalso by means ofgreatest conodont abundance, which similarlyreflects decreased sediment dilut ion in the deepest-water facies.In the Moscow Basin these faci es are often shaly limestones(sometimes with tempestite beds) in contrast to the adjacentpurer, shal lower-water limestones. In the Donets Basin, thesefacies are usually in the non-algal limestone beds.

Moscovian-Kasimovian Boundary

Using these assumptions as guidelines , the followingcorrelations ofmajor cyclothems are made across the Moscovian-Kasimovian boundary (Fig. 1): The Midcontinent Lost Branchcyclothem is correlated with the Russian Voskresensk Formationand Donets Limestone N3

3, based on the youngest abundantoccurrence of the short -ranging troughed conodont genusSwadelina Lambert et al. 2003. Although different species ofthis distinct ive genus dominate in the different places, Sw.nodocarinata (Jones 1941), which dominates the Lost Branch,may occur in both the other regions. Idiognathodus expansusStauffer and Plummer 1932 occurs in both the Lost Branch andN3

3. This correlation lines up the next older Midcontinent majorAltamont cyclothem with the Suvorovo Formation in Russia, andwith Donets Limestone N3

1. Swadelina neoshoensis Lambert,Heckel, and Barrick 2003 occurs in both the Altamont and thenext older intermediate Farlington cyclothem, and in DonetsLimestone N3 (which is at the Farlington level) and possibly inN3

1. Streptognathodus subexcelsus Alekseev and Goreva 2001,which may or may not belong in Swadelina, occurs in theSuvorovo Formation and Donets Limestones N3 and N3

1. Belowall these units, the conodont faunas comprise entirely flat formsthat include I. delicatus Gunnell 1931 in the Midcontinent (LowerPawnee, Coal City) and forms resembling I. delicatus in Russia(Peski formation) and in Donets Limestone N2. The abrupt changein conodont faunas between these two levels coincides with thecurrent base of the Kasimovian Stage in Russia.

Among fusul ines, protriticitids [genera Protriticites andObsoletes] that are considered “ typical” dominate the Suvorovoand Voskresensk Formations in Russia, but are so far found onlyin Limestone N3

3 in the Donets Basin. However, those found sofar in Donets Limestone N3 are considered “ primitive” like thosefound in Russia below the Suvorovo in the middle and upperPeski cycles, which line up via conodonts withthe MidcontinentLower Pawnee and C oal City cyclothems. The latter aredominated by the provincial North American Beedeina faunas,but correlate via conodonts (Ritter et al., 2002) with the westernU.S. units that contain primit ive protriticitids reported byWahlman et al. (1997). Donets Limestone N2 could be as youngas the Lower P awnee major cyclothem or older, based onconodonts alone, but it is shown as older based on its fusulinecontent, which would mean that a significant gap exists belowthe Swadelina-bearing beds in the Donets Basin.

Above the highest Swadelina-bearing major cyclothem inthe Midcont inent are two minor cyclothems (Glenpool,


MO

SC

OV

IAN

-KA

SIM

OV

IAN

BO

UN

DA

RY

BED

SC

YC

LO

TH

EMC

OR

REL

AT

ION

CH

AR

T

P.H

.H

eck

el,

July

28,

200

5

Jul y 2005 39

Checkerboard), followed upward by the intermediate Exline,minor Critzer, and the major Hertha and Swopecyclothems (Fig.1). These cyclothems displaya radiation ofIdiognathodus speciesthat tend to have coarser transverse ribs and longer adcarinalridges than similar flat forms in the older units with Swadelina(Barrick et al., 1996). Recently, a new, transitional and possiblyances tral form from the Altamont-Glenpool int erval fromOklahomais under studyby Barrick andS.J. Rosscoe. Above theGlenpool, first appearances involve I. eccentricus (Ellison 1941)in the Exline, several more nodose forms in the Hertha and aneven greater variety in the Swope, including type I. sulciferusGunnell 1933, type I. eccentricus, and type Streptognathoduscancellosus (Gunnell 1933). The “ basic morphotype” of theearlier forms was included in I. sulciferus by Barrick et al. (1996),but most specimens tend to have a less prominent inner lobe thanthe holotype from the Swope, and so these “ basic” forms may berecognized as an earlier species. Some of the forms appear to beI. sagittalis Kozitskaya 1978, which was named from LimestoneO1 in the Donets Basin. Above the Swope is the minor MoundValley cycle in which S. confragus (Gunnell 1933) first appears,overlain by the major Dennis cyclothem, which contains a numberof distinct forms including the holotype of S. confragus.

Above the Swadelina-bearing Voskresensk Formation andfaunally related Ratmirovo Formation in the Moscow region,several cycles have been recognized in the complex NeverovoFormation (Basal, Lower, Middle, Upper), of which the uppertwo have conodonts abundant enough to be considered major(Fig. 1). Above Swadelina-bearing Limestone N3

3 in the DonetsBasin, several minor poorly known cycles are overlain by twomajor cycles (upper N5

1, O1) and followed by minor cycle O12

and major cycle O2. In terms of scale, the major cycles can belined up with those in the Midcontinent, and the minor-majorsequence at the top (O1

2-O2) both contain forms that closelyresemble S. confragus, which occurs in the similar minor-majorsequence (Mound Valley-Dennis) at the top of this part of theMidcontinent succession. Fittingthe Russian succession intothisframework places the major Upper Neverovo cycle equivalent tothe Dennis and Limestone O2, the major Middle Neverovo cycleequivalent to the Swope and Limestone O1, and the two lowerrecognized cycles (though minor) equivalent to the more majorof the several cycles in the other two regions. Thus the LowerNeverovo cycle is correlated with the Hertha and Limestone N5

1-upper, and the Basal Neverovo cycle is correlated with the Exlineand Limestone N5

1-lower. (Some authors do not think that thethin shales separating the three limestones in Donets unit N5

1

represent cycle boundaries; thus, if N51 is a single major cycle,

then the upper of the two lower poorlyknown beds, N5, would beequivalent to the Exline cyclothem, because Limestone N4reportedly contains the highest occurrence of the conodontNeognathodus in the Donets Basin, and lines up well with theGlenpool cycle of the Midcontinent, which carries the highestdefinite occurrence of this genus in the Midcontinent.) Althoughmost of the conodonts that dominate these cyclothems are notsimilar to those that dominate their scale-positional equivalentsin the other regions, parti cularly the Midcontinent , somedistinctive forms arefound at the same levels. The Basal Neverovocontains a grooved form that closely resembles I. eccentricus,which first appears in the Exline. The Middle and Upper Neverovo

contain forms that closely resemble S. cancellosus, which firstappears in the Swope. A large-lobed form that closely resemblestype I. sulciferus in the Swope occurs in the Middle Neverovoand Limestone O1. I. sagittalis, however, occurs only in theyounger, major cycles inRussia and theDonets Basin, whereas itfirst appears in older lesser cycles in the Midcontinent, probablybecause the southern Midcontinent where these cycles are bestdeveloped was more basinward, hence deeper-water than theequivalent cycles in Russia and the Donets Basin.

Larger fusulines are absent for several cycles below theSwope—Mid-Neverovo—O1 cycl e, except for rare primi tiveMontiparus [anearly triticitid] inthe Basal Neverovo cycle. Thosethat appear in the Swope—Mid-Neverovo—O1 cycle areprovincial, with Eowaeringella in the Swope, typical Montiparusin the Mid-Neverovo, and advanced protriticitids in O1 (Fig. 1).This fusuline provinciality within eastern Europe had confoundedthe compatible conodont faunas there until recent discovery of aprimitive triticitid [Triticites?] among the dominant protriticitidsin Limestone O1, suggesting that the protriticitids persisted longerin the Donets Basin than on the Russian Platform. Only in theDennis—Upper-Neverovo—O2 cycle do the fusuline faunasbecome less provincial, with advanced Montiparus in both eastEuropean regions and “ pos t-primit ive” Trit ici tes i n theMidcontinent, which helps to strengthen this correlation. Thediachronous nature of the protri tici tids in this part of thesuccession and their earlier apparent diachroneity in stage ofevolution at the level ofthe current base ofthe Kasimovian arguesagainst using these benthic fossils as boundary marker events todefine global stages.

Successions in which cyclothems are not well recognizedwere correlated into the cyclothem framework using appearancesof conodont species supplemented by fusulines (Fig. 1). In theDalniy Tyulkas-2 section in thesouthern Urals, the succession ofinterbedded cherty limestone, siliceous marl and shale containsno obvious terrestrial deposits, exposure surfaces, orrecognizableli thic cycles. However, the conodont success ion of firstappearances of S. subexcelsus in bed 15, Sw. nodocarinata? inbed 19, Sw. makhlinae (Alekseev and Goreva 2001) in bed 25,and I. sagittalis in bed 34 indicate correlation ofthis ~3 m part ofthe section, respectively, with the ascending major Altamont—Suvorovo—N3

1 cyclothem, Lost-Branch—Voskresensk—N33

cyclothem, and the set ofcycles culminating with the Swope—Mid-Neverovo—O1 cyclothem succession.

In the Las Llacerias section in the Cantabrianzone ofnorthernSpain, the thick succession of fusuline-bearing, locally shalylimestone contains no obvious terrestrial deposits or lithiccycles,but modern exposure is not good enough to rule out exposuresurfaces. Conodonts are sparse, but the appearance of I.eccentricus in sample 9030 followed by possible I. sagittalis andS. neverovensis GorevaandAlekseev 2005 in sample 9035, about14 m higher, suggest correlation of this part of the section withthe Exline—Basal-Neverovo—Lower N5

1 cyclothem and theHertha—Lower Neverovo—Upper N5

1 cyclothem, respectively(Fig. 1). T his is support ed by the appearance of primi tiveMontiparus in sample 9034 and advanced Montiparus insamples9038-9047. T he latter indi cates correlat ion with the Mid-Neverovo cyclothem in Russia, considering the higher appearance


ofprimitive Triticites? leciae van Ginkel and Villa 1999 insamples9046-9047 and in Donets Limestone O2, which is consideredcorrelati ve wi th the Upper Neverovo in Russia. The olderascending succession ofprimitive protriticitids in samples 9010-9012 and typical protriticitids in samples 9017-9026 suggestcorrelation, respectively, with the Middle and Upper Peski cyclesplus Donets Limestone N3, and the Suvorovo and Voskresenskcyclothemsin Russia.

In the tectonically complex CarnicAlps, where siliciclastic/carbonate cyclothems are recognized locally (Massari et al.,1991), Forke and Samankassou (2000; updated by Forke andLuppold herein) reported from the lower Auernig Group anascending faunal succession of: [1] conodonts resembling I.expansus and Sw. makhlinae plus protritici tids , [2] formsresembling S. cancellosus and S. neverovensis plus advancedprotriticitids and primitive Montiparus, and [3] forms resemblingS. confragus plus Montiparus subcrassulus Rozovskaya 1950.Thi s succession correl ates, respectively, with [1] the LostBranch—Voskresensk—N3

3 cyclothem, [2] the Hertha—LowerNeverovo—N5

1 cyclothem and/or the Swope—Mid-Neverovo—O1 cyclothem, and [3] the Dennis—Upper Neverovo—O2cyclothem.

Kasimovian-Gzhelian Boundary

Using the same assumptions as guidelines, adding the north-central Texas succession for its ammonoid informat ion, andeliminating the Spanish Cantabrian succession where the sparseconodont s are not yet known to be helpful, the followingcorrelations are made across the Kasimovian-Gzhelian boundary(F ig. 2): The major North American Midcontinent Oreadcyclothem and Texas Finis cyclothem are correlated with themajor Upper Rusavkino cyclothem ofRussia and Donets BasinLimestone O7, based on the first (and last) appearance of thedistinctive conodont Idiognathodus simulator (Ellison 1941)[sensu stri cto] in all regions. C orrelation of the Oread with theFinis cyclothem is strongly supported by the first appearance ofthe ammonoid Vidrioceras uddeni Bose 1919 in both (Boardmanand Work, 2004). Two major cyclothems below this correlatedcyclothem, the Midcontinent Stanton and Texas Merriman-UpperWinchell cyclothems are correlated with the Russian Troshkovocyclothem, based on the first appearance of the probable ancestorof I. simulator [s.s.], which is termed I. aff. simulator, and iscurrently under study by Barri ck, Boardman, and Heckel. Themajor cyclothem between these two correlated cyclothems, theMidcontinent Cass cyclothem is correlated wi th the LowerColony Creek cyclothem of Texas by the appearance of theammonoids Eovidrioceras conlini (Miller and Downs 1950) andPseudaktubites stainbrooki (Plummer and Scott 1937) in both,and with the Lower Rusavkino cyclothem ofRussia by the firstoccurrence of the conodont Streptognathodus zethus Chernykh1987 in both. The next major cyclothem above the Oread—Upper-Rusavkino—O7 cyclothem, the Midcontinent Lecomptonand Texas Necessity cyclothems are correlated by the presenceof I. tersus Ellison 1941, S. ruzhencevi Kozur 1977 and S. vitaliChernykh 2002, and these are correlated with the Amerevocyclothem of Russia by the appearance of S. ruzhencevi and S.vitali. Donets Limestone P1 is correlated with the Amerevo ofRussi a by the first appearance of the fusul ine Rauserit es

stuckenbergi (Rauser-Chernousova 1938), but the conodonts arenot yet studied.

The succession of cyclothems below the Stanton—Troshkovo cyclothem (Fig. 2) and above the Dennis—UpperNeverovo—O2 cyclothem (top of Fig. 1) is well correl atedbetween the NorthAmerican regions in terms of both conodontsand scale of the major cyclothems. The Midcontinent successionof five intermediate and major cyclothems lines up well byposition wi th the five cyclothems in Russia, with only the thirdcyclothem upward (the minor Presnya) not at the same relativescale as it s positional equivalent (Iola) in North America. Theconodont succession in the Donets Basin above and below theappearance of I. simulator in Limestone O7 is not as well knownas it is across the Moscovian-Kasimovian boundary, so theDonetsunits are correlated mainly by a combination of position andscale, along with preliminary data on the conodonts. CorrelatingLimestone O5 with the Stanton—Troshkovo cyclothem becauseO5 contains the first definite I. aff. simulator, which first appearsin this cyclothem in North America, provides a reasonabledi stri bution of the remaining Donets cycles . We correlateLimestone O6 with the South Bend cyclothem and O6

1 with theCass—Lower Rusavkino cyclothem, because we believe that theSouth Bend cyclothem is more widespread than the Torontocyclothem, with which O6

1 would be correl ated i f O6 werecorrelated with the Cass—Lower Rusavkino cyclothem. BelowO5, eight Donets limestones line up fairly well with the ninecyclothems of all scales in Midcontinent North America, andwith major cycle O4

1 equivalent to the lower of the two majorMidcontinent cyclothems (Dewey), with which the single majorRussian cyclothem (Mestsherino) correlates.

Among fusulines, correlation ofthe Donets succession withthat in the Moscow areaof Russia is not clear. Rauserites rossicus(Schellwein 1908) first appears in the Gzhel section near Moscowwith I. simulator in the Upper Rusavkino, but it firs t appears inDonets Limestone O5, the likely Troshkovo equivalent, where itis noted as primitive, and Davydov believes that the R. rossicusat Gzhel are most closely related to those in O7 (hence noted asadvanced in Fig. 2). Other fusulines, such as Jiguli tesmakbalensis Davydov 1986, which is considered Gzhelian, isreported to appear in Donets Limestone O5, and with I. simulatorin bed 7 at the Nikolskysection in the southern Urals (see below),and thus would suggest that the Donets cyclesshould all beraisedhigher. Assuming that O7 with I. simulator is properly positionedand matching major with intermediate or major cycles in scale,this would bring O6

1 up to the level of the Toronto and Mid-Rusavkino, O6 up to the level ofthe Cass and Lower Rusavkino,O5 up to the level ofthe Iatan, and one ofthe higher O4 limestonesup to the level ofthe Stanton and Troshkovo, but J. makbalensisin O5 would st ill be well below the base of the Gzhelian asrecognized elsewhere. We rely on the conodonts along with cyclescale as the primary basis for the correlation shown in Figure 2,but we cannot rule out the possibility that syndepositional tectonicactivity di storted the scale of the cycles in the Donets Basin.

Correlation ofthe successions in which cyclothems are notidentified is based mainly on the succession of conodonts, againusing fusulines where they appear helpful. In the Dalniy Tyulkas-2 section of the southern Ural s, the upward appearances of S.

Jul y 2005 41

KA

SIM

OV

IAN

-GZ

HEL

IAN

BO

UN

DA

RY

BED

SC

YC

LO

TH

EMC

OR

REL

AT

ION

CH

AR

T

P.H

.H

eck

el,

July

28,

200

5


where “ typical” prot rit ici ti ds appear, above primit iveprotritici tids in the underlying Peski Formation. While someworkers wish to keep the base of the Kasimovian at or near thislevel , t he di ffi cul ty of di sti nguishing species among theprotriticit ids along with their possibly diachronous appearancerelative tothe conodont correlation between the Russian Platformand the Donets Basin (recently shown also for the DonskayaLuka section between these two areas by Isakova et al. in thisvolume) have led the conodont workers and many fusulineworkers to prefer a higher boundary, above the last occurrenceof the conodont Swadelina and below the first appearance of I.sagitt alis and the easily identified fusuline Montiparus.

Ironically, the widespread exposure surfaces that help toexpedite correlation will make the selection of GS SPs (whichrequire continuous sedimentation) difficult in the shelf regionswhere the cyclothems are well defined. However, the correlationof sections in which cyclothems are not recognized into thiscyclothem framework may allow the possibility of selecting aGSSP in a section of continuous sedimentation that can becorrelated globally (at least in the pantropical belt), if severalconditions are met: Cyclothems are not recognized because thesection was deposited at great er water depth below lowstand,the section contains a complete succession of fossils that occural so in the more shelfward regions where the correl ati onframework i s recognized, and the section is on a slope gentleenough that the continuity is not interrupted by debris flows thatmay have mixed biotas of different ages.

Ackn owledgments

Among the authors, Heckel coordinated and compi ledinformation from all authors and established the correlations;Barrick and Boardman provided conodont information for theMidcont inent; B oardman and Work provided ammonoidinformation for the Midcontinent and perspective on ammonoidsreported elsewhere; Alekseev and Goreva provided informationfor correlations in the Moscow region and Dalniy Tyulkas in theUrals ; Nemyrovska provided conodont and cycle scal einformation for correlations in the Donets Basin; Ueno providedfusuline information for the Donets Basin; Davydov providedfusuline information for the Usolka and Nikolsky sect ions in theUrals, and for the Donets Basin; Chernykh provided conodontdata for the Usolka and Nikolsky sections in the Urals; Villa andMendez provided information on fusulines and conodonts,respectively, for the succession in Spain. Forke and Luppoldprovided information on fusulines and conodonts, respectively,for the succession in the Carnic Alps. Not all authors agree withall correlat ions or opinions expressed herein.

Ref eren ces

Aizenverg, D. E., and 19 others. 1975. Field excursion guide-book for the Donets Basin: Publishing Office <Nauka>, Mos-cow, 360 p.

Alekseev, A.S., N.V. Goreva, T.N. Isakova, and M.Kh. Makhlina.2004. Biostratigraphy of the Carboniferous in the MoscowSyneclise, Russia. Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy,22:28-35.

Alekseev, A.S., N.V. Goreva, E.I. Kulagina, O.L. Kossovaya, T.N.Isakova, and A.N. Reimers. 2002. Upper Carboniferous of

zethus and I. aff. simulator in bed 42, ofI. simulator in bed 46,and of the fusuline Rauserites s tuckenbergi in bed 47, indicatecorrelation of this part of the succession, respectively, with theC ass—Lower R usavkino cyclothem, the Oread—UpperRusavkino—O7 cyclothem, and the Lecompton—Amerevocyclothem (Fig. 2). In the nearby Usolka section of shalycarbonates, the presence of type S. zethus in bed 4-1, and theappearance of I. simulator in bed 4-2 suggest correlati on of thispart ofthe section with the Cass—Lower Rusavkinoand Oread—Upper Rusavkino—O7 cyclothems, respectively. In the detritalsiliciclast ic Nikolsky section not far away, the presence of bothS. firmus Kozitskaya 1978 and S. pawhuskaensis (Harris andHollingsworth 1933) in bed 5, the appearance of I. simulator inbed 7, the appearance of R. stuckenbergi in bed 10 and theappearance of S. vitali in bed 12, suggest correlation ofthis partof the succession, respectively, with the South Bend cyclothemof the Midcontinent (and possibly Donets Limestone O6), theOread—Upper Rusavkino—O7 cyclothem, and the Lecompton—Amerevo cyclothem, although bed 12 could be younger.

In the Carnic Alps, the presence of S. elegantulus Staufferand Plummer 1932, I. magnificus Stauffer and Plummer 1932,and I. bachmuticus Kozitskaya 1978, plus Rauser ites includingaff. rossicus and Quasifusulina eleganta Schlykova 1948 in thelower “ Rosskofel Limestone” indicate correlation somewherewithin the group ofcyclothems below the Stanton—Troshkovocyclothem. Disconformably above this, a bed with S. zethus andS. pawhuskaensis plus Rauserites aff. rossicus and Quasifusulinasp. may correlate with the Cass—Lower Rusavkino cyclothem.In the Cantabrian zone of Spain, fusuline faunas of the upperPuentelles Formation that include Rauserites rossicus and R. cf.stuckenbergi may correlate with the Oread—Upper Rusavkino—O7 or younger cyclothems.

Potential Global Boundary Levels

The relative ease of correlation of the Oread—UpperRusavkino—O7 cyclothem by means of the first appearance ofI. simulator [s.s] in all regions above s trata that contain the firstappearance of S. zethus and I. aff. simulator (including aspecimen that appears transit ional to I. simulator [s.s.] in theMidcontinent Little Pawnee Shale) indicates that this appearancewould provide a good marker event for defining the base of theGzhelian Stage. The appearance with I. simulator i n thiscyclothem in Texas and the Midcontinent of the ammonoidsVidrioceras uddeni and Shumardites cuyleri Miller and Downs1950, the earliest species of these genera that have often beenused to mark the base of the Gzhelian, serve to keep the base ofthe Gzhelian at its traditional position in terms of the classicammonoid zonation. So far, the occurrences of some fusulinesare not consistent with this correlation, but the appearance ofRauserites rossicus with I. simulator in the Moscow region andof the most closely related, more advanced form of R. rossicuswith I. simulator in the Donets Basin, provide hope that certainfusulines may aid in identifying this boundary in Eurasia.

Although the traditional Moscovian-Kasimovian boundarywas originally pl aced at the fi rst appearance of protriticitidfusulines, it was laterstabilized in the type region around Moscowat the base of the Suvorovo Formation (Makhlina et al., 2001),

Jul y 2005 43

South Urals (Bashkiria, Russia), Guidebook for field trip ofworking group to establish GSSP in upper part of Carbonifer-ous System August 10-18, 2002, Moscow and Ufa: MoscowState University; Geological Institute of Russian Academy ofSciences; Institute of Geology, Ufa Research Center of Rus-sian Academy of Sciences, 56 p.

Anonymous [A.S. Alekseev and colleagues], 1998, Type and ref-erence sections ofSerpukhovian, Moscovian, Kasimovian andGzhelian stages in Moscow Basin, Field-Trip Guidebook 7-13August, 1998: Commission on Carboniferous System ofRus-sia on central and southern Russian Platform. Geology facultyof Moscow State University. Paleontological and GeologicalInstitutes ofthe RussianAcademy ofSciences. …. unnumberedpages.

Baranova, D.V., and P.B. Kabanov. 2003. Facies distribution offusulinoid genera in the Myachkovian (Upper Carboniferous,upper Moscovian) ofsouthern Moscow region. Rivista Italianadi Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 109:225-239.

Barrick, J. E., D.R. Boardman, and P.H. Heckel. 1996. Biostratig-raphy across the Desmoinesian-Missourian Stage boundary inNorth American Midcontinent, USA: Implications for defin-ing the Middle-Upper Pennsylvanian Series boundary. News-letters on Stratigraphy, 34:161-175.

Boardman, D.R., and P.H. Heckel. 1989. Glacial-eustatic sea-level curve for early Late Pennsylvanian sequence in north-central Texas and biostratigraphic correlation with curve forMidcontinent NorthAmerica. Geology, 17:802-805.

Boardman, D.R., and D.M. Work. 2004. Stratigraphic distribu-tion of the ammonoids Shumardites and Vidrioceras and im-plications for the definition and correlat ion of the globalGzhelian Stage, Upper Pennsylvanian Series. Newsletter onCarboniferous Stratigraphy, 22:23-27.

Boardman, D.R., D.M. Work, R.H. Mapes, and J.E. Barrick. 1994.B ios t rat i graphy of Middle and Late P ennsylvanian(Desmoinesian-Virgilian) ammonoids. Kansas Geological Sur-vey Bulletin, 232, 121 p.

Davydov, V.I. 1986. Upper Carboniferousand Asselian fusulinidsof the Southern Urals, p. 77-103. In B.I. Chuvashov, E.Ya.Leven, and V.I. Davydov (eds.), Carboniferous-Permian Bound-ary Beds ofthe Urals, PreUrals and CentralAsia. Nauka Pub-lishing House, Moscow. (In Russian)

Davydov, V.I. 1992. Subdivision and correlation of Upper Car-boniferous and Lower Permian deposits in Donets Basin ac-cording to fusulinid data. Soviet Geology, 5:53-61. (In Rus-sian)

Forke, H.C., and E. Samankassou. 2000. Biostratigraphical cor-relation of Late Carboniferous (Kasimovian) sections in theCarnic Alps (Austria/Italy): Integrated paleontological data,facies, and discussion. Facies, 42:177-210.

Goreva, N. V., and A.S. Alekseev. In press 2005. New conodontspecies from Kasimovian (Upper Carboniferous) of Moscowand Moscow Basin. Paleontological Journal.

Heckel, P. H. 1994. Evaluation of evidence for glacio-eustaticcontrol over marine Pennsylvanian cyclothems in NorthAmerica and consideration of possible tectonic effects, p. 65-87. In J.M. Dennison and F.R. Ettensohn (eds.), Tectonic andEustatic Controls on Sedimentary Cycles. SEPM Concepts inSedimentology and Paleontology, 4.

Heckel, P.H., (ed.). 1999. XIV-ICCP Field Trip #8: Middle andUpper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) Cyclothem Suc-cession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas GeologicalSur-vey Open-file Report, 99-27, 236 p.

Heckel, P.H. 2002. Genetic stratigraphy and conodontbiostratig-raphy of upper Desmoinesian-Missourian (Pennsylvanian)cyclothem succession in Midcontinent North America, p. 99-119. In L. V. Hills, C. M. Henderson, and E. W. Bamber (eds.),The Carboniferous and Permian of the World. Canadian Soci-ety of Petroleum Geologists Memoir, 19.

Isakova, T. N., A.S. Alekseev, N.V. Goreva, andO.L. Kossovaya.2005. Lower Kasimovian (Pennsylvanian) of Donskaya Luka(southern Russia). Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy,23:44-47.

Kabanov, P. 2003. The upper Moscovian and basal Kasimovian(Pennsylvanian) of central European Russia: Facies, subaerialexposures and depositional model. Facies, 49:243-270.

Kabanov, P., and D. Baranova. In press . Cyclothems andcyclostratigraphy of the upper Moscovian-basal Kasimoviansuccession of central and northern European Russia. [Reportsof XV-ICCP, Utrecht, 2003]

Lambert, L. L., P.H. Heckel, and J.E. Barrick. 2003. Swadelinanew genus (Pennsylvanian Conodonta), a taxon with potentialchronostratigraphic significance. Micropaleontology, 49:151-158.

Makhlina, M. Kh., A.S.Alekseev, N.V. Goreva, R.V. Goryunova,T.N. Isakova, O.L. Kossovaya, S.S. Lazarev, O.A. Lebedev,andA.A. Shkolin. 2001. Middle Carboniferous of the MoscowSyneclize (southern part). Volume 2. Biostratigraphy [in Rus-sian]: Scientific World [Nauchniy Mir], Moscow, 328 p.

Massari, F., M. Pesavento, and C. Venturini. 1991. The Permian-Carboniferous cyclothems of the Pramollo Basin sequence(Carnic Alps). Giornale di Geologia, 53:171-185.

Mendez, C.A. 2002. Carboniferous conodonts ofthe Ponga andPicos de Europa units (Cantabrian Zone, North Spain), p. 207-227. In S. Garcia-Lopez, and F. Bastida (eds.), PalaeozoicConodonts from Northern Spain. Instituto Geologico y Minerode Espana, Serie Cuadernos del Museo Geominero 1.

Nemyrovska, T. I. , and R .I. Kozit ska. 1999. S pecies ofIdiognathodus and Streptognathodus from Late Carbonifer-ous strata of the Donets Basin, Ukraine, p. 170-173. In P.H.Heckel (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Car-boniferous) Cyclothem Succession in Midcontinent Basin,U.S.A. [1999, XIV-ICCP Field Trip #8]. Kansas GeologicalSurvey Open-file Report, 99-27.

Nemyrovska, T. I., M.-F. Perret-Mirouse, andA.S. Alekseev. 1999.On Moscovian (Late Carboniferous) conodonts of the DonetsB asin, Ukraine. Neues Jahrbuch fur Geologie undPalaontologie, Abhandlungen, 214:169-194.

Remane, J., M.G. Bassett, J.W. Cowie, K.H. Gohrbandt, H.R.Lane, O. Michelsen, and N. Wang. 1996. Revised guidelinesfor the establishment of global chronostratigraphic standardsby the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS). Epi-sodes, 19:77-81.

Ritter, S.M., J.E. Barrick, and M.R. Skinner. 2002. Conodontsequence biostratigraphy of the Hermosa Group (Pennsylva-nian) at Honaker Trail, Paradox Basin, Utah. Journal of Pale-ontology, 76:495-517.


Swade, J.W. 1985. Conodont distribution, paleoecology, andpre-liminary biostratigraphy ofthe upper Cherokee and MarmatonGroups (upper Desmoinesian, MiddlePennsylvanian) from twocores in south-central Iowa. Iowa Geological Survey Techni-cal Information Series, 14, 71 p.

Villa, E., andA.C. van Ginkel. 2000. Some late Moscovian andearly Kasimovian fusulinoideans from the Las Llacerias sec-tion (Cantabrian Mountains, Spain). Journal of ForaminiferalResearch, 30:219-243.

Wahlman, G.P., G.J. Verville, and G.A. Sanderson. 1997. Bios-tratigraphic significance of the fusulinacean Protriticites in theDesmoinesian (Pennsylvanian) ofthe Rocky Mountains, west-ern U.S.A., p. 163-168. In Cushman Foundation for Foramin-iferal Research Special Publication, 36.

Lower Kasimovian (Pennsylvanian) ofDonskaya Luka (southern Russia)T.N. Isakova1, A.S.Alekseev2, N.V. Goreva1, and O.L.Kossovaya3

1Geological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, Mos-

cow, 119017, Russia.2Department of Paleontology, Geological Faculty, Moscow

State University, Moscow, 119992, Russia.3All-Russian Geological Institute, Sankt-Peterburg, Sredniy

Prospekt 74, 199106, Russia.

Introduction

Donskaya Luka is the bend of theDon River where itcrossesthe southern part of the Don-Medveditsa Swell intheregion southwest of Volgograd. In the axial part of thisswell, Middle and Upper Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian)stratacrop out surroundedby Jurassicand Cretaceousrocks.The largest and most famousexposureof theCarboniferousison theright bank of theDon Riverclose to Kremenskayavillage (Fig.1), approximately 49°28' Nand 43°32' E.

The Carboniferous succession of this area wasstudiedextensively in the early andmid-twentieth century (e.g.,S.Semikhatova, 1929, 1931, 1953; E. Semikhatova,1939,1946; Yarikov, 1955). It is transitionalfrom the marginalshallow-water MoscowBasin on the north, to the paraliccoal-bearing Donets Basin succession on the south. Thethickness of most Carboniferous subdivisions is muchgreater than in the MoscowBasin,and faunal assemblagesof brachiopods, bryozoans, corals, and fusulinids containsome elements typical of theDonets Basin andVolga Riverarea as well as relatively abundant endemic species.

The Moscovian to Kasimovian transition at DonskayaLuka was described previously as more complete than intheMoscow Basin.Donskaya Luka is thetypearea for the“sub-Triticites Beds” of S.Semikhatova (1947). The faunalassemblage of these bedswas used as an argument to lower

the boundary of the Kasimovian Stage (and the RussianUpper Carboniferous Series) from the level of the firstapp earan ce o f Tritic ites (=Mo ntip aru s) to the fir stappearance of Obsoletes.

Lithostratigraphy

Wevisited some Donskaya Luka outcrops in 2003 and2004 to study the important Moscovian-Kasimovianboundary interval in the vicinity of Kremenskaya village,at SeleznevaRavine andjust downstream on the right bankof the Don River (Fig. 1). Here we present some results. Itisimportant to stress that previously only brachiopodsandfusulinids were studied in these localities, but conodontswerenot.

Carboniferous strata arecyclicat Donskaya Luka.Eachcycleconsists of relatively thin (0.5 to 3-4 m) transgressivebioclastic limestoneswith relatively abundant brachiopods,corals, and fusulinids, and thick (up to 20-30 m) verysh allo w-water white m udst on es, oft en brecciated,dolomitized, and with small stromatoliticbuildups at somelev els. T hese mudsto nes t ypically co ntain only thebrachiopod Linoproductus. The tops of themudstonesareerosionaland represent exposure surfaces. The strata aresubhorizontal,or with some dip (up to 15-20° to the southalong Selezneva Ravine), but normal faults with somedisplacement are common. This structure, together withthe monotonous succession of the similar Sukhov andSelezneva Formation s, has result ed in problems withcorrelation of individual sections.

Biostratigraphy

The lowermost part of the succession was studied inthe Don 1 section (Fig. 1). The grainstone interbeds indolomitized mudstones of the Sukhov Formation haveabundant solitary Rugosa, Tabulata,and brachiopods, andalso contain the fusulinids Fusulina intermedia RauserandGryzlova, F. pulchella Gryzlova, F. pakhrensis Rauser, F.qu asifu sulin oid es Rauser , F. q ua sicylind rica Lee,Pulchrella eopulchra (Rauser and Belyaev), Obsoletesconfusus Kireeva, O.callosus Kireeva, O. ex gr. dagmaraeKireeva, O . af f. ro so vskaa e Kireev a, Protriticitesumbonoreticulatus Kireeva, Fusiella ex gr. typica Lee andChen, and F. ex gr. lancetiformis Putrja. This assemblageis transitional from late Moscovian to early Kasimovianan d is close t o the fusulinid assem blage from t heVoskresensk Formation (upper Krevyakinian Substage, thecurrent lowerpart of theKasimovian Stage) in theMoscowBasin. Conodonts are scarce at this level, and only a fewelemen ts were identif iable as Strep togn ath odu s cf.subexcelsusAlekseev and Goreva and Idiognathodus sp.

The yo unger Selezneva Formation (about 50 m)consists mainly of white brecciated mudstones often with

Jul y 2005

pea-like chert nodules (Fig. 2). According to previousdescriptions, thin shale horizons (1-2 m)are typical of theSelezneva, but we did not find them in the type section.The basal part of the Selezneva Formation was studied insection SZ4, where an erosional surface at the top of thewhitemudstonesof theSukhov (?) Formation is overlappedby athin (up to 10 cm) green andyellowclay with limestonepebbles. This clay does not con tain conodon ts. Thebioclastic grainstones (1.5 m) in thebase of the SeleznevaFormation have abundant corals andare characterized by

45

Fig. 1. Don 1 section at Donskaya Luka, on right bank of Don River near Kremenskaya village. Map shows: A—Selezneva Ravine section; B — Don 1 section.

the fusulinids Obsoletes elongatus Kireeva, O. minutusKireeva, O. aff. biconicus Kireeva, Protriticites plicatusKireeva, and P. subschwagerinoides Rozovskaya.Amongsparse conodonts, Streptognathodus neverovensis GorevaandAlekseev is present.The latter species istypical of thelo wer Neverov o Format io n (upp er Kh amo vn ikianSubstage, the current middle of the Kasimovian) in theMoscow Basin.

The next transgressive level with fusulinids andconodonts is in the middle of the Selezneva Formation


(sections SZ1, SZ3, and SZ5). Among fusulinids, speciesof the genus Obsoletes are dominant at this level: O.biconicus Kireeva, O. rosovskaae Kireeva, O. magnusKireeva, O. mirabilis Kireeva, O. plicatissimus Kireeva,and O. ex gr. dagmarae Kireeva. Other fusulinids areQuasifusulina longissima Moeller, transitional forms fromObsoletes to Triticites, and what ismost important, thefirstMontiparus sp. The samespecies of Obsoletes arepresentin Limestone O

1of the Donets Basin. The conodont

assemblagecontains S.neverovensis Goreva and Alekseev,Idiogna thodus aff . sagittalis Kozit skaya, and I. aff.trig onolobatus Barskov and Alekseev. Both groups,

Fig. 2. Selezneva Ravine section at Donskaya Luka, on right bank of Don River near Kremenskaya village. Figure 1shows location.

fusulinids and conodonts, confirm the correlation of thisinterval with the Neverovo Formation of the MoscowBasin. Rugosa in section SZ3 (not shown on Fig. 2) belongto Bo th rop hyllu m conicu m subsp.1, B. robu stumDobro ly ubo va, an d Can in op hyllum koksch arowiStucken berg. All these tax a also are ty pical of theKhamovnikian. In section SZ5, a level with large solitaryRugosa, just above the fusulinid and conodont interval,con t ain s S ied leckia lo n gisepta (Greek ) an d“Pseudozaphrentoides”sp. nov.

The upper Selezneva Formation is very poor infusulinids and conodonts. Only in the uppermost part of

46

Jul y 2005

the formation (section SZ9), above a karstified interval(SZ9,bed 1) and just above an exposuresurface in the topofbed 3, the conodont Idiognathodusmestsherensis GorevaandAlekseev was found (Fig.2). This species is typical ofthe lower Dorogomilovian (upper Kasimovian) in theMoscowBasin (Alekseev et al.,2004).

Theresults of thesebiostratigraphic studies showthatmost of the “sub-Triticites” Beds in their stratotype arenotKrev y ak in ian as has been widely accep t ed, butKhamovnikian.This fact supports the proposalto shift thelower boundary of the Kasimovian from the base of theKrevyakinian (or the Obsoletes obsoletus–Protriticitesp seu d om o n tip a ru s Zon e) t o so m e lev el in t h eKhamovnikian at the first appearance of the conodont I.sagittalis Kozitskaya andthe fusulinid Montiparus.

Acknowledgments

These studies were supported by RFBR grant 03-05-64415.

ReferencesAlekseev, A.S., N.V. Goreva, T.N. Isakova, and M.Kh. Makhlina.

2004. Biostratigraphy of the Carboniferous in the MoscowSyneclise, Russia. Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy,22:28-35.

47

Semikhatova, E.N. 1939. Fusulinids of area of Don-Medveditsadislocations. Uchenye zapiski Rostovskogo Universiteta. TrudyKafedry Istoricheskoi Geologii i Paleontologii: 90-131. (InRussian)

Semikhatova, E.N. 1946. To the studies of fusulinids and stratig-raphy of Carboniferous of Don-Medveditsa di slocations.DokladyAkademii Nauk SSSR, 52(6):533-536. (In Russian)

Semikhatova, S.V. 1929. Preliminary report on investigations in1927. Izvestiya Geologicheskogo Komiteta, 48(2):217-229. (InRussianwith Englishsummary)

Semikhatova, S.V. 1931. To tectonics ofzone ofDon-Medveditsauplifts. Attitude of Carboniferous beds in the Don region. TrudyGlavnogo Geologo-razvedochnogo Upravleniya VSNKHSSSR, 62:3-19. (In Russian with Englishsummary)

Semikhatova, S.V. 1947. Sub-Triticites Beds of Upper Carbonif-erous. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR, 48(9):2033-2036. (InRussian)

Semikhatova, S.V. 1953. Some characters ofsedimentation andevolution of fauna in Moscovian Age of Middle Carbonifer-ous and in Upper C arboni ferous in south part of Don-Medveditsa Swell . Vsesoyuznyi Nauchno-IssledovatelskiyInstitutPririodnykh Gazov. Trudy. Voprosy geologii i geokhimiinefti i gaza (Evropeyskaya Chast SSSR). Moscow, 1953: 344-381.

Yarikov, G.M. 1955. New data on stratigraphy of Upper Carbon-iferous of Donskaya Luka. Uchenye Zapiski SaratovskogoGosudarstvennogo Universiteta imeni N.G. Chernyshevskogo.Vypusk Geologicheskiy, 45:27-30. (In Russian)

who was an inspiration andmentor to Bill, and whom wevisited duringmy first visit .

Billmoved early from echinoderms to Carboniferousstratigraphy and biostratigraphy,mappingextensively in theYorkshire region. Hewas promotedto a “SpecialMerit”position in the Survey that permittedhim to conduct researchfull time. This was about the timethat I met him, and hetook it upon himself to introduce me to the ammonoidbiostratigraphy of northern England. This shelf-to-basinsequencereflectedlargely uninterrupteddeposition throughthe Carboniferous, co ntrasted to the condensed andincomplete (albeit richly fossiliferous) cratonic sectionsoftheU.S. Midcontinent that Iwas familiar with.

I spent a series of summers based at The Croft in thelate1970’sand 80’s,often accompaniedby WalterManger,University ofArkansas.Together,we studied the historicIGSammonoid collections,often for12-hour daily stretches,before returning to The Croft to share evening meals withBilland family.Helovedthe kitchen, andwould createfromapparent chaos such delightfulcombinations as lambwithfresh mint sauce, peas and roasted potatoes, all from hisgarden, followed by gooseberries and cream, then sherryand coffee servedin the living room. Wefelt like membersof the family, and saw George, Victoria, and James growfrom children to adults, and even getting to know thegrandchildren.

Reminiscences of W.H.C.Ramsbottom (1926–2004)

W. Bruce Saunders

Department ofGeology, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, PA19010, USA.

In 1971, fresh from graduate school an d havingcom pleted my dissertat ion on Up per Mississipp ianammonoids, I attendedmy first Carboniferous CongressinKrefeld,Germany. An afternoon Congress-cruise on theRhine provided my first opportunity to m eet manyindividuals otherwise familiar only as reference citations.It was also my first chance to get to knowBillRamsbottom.In his unique, quiet, yet insistent way,he convinced me tovisit him in Leeds after the Congress. This began anassociation with Bill asmentor, collaborator, and closefriendthat lastedmore than three decades.

Bill grew up in Yorkshire, an area that he loved. Hegraduated from Clare College, Cambridge, joined theInstituteof Geological Sciences, andcompleted hisdoctoraldissertation,on Ordovician crinoids. Hemoved to theLeedsIGS office in 1958 and purchased a Victorian red-brickhouse,barn, and garden, known as The Croft, in thevillageof Collingham, near Weatherby, about 20 minutes fromLeeds. This wasjust down the street from W.S. Bisat,F.R.S.,


for the Mid-Carboniferous, in an effort to try to agree on achoicefor the Mid-Carboniferous boundary. This ledto thepublicat ion of “ Bio str atigraphic Data fo r a Mid-Carboniferous Boundary” (Ramsbottom, Saunders, andOwens, 1982) and to theformation of acommittee,chairedby H. Richard Lane, to present a formal proposal for aboundary choice to be presented and votedon in Madrid in1983. (In spite of our goodintentions, it took nearly 20years beforethis vote was ratified.)

Typicalof Bill’screativeapproach, was hissuggestion,oneeveningafter dinner, that we attempt to determinetheage of the youngest Mississippian and oldest Pennsylvanianin as m any localities as possible (where the two aresuperimposed), in order to establish whether this might serveasan internationaldatum.A week later,with the livingroomlittered with publications,maps,and stratigraphic sections,we completedthe draft of amanuscript that proposedtheMid-Carboniferous Eustatic Event, published in Geology in1986. (Bill wasmuch pleasedthat P.R. Vailand L. L.Sloss,father and grandfather of Sequence Stratigraphy, gavesupportivereviewsof the ms.)

In 1984, the Leeds office of IGS moved south toKeyworth, near Nottingham , and became the BritishGeologicalSurvey. It was no surprise to methat Bill electedto take early retirement rather than move from Yorkshire.TheCroft was surrendered to villagesprawl and Bill movedto eighteenth century “BrowCottage”locatedat thebrowofa hill passing through the village of Kirkby Malzeard,nearRipon. Brow Cottagehad alarge attachedgreenhousewherehe began to experiment with nasturtiums. He undertook anumber of crossing experiments with different lines of thisplant, including variants from South America, obtainedduring four visits there, including one to Venezuelawith hisson James. (I believe there was a paper published on thegeneticresults of this work,although Ihavenot seen acopy.)At the same time, thestonebarn at the rearof BrowCottageserved as a workshop where Bill both designed andmanufactured grandfather-sizedweight-driven clocks withwooden gears that healso designedand machinedhimselffrom exotic hardwoods. His mind wastireless. During hisretirement he also undertook to make acomputer-catalogueof Carboniferousforaminifers, andtaught part time in thegraduateprograms at theuniversities ofSheffield and Hull.

I last visited with Bill at Brow Cottage several yearsago. Though his health was beginning to fail, he was theconsummate host,gentleman, and goodfriend…and he wasstill an excellent cook. I have yet to meet anyone who soloved thinking about science in newways. His scientificaccomplishmentswill continue to speak for themselves andhis background will be detailed elsewhere. Here, I wantedto pass on some reminiscences of this quiet, friendly,persuasive, and creative individual, who did so much toinfluenceme during thelong course of our friendship.

48

Bill’s mind was always running at high rpm’s. He had aunique way of looking at a given set of facts or a concept,sometimes discarding his ideas, at other times arrivingat awholenewperspective. Thus,his viewofa cyclic successionof Namurian and Dinantian stratigraphic events known as“mesothems,”which werethick complete basinalsuccessionsthat corresponded to condensed shelf sequences rife withunconformities,came to provideaframework for theBritishCarboniferousthat was subsequently appliedinternationally.

Billinsisted that Walt and I learn the British Namurianfrom field exposuresaswellas from the IGScollections. Oneofour first fieldvisitswas to theIrish Namurian,accompaniedby Frank Hodson, Southampton University. Mindful ofourtight budget, Bill joined us in sleeping on ferry deck chairsandin economy class “group lodgings,”even though hisIGSgrade entitledhim to first classaccommodations. Our fieldwork wasalways punctuatedby history lessons andvisitstohistoric and architectural sites. We also “re-discovered”classic ammonoid localities in Yorkshirethat had not beenvisited since thetimes of such collectorsas W.S. Bisat andE.W.J.Moore.

Beginningin 1976, I served as Secretary for the SCCSforalmost a decade. Bill was Chair during the latter part ofthis tenure, and it was delightful to work with him. Amajorobjective at that time was to try to bring some sort ofconsensusto then-boiling deliberations over Carboniferoussubdivisionsand boundary selection.What began asWorkingGroup “discussions”often ended as shouting matches. Neveronce in the 35 years I knew him, did I hear Bill raise hisvoice; but he hada remarkable ability to restore calm, reasonand direction to thesemeetings and the Subcommision mademuch headway during hisChairmanship. In 1981, togetherwith Bernard Owens of the IGS,we organizeda symposiumand field meeting based in Leeds, to permit respectivespecialists to synthesize allavailable biostratigraphic data

W.H.C. Ramsbottom (right) and W.B. Saunders (left) atBrowCottage, Kirkby Malzeard,Yorkshire ca. 2000.

Jul y 2005 49

ANNOUNCEMENTS

We cordiall y invit e you to att end the “Carb on if erou sConference Cologne 2006 (CCC-2006) – From Platform toBasin”, a research and field conference sponsored by SEPM-CES and organised by the Instit ute ofGeology and Mineralogy,University of Cologne, September 4 – 10, 2006.

CCC-2006 succeeds the meetings in Manchest er (EuropeanDinantian Environments 1984), Dublin (European DinantianEnvironments 2, 1994), and El Paso (SEPM & IAS: Permo-Carboniferous Carbonate Platforms and Reefs, 2000), whichst rongly promoted research on a wide range of topi cs inCarboniferous geology. We venture to take up these roots andmotivate young scientists and es tablished colleagues to presentand discuss their research result s in Cologne. We offer theopportunity to experience state-of-the art results on platform andbasinal facies on field trips to the classical central EuropeanMississippian in the Belgian Ardennes and the Rhenish SlateMountains.

See you in Cologne in September 2006!Hans-Georg Herbig and Markus Aretz

Venue

Cologne is an ideal meeting place situated in the heart ofEurope.It is easil y reached by plane, train, and car from derivationsworldwide.

The city, one of the largest in Germany, has more than 1 millioninhabitants . Since its foundation by the Romans, 50 BC, it hasbeen an important traffic junction and trading place. Famousfor its cathedral, Cologne offers a wealth of innumerable culturaland historical treasures, world-famous museums and an activeart scene.

From venerable breweries offering unique Kölsch beer andtypical Cologne delicacies to first-class restaurants the city isone of Germany’s leading gastronomic lights. Life in Colognei s uncompl i cat ed and vivacious - the tol erance andcosmopolit anism of its inhabit ants are proverbial. More than49,000 students at Cologne University contribute to the youngflair of the city and make the university one of the largest inGermany. Scenic landscapes including the Middle Rhine valley,a UNESCO world heritage since 2002, offer splendid touristichighlights near-by.

Host and Conference Language

The CCC-2006 will be held at the Institute of Geology andMineralogy, Cologne Universityfrom September 6-8, 2006. Theofficial conference language will be English - no translationfacilities will be available.

Program

Main focus of the conference will be the topic “ From Platformto Basin”. Platform-basin t ransi tions are critical interfacesdisplaying gradual to abrupt changes in sedimentary facies, biota,geochemical gradients, etc. Many phenomena and processes arerestricted to platform-basin transitions which, moreover, mightchange their profile in time due to sedimentary and tectonicprocesses and sea-level variations. Processes acting on adjacentplatforms and basins under different climatic regimes are oftenintimately connect ed across the s lope and are crucial forcorrelation and better understanding ofthe complexly controlledand reacting system. Though it is intended to concentrate on theCarboniferous due to it s pecul iar characters in climate andadvancing orogenies, contribut ions from adjacent t ime slicesare welcome.

Scientific answers to the open questions should be presented inthe suggested scientific sessions.

S-1: Facies pat terns: Platforms, basins and their i nterfacesS-2: Bioconst ructions and bioconst ructors across platform-basin-transectsS-3: Reconstruction ofsedimentary environments, climates and

palaeo-oceanography, I: geochemical proxiesS-4: Reconstruction ofsedimentary environments, climates and

palaeo-oceanography, II: marine faunas in greenhouse andicehouse climates

S-5: Multistratigraphic correlation of platform and basinS-6: Sequence stratigraphy and eustacyS-7: Basin evolution in front of prograding orogenic beltsS-8: Diagenesis and reservoirs


S-9: Open themesS-X: If you are interested in convening a further session, pleasecontact the organizers and reservoirs

Field Excursions

Pre-Conference Field Trip (Sept . 4-5, 2006): From palaeokarstto calci-turbidites - a carbonate platform-slope–transect fromthe Mississippian Limestone in eastern Belgium to the CulmBasin in west ern Germany.

Leaders: E. Poty (Liège), M. Aretz and H.-G. Herbig (Cologne)

Post-Conference Field T rip (Sept. 9-10, 2006): The mixedcarbonate-siliciclastic facies of the Mississippian Culm Basin,Rhenish Slate Mountains –complex interplay ofplatform, starvedbasin and prograding orogeny.

Leaders: H.-G. Herbig (Cologne), M. Amler (Marburg) and D.Korn (B erlin)

Presen tation

Oral presentations are scheduled for 20 minutes including fiveminutes for discussion. Overhead and slide projection will beavailable, but PowerPoint presentations are preferred. Participantsareencouraged to display posters. Wewill providesufficientlytimefor presentation and discussion. Two boards, each A0 format, areavailable for your presentation.

Abstracts, Field Guides and Congress Proceedings

Abstracts and Field-Guides will be published as volumes in theISSN-coded series ofthe instit ute, “ Kölner Forum für Geologieund Paläontologie”.

We seek arrangements to publ ish select ed papers from theconference proceedings in a first-class international journal.

Congress Fees

All efforts will be made to keep costs affordable. R educed feeswill be available for SEPM-CES members. For membershipapplication please refer to: http://sepm-ces.uni-frankfurt.de

Since the conference will be held with our staff in the buildingsof the inst itute, most costs have to be calculated for the fieldtrips. We will give detailed information in the second circularbased on approximate numbers of participants.

Social Program

Besides ice-breaker party and conference dinner we wi ll organizeguided ci ty tours in Cologne and a River Rhine cruise.

Accommodation

Conference participants are responsible for making their ownaccommodat ion arrangements. Cologne offers a wide selectionfrom reasonable hotels starting at 40 €/night up to first classhotels. We will give a list ofhotels with special arrangements inthe second circular. The well-organized public transport willguarant ee easy access to the conference locat ion.

Important Dates (deadlines)

Reply to the 1st Circular 01.07.2005

2nd Ci rcular Sept. 2005

Registration 01.03.2006

All Fees (Registration, Field trips) 15.04.2006

Abstracts 01.06.2006

Contact

Dr. Markus Aretz

CCC-2006, Institut für Geologie und Mineralogie, UniversitätKöln, Zülpicher Str. 49a, 50674 Köln, Germany

Tel.: +49 221 4703532, Fax: +49 221 4705080

Email: [email protected]

www.ccc2006.uni-koeln.de

Jul y 2005

SCCS VOTING & CORRESPONDING MEMBERSHIP 2005

Please check your entry and report anychanges to the Secretary

ALGERIAMrs Fatma Abdesselam-RouighiCentre de Recherche etDeveloppementAve du 1er N ovembre35000 BounerdesALGER IA

A. SebbarUni vers ite de Boumer desFaculte des Hydr ocarbureset de la Chi mieDept. Gisements Minier s etPetrol iers.Ave du l ’ Independance35000 BoumerdesALGER IAFax: (213) 24 81 91 72Email : [email protected]

ARGENTINADr S. ArchangelskyURQUIZA 1132Vicente Lopez1638 Buenos Ai resRep. AR GENTINAFax: 54-1-982-4494Emai l:sar cang @overnet.com.ar

Dr Carlos AzcuyDepto. de Cienc ias GeológicasPabellón 2, CiudadUnivers itaria1428 Núñez, Buenos AiresRep. AR GENTINAFax: 54-1-638-1822Email: [email protected] .ar

Dr Silvia CésariDiv. PaleobotanicaMuseo de Cs. Naturales‘B.Rivadavi a’Av. A. Gal lardo 4701405 Buenos Ai resRep. AR GENTINA

Dr N. Rubén CuneoPalaeontol ogical Museum ‘E.Feruglio’Av. 9 de Juli o 6559100 Trelew, ChubutRep. AR GENTINA

Dr Carlos R. GonzálezDirección de GeologíaFundación M iguel LilloMiguel Lillo 2514000 TucumánRep. AR GENTINAFax: 081-330868Email: fmlgeo@tuccbbs .com.ar

Dr L. MasiniDepartment of Zool ogyLa Tr obe UniversityMelbourne, VIC 3086AUSTRALIAFax: 61-3-94791551Email: [email protected]

Dr I. MetcalfeAsia C entreUniversity of New Eng landArmidal e, N SW 2351AUSTRALIAFax: 02- 67733596Email: [email protected]

Prof. G. PlayfordEar th Sc iences/School of Physical SciencesThe University of Queensl andBri sbane,AUSTRALIA 4072Fax: 07-3365-1277Emai l:[email protected]

Prof. J. RobertsSchool of Applied GeologyThe U niversity ofNew South WalesSydney, N SW 2052AUSTRALIAFax: 61-2- 9385-5935Email: [email protected]

Dr Guang R. ShiSchool of Ecology andEnvi ronmentDeakin Univers ityMel bourne Campus221 Bur wood HighwayBur wood, VIC 3125AUSTRALIAEmail: [email protected]

S. Stoj anovic71 Barracks RoadHope Vall eyAdelaide, SA 5090AUSTRALIAFax: 373-4098

Dr S. TurnerQueensl and MuseumP.O. Box 3300South Bri sbane, QLD 4101AUSTRALIAFax: 61-7- 3846-1918Emai l:[email protected] .oz.au

AUSTRIADr F. EbnerIns titut für GeowissenschaftenMontanuniversi tät LeobenA- 8700 LeobenAUSTRIA

Dr K. KrainerInst. für Geol . undPal äontolog ieUni versi tät Innsbr uckInnrain 52A- 6020 InnsbruckAUSTRIAFax: 0043-512-507-5585Email: [email protected] .at

Prof. Dr H.P. SchönlaubGeol. Bundesanstalt WienPostfach 127Rasumofskygasse 23A- 1031 Wi enAUSTRIAFax: +431-712-5674- 56Emai l:[email protected]

BELGIUM

Dr F.-X. DevuystUnité de GéologieUniversité Catholique de Louvain3 pl ace Louis Pas teur1348, Louvain-la-NeuveBELGIUMEmai l: devuys t@hotmai l.com

Dr Michiel DusarGeol ogical Survey of Bel giumJenner str. 13B-1000 BrusselsBELGIUMEmai l:michiel .dusar@naturalsciences .be

Dr E. Gr oessensService Géologique de Belgique13, rue Jenner 1000Bruxell esBELGIUMFAX: 02/6477359Emai l:[email protected]

Dr Luc HanceUnité de GéologieUniversité Catholique de Louvain3 pl ace Louis Pas teur1348, Louvain-la-NeuveBELGIUMFAX: 322- 647-7359Emai l: hance@geol .ucl .ac.be

Prof. Bernard L. M ametLaboratoire de Geol ogieUniversite de Bruxelles50 avenue F.D. RooseveltBruxelles BI000BELGIUM

Prof. E. PotySer vice de PaléontologieanimaleUniversitè de LiègeBât. B18, Sart Ti lmanB-4000 Li ègeBELGIUMFax: 32-43-665338

Mercedes di PasquoFacul tad de CienciasExactas y Natural es.Depto. Geologia. Ci udadUniversitaria. Pabell on II. N uñez.Capital Federal. C.P. 1428.Rep. AR GENTINAEmail: medi [email protected] [email protected] l.fcen.uba.ar

Dr Arturo C. TaboadaIns tituto de PaleontologiaFundación M iguel LilloMiguel Lillo 2514000 S.M. deTucumánRep. AR GENTINA

Dr M.S. JapasDepto. de Cienc ias GeológicasPabellón 2, Ciudad U niversitaria1428 Núñez, Buenos AiresRep. AR GENTINA

Dr Nora SabattiniUniver sidad Naci onal de la PlataFacultad de Ciencias Naturales YMuseoPaseo del Bosque1900, La Pl ataRep. AR GENTINA

AUSTRALIAProf. N.W. ArchboldSchool of Ecol ogyand Envi ronmentDeakin Universi ty,Rusden CampusClayton VIC 3168AUSTRALIAFax: 03-9244-7480Email: nar [email protected]

Dr J.C. Claoué-LongAust. Geol . Survey Org anisat ionP.O. Box 378Canberra City, A.C.T. 2601AUSTRALIAFax: 06-249-9983Emai l: jcl ong@ag so.gov.au

Dr J.M. DickinsInnovati ve Geology14 Bent StreetTurner Canber ra, ACT 2612AUSTRALIAFax: 06-249-9999

Dr B.A. Engel10 Fay AvenueNew Lambton, NSW 2305AUSTRALIAEmail : beng [email protected]

Dr P.J. JonesDepartment of Geol ogyAustralian National Univer sityCanberra ACT 0200AUSTRALIAFax: 61-2-62495544Emai l:peter. jones@g eology.anu.edu.au

51


Hon. Prof. Maurice StreelUniversity of LiègePaleontolog y,Sart Tilman Bat. B18B-4000 LIEGE 1BELGIUMFax: 32-4-366 5338Emai l:Maur [email protected]

Dr Rudy SwennenFysico-chemische geol ogieKatholi eke Universi teit LeuvenCelestijnenlaan 200CB-3001 H ever leeBELGIUM

BRAZILMr L.E. AnelliInst ituto de Geosciênc iasUniversidade de São PauloCP 11348 CEP 05422- 970São PauloBRAZILFax: 55- 011- 818-4129Emai l: [email protected]

Dr U.G. CordaniInst ituto de Geosciênc iasUniversidade de São PauloCP 11348 CEP 05422- 970São PauloBRAZIL

Dr Jose Henrique G. MeloPetrobras /Cenpes/PDEXP/BPA1112 Cicade UniversitariaQuadra 7, Ilha do Fundao21941-598 Ri o de JaneiroBRAZILFax: 55-21-2590-1291Emai l:[email protected]

Dr A.C. Rocha-CamposInst ituto de Geosciênc iasUniversidade de São PauloCP 11348 CEP 05422- 970São PauloBRAZILFax: 11- 818-4129Email: [email protected]

Dr Paulo Alves de SouzaDepartamento de Paleontologi a eEstrati grafiaInst ituto de Geosciênci asUniversidade Federal do RioGrande do SulAv. Bento Gonçalves, 950091.540-000 - Porto Alegre - RSBRAZILEmail: [email protected] .br

BULGARIADr Y.G. TenchovGeol .Inst. ul. Acad.Bonchev bl oc. 24Sofia 1113BU LGAR IAEmail: geoins@bgear n.acad.bg

CANADADr Wayne BamberGeol.Surv.C anada, C algary3303- 33rd St. N.W.Calgary AB, T2L 2A7CANADAFax: 403- 292-6014Email:bamber@g sc.nr can.gc .ca

Dr B. BeauchampGeol.Surv.C anada, C algary3303- 33rd St. N.W.Calgary AB, T2L 2A7CANADA

Dr A.R. BergerGeol ogical Survey of CanadaRoom 177, 601 Booth Str eetOttawa ON , K1A 0E8CANADA

Dr P.H. von BitterRoyal Ontario Museum100 Queen ParkToronto ON , M5S 2C6CANADA

Fannie C ouzarisRedpath MuseumMcGill University859 Sherbr ooke WestMontreal, PQ, H3A 2K6CANADAEmai l:fanniecouzari [email protected]

Dr W.R. DannerUniversity of British Col umbiaDept Earth & Ocean.Sciences6339 Stores Rd.Vancouver B.C., V6T 1Z4CANADA

Dr Martin GiblingDepartment of Geol ogyDalhousie Univer sityHalifax N.S., B3H 3J5CANADA

Prof. Charles HendersonDepartment of Geol ogy& Geophysi csThe Uni versity of C algary2500 University D rive, N.W.Calgary AB, T2N 1N4CANADAFax: 1 403 284 0074Emai l:henderson@g eo.ucalg ary.ca

Dr W. NassichukGeol ogical Survey of Canada3303- 33rd St. N.W.Calgary AB, T2L 2A7CANADA

Dr M.J. OrchardGeol ogical Survey of Canada101-605 Robson Street,Vancouver, B.C., V6B 5J3CANADAFax: 604- 666-1124Emai l:mor [email protected] can.gc .ca

Dr Sylvie Pi nard7146 - 119 Street N.W.Edmonton, Alberta T6G 1V6CANADAFax: 403- 436-7136

Dr B.C. RichardsGeol ogical Survey of Canada3303- 33rd St. N.W.Calgary AB, T2L 2A7CANADAFax: 403- 292-5377Email : brichar [email protected]

Dr Michael RygelDepartment of Earth SciencesDalhousie Univer sityHalifax,Nova Scoti a B3H 4J1CANADAFax: 902- 494-6889Email: mike ryg [email protected]

Dr J. UttingGeol.Surv.C anada, C algary3303- 33rd St. N.W.Calgary AB, T2L 2A7CANADAFax: 403- 292-6014Email: [email protected]

Dr Erwin L. ZodrowUniv. College of Cape BretonDept Geol ogy, Glace Bay H’ waySydney N.S., B1P 6L2CANADAFax: 902- 562-0119Emai l:[email protected]

CZECH REPUBLIC

Dr Jirí KalvodaDept. Geol. Paleont.Masaryk Uni vers ityKot lárská 261137 Br noCZECH REPUBLICEmai l:dino@sci .muni .cz

Dr Jirí KrálDept Genetics & MicrobiologyFac. Sci ence, Charles Univer-si tyVinicná 5128 44 Praha 2CZECH REPUBLIC

RNDr Stanisl av OplustilCharl es UniversityInst itute of Geology &PalaeontologyAlbertov 6CZ-128 43 PragueCZECH REPUBLICEmai l:opl ustil@prfdec .natur.cuni .cz

Dr Jirí PesekDept. Geol. Paleontol.,Fac .ScienceCharl es University128 43 Praha 2, Alber tov 6CZECH REPUBLICFax: +02-296- 084

RND r Zbynek SimunekCzech Geolog ical SurveyKl árov 3/131CZ-118 21 PragueCZECH REPUBLICEmail: s [email protected]

EGYPTDr Mahmoud M. KholiefEgyptian Petrol eumResearch InstNasr City, 7th RegionCairoEGYPTFax: 202- 284-9997

FRANCEDr J-F. Becq-Giraudon1 rue de Villiers79500 - MelleFRANCEEmai l:jfbecqgi [email protected]

Dr Alain BlieckU.S.T.L.Sciences de la terreUPRESA 8014 et FR1818 du C.N.R.S.F-59655 Villeneuve d’ AscqCedexFRANCEFax: 00 333 20 43 6900Emai l:Alain.Bl ieck@univ-l ille1.fr

Dr O. BruguierISTEEM,Université de M ontpellier II,34 095 Montpel lier, Cedex 5FRANCEEmai l:Olivier.Br [email protected]

Henr i Fontaine8 Allee de la Chapelle92140 C lamartFRANCEFax: 33-1-40940892

Dr Alain IzartUniver sité de Nancy IDépartement des Sci ences dela TerreBP 239, 54506 Vandoeuvre l esNancyFRANCEFax: ( 33) 83 91 25 89Emai l:Alain.Izart@g 2r.u- nancy.fr

Dr J .P. LaveineLab.Paléobot.,UFR Sci.de laTerreUniv. des Sci. et Techn. de LilleF-59655 Villeneuve d’ AscqCedexFRANCEFax: 33-2043-6900Emai l:Jean-Pi erre.Laveine@uni v-lille1.fr

Jul y 2005

Dr Marie Legrand-BlainInstitut de Géodynamiq ueUni versité de Bordeaux 31 Allee F. Daguin33607 PessacFRANCEFax: 56-848-073-----------Home: “Tauzia”33170 Gr adig nanFRANCEFax: (0)5-56-89-33-24Email: egrandbl [email protected]

Dr D. MercierEcole des Mi nes de Paris35, Rue Saint-HonoréF-77305 FontainebleauFRANCE

Dr G.S. OdinLab.Géochr on.et Sédim.Océaniq ueUniv. P.&M.Curie, 4 Place Jussieucase 119F-75252 Par is Cédex 05FRANCEFax: 33-1- 4427-4965Email: g [email protected]

Dr M.F. PerretUni versité Paul -Sabat ierLab.Géol .Str uctur ale38 rue des 36 PontsF-31400 ToulouseFRANCEFax: 61- 55-82-50Email: perret@ci ct.fr

Cari ne RandonLab. de Paléontolgi e etPaléogéographie du PaléozoiqueUniv. des Sci. et Techn. de LilleUFR Sciences de la TerreF-59655 Vi lleneuve d’Ascq cedexFRANCEEmai l:car ine.r [email protected] ille1.fr

Dr D. VachardUniv.des Sci ences et Techni quesScience de la TerreF-59655 Vi lleneuve d’Ascq CédexFRANCEFax: 00- 33-20- 43-69-00Emai l:Daniel.Vachard@univ- lille1.fr

GERMANYDr H .W.J. van AmeromGeol.Landesamt Nor drh.-Wes tfal enDe Greiff Str.195D-47803 KrefeldGERM ANYFax: 2151-897-505

Prof. Dr Michael R. W. AmlerInsti tut für Geologie undPal aeontologieder Phili pps-Universitaet MarburgHans-M eerwein-StrasseD-35032 MarburgGERM ANYFax: +49 ( 0)6421 282-8919Emai l:aml [email protected] .de

Prof. Dr. R. Thomas BeckerWestfäl ische Wi lhel ms-U niversitätGeologi sch-PaläontologischesInstitut u. MuseumCor rensstrasse 24D-48149 Müns terGERM ANYEmai l:rbecker@uni-muens ter.de

Dr Z. BelkaIns t.und Mus.für Geol.und Paläont.Universität Tübi ngenSigwartstr. 10D-72076 Tübi ngenGERM ANYFax: + 49-7071- 610259Emai l:[email protected] tuebingen.de

Prof. Dr C arsten BrauckmannTechnische U niversität Claus thalInsti tut für Geologie undPal äontolog ieLei bnizstrasse 10D-38678 Clausthal-ZellerfeldGERM ANYFax: 05323-722903Emai l:Carsten.Brauckmann@tu-cl austhal.de

Dr Peter BruckschenRuhr-Universität BochumGeol ogisches Inst itutUniversitätsstr . 150D- 44801 BochumGERM ANY

Dr Günter DrozdzewskiGeologi sches LandesamtNor drhein-WestfalenDe-Greiff -Str. 195D-47803 KrefeldGERM ANYFax ++49-2151-89 75 05Email: dr ozdzewski@g la.nrw.de

Dr Holger ForkeInst itut für Pal äontol ogieLoewenichstr. 28D-91054 ErlangenGERM ANYEmai l:for [email protected]

Mr Chr. Hartkopf-FröderGeol .LandesamtNor drh.-WestfalenDe Greiff Str.195D-47803 KrefeldGERM ANYFax: + 49-2151- 897505Emai l:har tkopf-froeder @mai l.gla.nrw.de

Prof. Dr Hans-Georg HerbigUniversität zu Köln,Geol ogisches Inst itutZülpicher Str. 49aD-50674 KölnGERM ANYFax: +49-221-470-5080Emai l:herbig .pal [email protected]

Dr Peer HothBundesanstalt fürGeowissenschaften und RohstoffeAS BerlinWil helmstr. 25-30D-13539 BerlinGERM ANYFax ++ 49-30-36 99 31 00Email: peer.hoth@bgr .de

Prof. Dr Hans KerpWestfäli sche Wilhel ms-Uni versi tätAbt.Paläobot.am Geol -Pal .Ins t.u Mus.Hindenburgplatz 57-59D-48143 MünsterGERM ANYFax: 49-251-834-831Email: Kerp@uni- muenster .de

Dr Dieter KornNatur historischesForschungsins titutMuseum für NaturkundeHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinInsti tut für PaläontolgieInvalidenstr asse 43D-10115 BerlinGERM ANYFax + +49-(0) 30 2093 8568Emai l:di [email protected] lin.de

Prof. Dr J . KullmannIns t.und Mus.für Geol.undPaläont.Universität Tübi ngenSigwartstr. 10D-72076 Tübi ngenGERM ANYFax: + 49-7473-26768Emai l:Juergen.Kull [email protected]

Dr Manfred MenningGeoForschungs ZentrumPotsdamTelegrafenberg, Haus C128D- 14473 PotsdamGERM ANYFax: +49-331-288-1302Email: menne@g fz-potsdam.de

Dr Klaus-Jürgen MüllerInst itut für Pal äontol ogieNussal lee 8,D- 53115 BonnGERM ANY

Dr E. PaprothSchwanenburgstr. 14D-47804 KrefeldGERM ANYFax: + 49-2151- 710774

Dr Elias SamankassouIns titute of Paleontol ogyUniver sity of Erl angen-NuernbergLoeweni chstr asse 28D-91054 ErlangenGERM ANYFax: +49-9131-85 22690Emai l:samelias@pal .uni -erlangen.de

Prof. Dr. Jörg SchneiderTU Ber gakademie Fr eibergInstitut für GeologieBernhard-von- Cotta-Str. 2D-09596 FreibergGERM ANYFax ++49-3731-39 35 99Emai l:schneidj@g eo.tu-freiber g.de

Dr D. StoppelBundesanst.für Geowissen. u.RohstoffePostfach 51 0153D- 30631 HannoverGERM ANYFax: 511- 643-2304

Dr E. ThomasRhsbergstr. 22D-58456 Witten-HerbedeGERM ANY

Dr Dieter WeyerLöwestr. 15D-10249 BerlinGERM ANYEmai l:di eter .weyer@t-onl ine.de

Dr Volker WredeGeologi sches LandesamtNor drhein-Westfalende-Greiff -Str. 195D-47803 KrefeldGERM ANYFax ++49-2151-89 75 42Emai l:volker .wr [email protected]

HUNGARYDr Sc. Heinz KozurRézsü u. 83H- 1029 BudapestHUNGARYFax: +36-1-204-4167Email : h12547koz@el la.hu

IRELANDDr Geoff ClaytonDepartment of Geol ogyTrinity CollegeDublin 2IRELANDFax: 3531- 6711199Email: g [email protected]

Dr Ken HigginsDepartment of Geol ogyUniversity CollegeCorkIRELAND

53


Dr G.D. SevastopuloDepartment of Geol ogyTrinity CollegeDublin 2IRELANDEmail: g [email protected]

ISRAELDr Olga Orlov-LabkovskyDepartment of Zool ogyTel- Aviv U nivers ityTel -Avi v 69978ISRAELEmai l: olgaorl@pos t.tau.ac.il

ITALYProf. Mar io PasiniUnivers itarà delle Studi diSi enaDipar timento di Sienza dellater raI-53100 SienaITALY

JAPANDr Shuko AdachiEar th Evolut ion SciencesGraduate School of Life andEnvironmental SciencesUni versi ty of TsukubaTsukubaIbaraki, 305-8572JAPANEmai l:[email protected] .jp

Dr Masayuki EhiroTohoku University MuseumAoba, Ar amakiAoba-kuSendai , 980-8578JAPANFax: +81-22- 217-7759Emai l:ehiro@mai l.cc .tohoku.ac. jp

Dr Yoichi EzakiDept Geosciences,Fac . ScienceOsaka Ci ty Univers itySumiyoshi- kuOsaka, 558-8585JAPAN

Mr Takehiko HaikawaAki yoshi- dai Sc i. MuseumNat. Hist.Shuhou-chou, Mine- gunYamaguchi 754-0511JAPAN

Dr Yoshiyuki HasegawaIkarashi 2- no-chou 7492- 128Niigata, 950- 2101JAPAN

Dr Hisaharu IgoDept Earth SciencesTokyo Gakugei Universi tyKoganeiTokyo, 184-8501JAPAN

Dr Hisayoshi IgoSakae-chou 1-31-7Tachi kawaTokyo, 190-0003JAPANEmail: i [email protected]

Dr Keisuke IshidaDept M aterial Sc ienceTokushima Universi tyTokushima, 770-8502JAPAN

Mr Atsushi KanekoFukae- honchou 1-15-7Higashi-nada-kuKobe, 658-0021JAPAN

Dr Kametoshi KanmeraMai matsubara 3-20-24Higashi-kuFukuoka, 813- 0042JAPAN

Dr N aruhiko KashimaJunior CollegeMatsuyama ShinonomeGakuenKuwabar a 3- 2-1MatsuyamaEhime, 790-8531JAPAN

Dr M akoto KatoMiyanomori 1- jou 18-choume1- 15Chuou- kuSapporo, 064-0951JAPANFax: + 81-11-644-1426

Dr Toshio KawamuraDept Earth Sci., Fac. Educa-ti onMiyagi Univ. EducationAoba-kuSendai , 980-0845JAPANEmai l:t- [email protected] yakyo- u.ac. jp

Dr Toshi o KoikeTokiwadai 36-6- 606Hodogaya- kuYokohama, 240- 0067JAPANEmail : [email protected]. jp

Ms Yuko KyumaTomachi 2-295-14- 303Nag asaki, 850-0952JAPAN

Dr Yoshihiro MizunoShimano 1054-1IchiharaChi ba, 290-0034JAPANEmai l: onuz [email protected] net.ne. jp

Dr Makoto MusashinoDept Earth SciencesKyoto Uni v. Educati onHushimi -kuKyoto, 612-8522JAPAN

Dr Koichi NagaiDept Physics & Earth Sci encesFac . ScienceUni vers ity of the R yukyusNishi haraOkinawa, 903- 0129JAPANEmai l:k- [email protected]. jp

Dr Tamio NishidaDept Earth Sci., Fac. EducationSaga Univer sitySag a, 840-8502JAPAN

Dr Yuji OkimuraOhtada 236-1, Kurose-machiKamo-g unHir oshi ma, 724-0611JAPANEmai l:oktethys@themis .ocn.ne. jp

Dr Masamichi OtaKitakyushu Muse. Natur al His toryNishihon-machi,Yahatahigashi- kuKi takyushu, 805-0061JAPANFax: +81-93- 661-7503Email : [email protected] takyushu. jp

Dr Yasuhiro OtaKitakyushu Muse. Natur al His toryNishihon-machi,Yahatahigashi- kuKi takyushu, 805-0061JAPANFax: +81-93- 661-7503Emai l:[email protected]. jp

Dr Tomowo OzawaDept Earth & Planetary Sci.Fac . ScienceNag oya Univ.Chi gusa-kuNagoya, 464-8602JAPAN

Dr Ki miyoshi SadaFac. Social Information ScienceGraduate School Infor. Sci.Kure Univer sityKureHir oshi ma, 737-0182JAPANFax: +81-823-70-3364Email : [email protected] e-u.ac. jp

Dr Sumio Sakag amiKonakano 48Aki runo- shiTokyo, 190-0165JAPANFax: +81-42- 596-0459

Dr Katsuo SashidaEar th Evolut ion SciencesGraduate School of Life andEnvironmental SciencesUni vers ity TsukubaTsukubaIbaraki, 305-8572JAPAN

Dr Tetsuo Sug iyamaDept. Ear th System Sci.Fac . ScienceFukuoka Uni ver sity,Jonan- kuFukuoka, 814- 0180JAPANFax: +81-92- 865-6030Emai l:[email protected]. jp

Dr Jun-ichi TazawaDept of GeologyFac . ScienceNiigata U niversityNiigata, 950- 2181JAPANFax: +81-25- 262-6194Email: tazawa@g eo.sc .niigata-u.ac. jp

Dr Katsumi UenoDept. Earth System ScienceFac . ScienceFukuoka Uni ver sity,Jonan- kuFukuoka, 814- 0180JAPANEmai l:katsumi @fukuoka- u.ac. jp

Dr Nobuo YamagiwaShiroyama- chou 3- 51-203Ikeda-shiOsaka, 563-0052JAPAN

Mr Yasushi YoshidaShichikukami hon-machi 21Ki ta- kuKyoto, 603-8116JAPAN

KAZAKHSTANDr V. KoshkinKaz IMSul. K. M arx, 105480100 AlmatyREP. KAZAKH STAN

Dr M.M. MarfenkovaIns t. Geol. N aukul. Kananbai batyra 69A480100 Alma AtaREP. KAZAKH STAN

Dr Alexei Pronin3, D ossorskaya Str.Atyr au, 465002REP. KAZAKH STAN

Dr M.I. Radchenkoul . Shagabutdi nova 80 kv. 39480059 Al ma-AtaREP. KAZAKH STAN

KYRGYZSTANDr Alexandr a V. D jenchur aevaAgency on Geology and Mi neralResources of Kyrgyz Republicpr ospekt Eki ndik 2720300 BishkekKYR GYZSTANEmai l:mail@geoag ency.bishkek.g ov.kg

Jul y 2005

Al exandr V. N eyevinAgency on Geology andMineralResources of Kyrgyz Republicpr ospekt Eki ndik 2720300 BishkekKYR GYZSTANEmai l:mai [email protected] shkek.gov.kg

Timur Yu. VorobyovAgency on Geology andMineralResources of Kyrgyz Republicpr ospekt Eki ndik 2720300 BishkekKYR GYZSTANEmai l:mai [email protected] shkek.gov.kg

Olg a GetmanAgency on Geology andMineralResources of Kyrgyz Republicpr ospekt Eki ndik 2720300 BishkekKYR GYZSTANEmai l:mai [email protected] shkek.gov.kg

MALAYSIAIbr ahim bin AmnanTechnical Services DivisionMinerals and Geosci enceDepartment M alaysiaJalan Sultan Azlan Shah31400 IpohPerak,MALAYSIAEmai l:ibrahi m@j mg.gov.my

NEW ZEALANDDr J.B. Water house25 Avon St.OamaruNEW ZEALAND

PEOPLES REP. CHINAProf. Hou HongfeiEpisodesP.O. Box 82326 Baiwanzhuang R oadBeij ing 100037PEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINA

Dr Gao LiandaInst. Geol ., Chi nese Acad.Geol.Sc iencesBai wanzhuang RoadBeijingPEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINA

Dr Guo HongjunChang chun Coll ege of Geology6 Ximinzhu StreetChangchun, JilinPEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINA

Dr Jin Xiao-chiIns titute of Geol ogyChinese Academy of Geol ogi-cal Sc iences26 Baiwanzhuang R oadBeij ing 100037PEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINAEmail: j inxchi@cag s.net.cn

Dr Li XingxueNanji ng Inst. Geol. Pal eont.Academia Sini ca,Chi-Ming-SsuNanj ing 210008PEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINAFax: 86-25-3357026Email: lixx@nj net. ihep.ac.cn

Dr Ouyang ShuNanjing Inst. of Geol. &Palaeont.Academia Sini ca, Chi-Ming-SsuNanj ing 210008PEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINAFax: 86-25-335-7026Email: [email protected] .cn

Dr Ruan YipingNanji ng Inst. Geol. Pal eont.Academia Sini ca, Chi-Ming-SsuNanj ing 210008PEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINA

Dr Yang ShipuChina Univer sity of Geo-sciencesChengfu LuBeij ing 100083PEOPLES REPUBLIC OFCHINA

Prof. Wang Xiang-dongNanj ing Inst itute of Geology andPalaeontologyChi nese Academy of Sciences39 East Beijing RoadNanj ing 210008PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINAEmail: [email protected] .cn

Prof. Wang Zhi-haoNanj ing Inst itute of Geology andPalaeontologyAcademia SinicaNanj ing 210008PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINAEmail: fmxu@ni gpas .ac.cn

POLANDProf. Jerzy FedorowskiIns titute of Geol ogyAdam Micki ewicz Univer sityMaków Polnych 16PL-61601 PoznanPOLANDFax: 48-61- 536- 536Email : j [email protected]

Dr Tadeusz PerytDept of Chemi cal ResourcesPanstwowy Ins tytut GeologicznyRakowiecka 4PL- 00975 WarszawaPOLAND

Dr S. SkompskiIns titute of Geolog y, War sawUniv.Al Zwirki i Wigury 93PL- 02089 WarszawaPOLANDFax: 0- 048- 22-220-248Emai l:[email protected]

Dr Elzbieta TurnauInst itute of Geologi cal SciencesPASSenacka 1PL-31002 KrakowPOLANDEmail: [email protected]

Dr H. ZakowaPanstwowy Ins t. Geol .,Oddzial-Swietokr zyski,Slir Poczt. 59PL- 25953 KielcePOLAND

PORTUGALProf. M.J .Lemos de SousaDept. de Geologi a, Fac.CiênciasUniversidade do PortoPraça de Gomes Teixeira4099-002 PortoPORTUGALFax: (+ 351) 22 3325937Email: mlsousa@fc .up.pt

Prof. J.T. Oli veiraInstituto Geológico e MineiroEstrada da Portela, BairroZambuj alApartado 75862720 Al fragidePORTUGAL

RUSSIADr Alexander S. AlekseevDept of Palaeont., Geol. FacultyMoscow State Univer sity119899 Moscow GSP V- 234RUSSIAFax: 70953391266Email: aaleks@g eol.msu.ru

Dr I.S. Bar skovDept. of Paleontology,Geology FacultyMoscow State Univer sity119899 Moscow GSP V-234RUSSIAFax: 7095-9392190

Dr I.V. BudnikovSiberian Inst. Geol., Geophys.&Min. Res.Siberian Geologi cal SurveyKrasny prospekt 67630104 Novosibi rskRUSSIAFax: 383-2-20-35- 17, 22-57-40

Dr T.V. Byvshevaul . Bolshaia Academycheskaja77 kor .1 kv. 154125183 MoscowRUSSIA

Dr Boris ChuvashovInst. Geology/GeochemistryRussian Academy of SciencesPochtoryi per. 7620151 Ekater inburgRUSSIAEmail: chuvasov@igg .uran.ru

Dr Marina V. DuranteGeol ogical Insti tuteRussian Academy of SciencesPyzhevsky per. 7109017 MoscowRUSSIAFax: +7-95-231-0443Email: dur [email protected]

Dr A.V. DurkinaTiman-Pechora ResearchCenterul. Pushkina 2169400 UkhtaKomi RepublicRUSSIAFax: 6-13-04

Dr V.G. GanelinGeol ogical Insti tuteRussian Academy of SciencesPyzhevsky per. 7109017 MoscowRUSSIA

Dr Nil yufer B. Gi bshmanMoscow Oi l and GasAcademyLeninsky Prospect 65117917 Moscow GSP-1RUSSIAEmai l:ni lyufer@mtu- net.ru

Dr N. GorevaGeol ogical Insti tuteRussian Academy of SciencesPyzhevsky per. 7109017 MoscowRUSSIAFax: +7- 095-231-04-43Emai l:[email protected] n.ru

Dr Igor A. IgnatievGeol ogical Insti tuteRussian Academy of Sciences7 Pyzhevsky per.119017 M oscowRUSSIA

Dr T.N. IsakovaGeol ogical Insti tuteRussian Academy of SciencesPyzhevsky per. 7109017 MoscowRUSSIAFax: +7- 095-231-04-43Emai l:[email protected] sign.ru

55


Dr R .M. IvanovaInst itute of Geol ogy & Geochemis-tr yUral ian Branch, Russian Academyof SciencesPochtovyi per . 7620151 Ekater inburgRUSSIAFax: +7- 3432-5152-52Email: [email protected]

Dr Pavel B. KabanovPaleontological InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesPr ofsoyuznaya 123117868 Moscow GSPRUSSIAEmail : kabanov@pal eo.ru

Dr A.H. Kagar manovLeningr adsky Gorny Inst.Vas ilievsky ostr.21 Linia, 2199106 St PetersburgRUSSIA

Dr N .V. Kalashni kovIns t.Geol.,Komi Sci entif ic Cent.Uralian Branch, R ussianAcademy of Scienceul . Per vomayskaya 57167000 SyktyvkarRUSSIA

Dr L.I. KononovaDept. of Paleontology,Geology FacultyMoscow State Univer sity119899 Moscow GSP V-234RUSSIA

Dr M.V. Konoval ovaTiman-Pechora ResearchCenterul. Pushkina 2169400 UkhtaKomi RepublicRUSSIAFax: 6-13-04

Dr Ol ga L. KossovayaV.S.E.G.E.I.Sredni pr. 74199106 St PetersburgRUSSIAEmail: koss@mai l.wplus.ru

Dr Elena I. KulaginaIns t. GeologyUralian Res. CenterRussian Academy of SciencesUfa RUSSIAEmail: [email protected]

Dr S.S. LazarevPaleontological InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesPr ofsoyuznaya 123117868 Moscow GSPRUSSIA

Dr M.K. MakhlinaT.T.P. “Centrgeologia”Varshavskoje Shosse 39a113105 M oscowRUSSIAFax: 7-095-954-38-15

Dr Yulia V. MosseichikGeol ogical Insti tuteRussian Academy of Sciences7 Pyzhevsky per.119017 M oscowRUSSIAEmai l: [email protected]

Dr E. V. MovshovichP.O. Box 1204344091 Ros tov- na-D onu- 91RUSSIA

Dr Svetl ana N ikolaevaPaleontological InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesPr ofsoyuznaya 123117868 Moscow GSPRUSSIAEmail: 44svnikol@mtu- net.ru

Mrs M.V. OshurkovaV.S.E.G.E.I.Sredni pr. 74199106 St PetersburgRUSSIA

Dr Vladimir N. PazukhinIns t. GeologyUralian Res. CenterRussian Academy of SciencesUfaRUSSIA

Dr L.N. PetersonKr asnoyar skg eolsyomkaul. Beresina, 3660020 Krasnoyar skRUSSIA

Dr A.V. PopovLeni ngrad Univer sity16 Linia, 29199178 St PetersburgRUSSIA

Dr B.V. PoyarkovMoskovsky prospekt 163 kv.639150057 Yar oslavlRUSSIA

Dr E.A. ReitlingerGeol ogical Insti tuteRussian Academy of SciencesPyzhevsky per. 7109017 MoscowRUSSIAFax: +7- 095-231-04-43

Dr S.T. Remi zovaInst.Geol. , Komi Scient ificCentreul . Pervomaj skayja 54167000 SyktyvkarKomi RepublicRUSSIAFax: 821-2-42-53-46Emai l:str at@g eol.dereza.komi.su

Dr R.A. SchekoldinDept of Historical GeologyMining Institute, 21st line V.O.2199106 St PetersburgRUSSIAFax: 812-213-26-13Email : beni [email protected]

Dr O.A. ShcherbakovPol ytechnical InstituteKomsomolskiy Avenue 29a614600 PermRUSSIAEmai l:[email protected] .ru

Dr M.V. ShcherbakovaPol ytechnical InstituteKomsomolskiy Avenue 29a614600 PermRUSSIA

Dr K.V. SimakovN.E.Inter.Sci.Res.Inst.,Far EastRussian Academy of SciencesPortovajy 16685005 MadaganRUSSIA

Dr V. TchizhovaV.N.I .I .neftI D mitrovsky proezd 10125422 MoscowRUSSIA

Dr Alexander P. VilesovGeological FacultyPer m State Univers ityu1. Bukir eva 15614600 PermRUSSIAEmai l: [email protected] .ru

SLOVENIADr M atevz N ovakGeological Survey of SloveniaDimiceva 14SI - 1000 LjubljanaSLOVEN IAFax: 386-01-2809753Emai l:matevz.novak@g eo- zs.si

Dr A. RamovsKatedra za g eologijo inpaleontologijoAskerceva 2SLO-1000 Lj ublj anaSLOVEN IAFax: 386-61-1259-337

SOUTH AFRICA

Dr Colin MacRaePal aeont.Sect.,Geol ogicalSur veyPrivate Mail Bag X112Pretoria 0001SOUTH AFRICA

Mr Barry MillsteedPal aeont.Sect.,Geol ogicalSur veyPrivate Mail Bag X112Pretoria 0001SOUTH AFRICAFax: 012- 841-1278Emai l:bmil lstd@g eoscience.or g.za

Dr J.N. TheronGeological Sur veyP.O. Box 572Bell ville 7535SOUTH AFRICA

SPAINDr A. García-LoygorriCátedra de GeologíaEscuel a Sup. Ing. MinasRíos Rosas 2128003 MadridSPAIN

L.F. Gr anadosAvda Juan Andrés 10bi s28035 MadridSPAIN

Dr M.L. Martinez ChacónDepto de Geol ogíaUni versi dad de Ovi edoArias de Velasco s/n33005 OviedoSPAINFax: 34-98-510-3103Emai l:[email protected]

Dr Sergio RodríguezDepto de PaleontologíaFacul tad de CienciasGeológicasCiudad Universi taria28040 MadridSPAINFax: 1-394-4854Emai l:ser [email protected]

Dr L.C. Sánchez de PosadaDepto de Geol ogRaUni versi dad de Ovi edoArias de Velasco s/n33005 OviedoSPAINFax: 34-98-510-3103Emai l:[email protected]

Dr Elisa VillaDepto de Geol ogíaUni versi dad de Ovi edoArias de Velasco s/n33005 OviedoSPAINFax: 34-98-510-3103Email: [email protected] .es

Jul y 2005

Dr R.H. WagnerUni dad de PaleobotánicaJardín Botánico de Cór dobaAvenida de Li nneo s/n14004 C órdobaSPAINFax: 34-57- 295- 333Emai l:jar dinbotcord@servi com.es

TARTARSTANDr V.S. Gubar evaul . Kosmonavtov 7 kv. 7420061 KazanTAR TARSTAN

THE NETHERLANDSDr O.A. AbbinkDepartment of Geo- Envir on-mentSection Paleo- EnvironmentalResearchNITG TNO: National GeologicalSur veyP.O. Box 800153508 TA UtrechtTHE NETHERLANDS

Bi bliotheek PalaeobotanieLab. Pal aeobotany andPalynologyBudapestl aan 43584 CD UtrechtTHE NETHERLANDSFax: 31-30-253-5096Email: [email protected]

Dr A.C. van GinkelNationaal NatuurhistorischMuseumPostbus 9517NL-2300 RA LeidenTHE NETHERLANDS

Dr W. KhrschnerLab. Palaeobotany & PalynologyBudapestl aan 4NL-3584 C D UtrechtTHE NETHERLANDS

Subcommissi e Stratig.NederlandNationaal NatuurhistorischMuseumPostbus 9517NL-2300 RA LeidenTHE NETHERLANDS

Dr C.F. Winkler PrinsNationaal NatuurhistorischMuseumPostbus 9517NL-2300 RA LeidenTHE NETHERLANDSFax: 31-71-5687666Emai l:wi [email protected]

TURKEYProf. Dr Demir AltinerDepartment of Geolog icalEngineeringMiddle East TechnicalUni vers ity06531 AnkaraTUR KEYFax: + 90-312-2101263Email: [email protected] @metu.edu.tr

Dr Cengiz OkuyucuMTA Genel MudurluguJeoloji Etut leri Dairesi06520 Balg at- AnkaraTUR KEYEmail : [email protected] ov.tr

UNITED KINGDOMAcquis itionsDepartment of Librar y ServiceThe Natural History MuseumCromwell R oadLondon SW7 5BDUNITED KINGDOM

Dr R.L. Austin21 Bellevue R oadWest Cross , SwanseaSouth Wales SA3 5QBUNITED KINGDOM

Andrew BarnettBadl ey Ashton & Associ atesLtdReservoir Geosci enceConsul tancyWi nceby HouseWi ncebyHorncastleLincolnshireLN9 6PBUNITED KINGDOMFax: 01222 874326Emai l:abarnett@badl ey-ashton.co.uk

Dr Karen BraithwaiteExpl oration & Geolog icalAnalys isBritish Gas Research CentreAshby RoadLoughbor ough, LEICS, LE113QUUNITED KINGDOMFax: 01509-283-137Emai l:kar en.braithwai te@bggrc .co.uk

Dr C.J. ClealDepartment of BotanyNational Museum & Gallery ofWal esCathays ParkCardiff CF1 3NPUNITED KINGDOMFax: 01222-239-829Emai l:100015.567@compuser ve.com

Dr Patrick J CosseyDivision of Natural Sciences(Geol ogy)School of SciencesStaffordshire U nivers ityColleg e RoadStoke-on-Tr ent ST4 2DEUNITED KINGDOMFax: 01782 294438Email: P.J .Cossey@staffs .ac.uk

Dr R.M.C. Eagar23 High Bond EndKnaresboroughNorth Yorks HG5 9BTUNITED KINGDOMFax: 01423-865-892Emai l:[email protected]

Dr Mark HounslowCentre for Envi ronmentalMagnetism andPalaeomagnetism,Lancaster Environment Centre,Geography D epar tment,Lancaster Uni versi ty,Bailrig g, Lancaster, LA1 4YWUNITED KINGDOMFax: 44 ( 0) 1524 847099Emai l:m.hounsl [email protected]

Dr G.A.L. JohnsonDepartment of Geol ogyUniversity of DurhamDurham DH1 3LEUNITED KINGDOM

Dr Duncan McLeanPalynology Resear ch Faci lityUni versity of Sheffi eldDainton Buil dingBrook HillSheffield S3 7HFUNITED KINGDOMEmail: d.mclean@sheff ield.ac.uk

Mr M. Mitchell11 Ryder GardensLeeds, W. Yorks . LS8 1JSUNITED KINGDOM

Dr B. OwensLangdale14th Park Avenue,Plumtree ParkNotti ngham NG12 5LUUNITED KINGDOM

Dr N.J. RileyBriti sh Geological SurveyKeywor thNott ingham NG12 5GGUNITED KINGDOMFax: 44- 115-9363200Email: n.ril ey@bg s.ac .uk

Dr A.R.E. StrankBriti sh Petrol eum Res.C entreChertsey Rd, Sunbury- on-ThamesMiddlesex TW16 7LNUNITED KINGDOM

Dr N. TurnerBriti sh Geological SurveyKeywor thNott ingham NG12 5GGUNITED KINGDOM

Dr W.J. VarkerDepartment of Earth SciencesThe Universi ty of LeedsLeeds LS2 9JTUNITED KINGDOM

Dr Colin N. WatersBriti sh Geological SurveyKeywor thNott ingham NG12 5GGUNITED KINGDOM

Prof. V.P. Wr ightDepartment of Earth SciencesUniver sity of CardiffCardiff CF1 3YEUNITED KINGDOMFax: 01222 874326Email: wrightvp@cardif f.ac .uk

U.S.A.Dr Thomas AlgeoDepartment of Geol ogyUniversity of CincinnatiCinc innati , OH 45221-0013U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr James E. BarrickDepartment of GeosciencesTexas Tech Univer sityLubbock, TX 79409-1053U.S.A.Email: ghj [email protected] tu.edu

Dr Jack D BeuthinDepartment of Geol ogyUni v. of Pittsburgh- JohnstownJohnstown, PA 15904U.S.A.Email: beuthi n@pi tt.edu

Mitch Bl akeWest Virgini a GeologicalSur veyPO Box 879Mor gantown, WV 26507-0879U.S.A.Emai l:bl ake@geosr v.wvnet.edu

Dr Darwin R . BoardmanSchool of Geol ogyOkl ahoma State Universi ty105 Noble Research Ctr.Stil lwater , OK 74078U.S.AEmai l:[email protected]

57


Dr Paul Brenckle1 Whistler Point R oad,Westport, MA 02790U.S.A.Emai l:[email protected]

Dr D.K. BrezinskiMaryland Geologi cal Survey2300 St Paul StreetBalt imore, MD 21218U.S.A.

Dr Lewis M. BrownDepartment of Geol ogyLake Superior State U nivers itySault Sainte M arie,MI 49783-1699U.S.A.Emai l:lbr [email protected] ssu.edu

Dr J.L. CarterCarnegi e Museum of NaturalHistory4400 For bes Ave.Pittsburgh, PA 15213U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr D.R. ChesnutKentucky Geol ogical Survey228 M in.Res.Bldg,Univer sity of KentuckyLexing ton, KY 40506-0107U.S.A.Emai l: [email protected]

Dr William C. Darrah2235 Baltimore PikeGettysburg, PA 17325U.S.A.

Dr Vladimir I. DavydovDept. GeosciencesBoise State Univer sity1910 Univer sity D riveBoise, ID 83725U.S.A.Emai l:vdavydov@boises tate.edu

Dr Lewis S. DeanLibr aryGeological Sur vey of AlabamaP.O. Box 869999420 Hackber ry LaneTuscaloosa, AL 35486U.S.A.Email: li [email protected] .us

Dr J.T. Dutro Jr5173 Fulton St. NWWashington, DC 20016U.S.A.Email: dutro. [email protected]

Dr Cortland EbleKentucky Geol ogical Survey228 Min.Res.Bldg, U niv.KentuckyLexing ton, KY 40506-0107U.S.A.

Dr Kenneth J. Englund40236 N ew R oadAldie, VA 20105,U.S.A.

Dr F.R. EttensohnDept. of Geological Sci encesUniver sity of Kentucky101 Slone Bui ldingLexing ton, KY 40506-0053U.S.A.Emai l: fet [email protected]

Dr Robert GastaldoDept. of GeologyColby C ollegeWaterville, ME 04901U.S.A.

Geology Libr aryThe Univers ity of Iowa136 Trowbridge HallIowa Ci ty, IA 53342-1379U.S.A.

William H. GillespieU.S. Geolog ical Survey916 Churchill CircleCharles ton, WV 25314-1747U.S.A.

Dr Brian F. GlenisterDepartment of GeoscienceUni versity of IowaIowa Ci ty, IA 52242-1379U.S.A.Emai l:bri an.gl [email protected]

Dr Ethan GrossmanDept. of Geology & GeophysicsTexas A&M Univer sityColl ege Station, TX 77843- 3115U.S.A.Email: e-gr [email protected]

Dr John GrovesDept. of Ear th SciencesUniversity of Nor thern IowaCedar Falls , IA 50614U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr Philip H. HeckelDepartment of GeoscienceUni versity of IowaIowa Ci ty, IA 52242U.S.A.Email: phil ip-heckel@ui owa.edu

Dr Peter H olterhoffExxonMobil U pstr eamResear ch C ompanyST-4102P.O. Box 2189Houston, TX 77252-2189U.S.A.Emai l:peter .holterhoff@exxonmobi l.com

Dr John IsbellDepartment of GeosciencesUni v. of Wisconsin- MilwaukeeP.O. Box 413Mi lwaukee, WI 53201U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr Thomas W. KammerDept. Geology and GeographyWest Virginia UniversityP.O. Box 6300Mor gantown, WV 26506-6300U.S.A.Emai l: [email protected]

Claren M Kidd100 E Boyd R 220Uni vers ity of OklahomaNor man, OK 73019-0628U.S.A.Email : [email protected]

Dr Norman R. KingDept. of GeosciencesUni versi ty of Southern Indi anaEvansvil le, IN 47712U.S.A.Email: nking @usi.edu

Albert KollarCarnegi e Museum of NaturalHistoryInvertebr ate Pal eontology4400 For bes AvePittsburgh, PA 15213U.S.A.Emai l:[email protected]

Ms Andrea KrumhardtDept of Geology & GeophysicsUniversity of Al askaP.O. Box 755780Fai rbanks, AK 99775U.S.A.Emai l:[email protected]

Dr Lance LambertEarth and EnvironmentalSci ences,Uni v. of Texas at San Antonio,San Antonio,TX 78249U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr N. Gary LaneDept. of Geological Sci encesIndiana Uni vers ityBlooming ton, IN 47408.U.S.A.Email: lane@i ndiana.edu

Dr H. Richard LaneNational Science Foundat ion4201 Wi lson Blvd., R oom 785Arli ngton, VA 22230U.S.A.Email: [email protected] ov

Dr Ral ph L. Lang enheimDept Geol.,Uni v. of Ill inois254 N.B.H.,1301 W. Green St.Urbana, IL 61801U.S.A.

Dr R.L. LearyIllinois State M useumResearch & Collections Center1011 East Ash StreetSpring field, IL 62703U.S.A.Emai l:[email protected]. il.us

Dr Spencer G. LucasNew Mexico Museumof Natural History

1801 Mountai n Road N.W.Albuquerque, NM 87104U.S.A.Emai l:[email protected]

Dr Richard LundDepartment of Biol ogyAdelphi U nivers ityGar den C ity, NY 11530U.S.A.

Dr W.L. MangerDepartment of Geol ogyUni v. of ArkansasFayetteville, AR 72701U.S.A.Email: wmang [email protected]

Dr Gene MapesDept of Envir. & Plant BiologyOhio Univer sityAthens, OH 45701U.S.A.

Dr R.H. MapesDepartment of Geol ogyOhio Univer sityAthens, OH 45701U.S.A.

Dr C. G. MaplesDept. of Geological Sci encesIndiana Uni vers ityBlooming ton, IN 47405U.S.A.

Charles E. MasonDept. of Physical SciencesMorehead State U nivers ityMor ehead, KY 40351U.S.A.Email : c.mason@mor ehead-s t.edu

Dr Patrick MulvanyGeological Sur veyMissouri DNRP.O. Box 250Rolla, M O 65402U.S.A.Emai l:patri ck.mulvany@dnr .mo.g ov

Dr Greg NadonDept. of Geological Sci encesOhio Univer sityAthens, OH 45701U.S.A.

Dr Hermann W. Pfeffer kornDepartment of Geol ogyUni vers ity of Pennsylvania240 S 33rd St.Phi ladelphi a, PA 19104-6316U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

John P. PopeDepartment of Geol ogyNorthwest Missouri StateUni vers ity800 Univer sity D riveMaryville, MO 64468U.S.A.Email :jppope@nwmissour i.edu

Jul y 2005

Dr E. Troy RasburyDepartment of GeosciencesSUN Y Stony Br ookStony Brook, NY 11794-2100U.S.A.Emai l:tr oy@pbisotopes .ess.sunysb.edu

Dr Donald L RasmussenPar adox Basin D ata1450 K Str eetLongmont, CO 80501-2427U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr Carl B. RexroadIndiana Geological Sur vey611 N. Walnut Gr oveBlooming ton, IN 47405U.S.A.Email: crexroad@i ndiana.edu

Dr J. G. RichardsonColumbus State Communi tyCollegeDept of Physical & BiologicalSc ience550 East Spring StreetCol umbus, OH 43215U.S.A.Emai l: jrichard@cscc .edu

Dr C.A. RossGeoBioStr at Consultants600 Highl and DriveBel lingham, WA 98225-6410U.S.A.Emai l:[email protected]

Dr June R.P Ross600 Highl and DriveBel lingham, WA 98225-6410U.S.A.Emai l:[email protected]

Dr C.A. SandbergU.S. Geolog ical SurveyBox 25046, Feder al Center,MS 940Denver, CO 80225U.S.A.

Dr M atthew SaltzmanDept. of Geological Sci ences275 Mendenhall LaboratoryOhio State Univer sityCol umbus, OH 43210-1398U.S.A.Email : [email protected]

Dr W. Bruce SaundersGeology DepartmentBryn Mawr CollegeBryn Mawr, PA 19010U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr Tamra A. SchiappaDepartment of GeosciencesBoise State Univer sity1910 Universi ty DrBoise, ID 83725U.S.A.Email: tschiapp@boi sestate.edu

Dr Steve SchutterMur phy Expl orat ion andProduct ion International550 Westlake Park Blvd.,Suite 1000Houston, TX 77079U.S.A.Email: steve-schutter@murphyoi lcorp.com

Ser ials D epartmentUniv. of Illinois Library1408 West Gr egory D riveUrbana, IL 61801U.S.A.

Dr Gerilyn S. SoreghanGeology & Geophys icsUni vers ity of Oklahoma100 E. Boyd St.Nor man, OK 73019U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr C.H. StevensDepartment of Geology,School of ScienceSan Jose State U nivers itySan Jose, CA 95192-0102U.S.A.Emai l:stevens@g eosun1.sjsu.edu

Ms Mathilda Stucke30 Oakland AvenueWest Hempstead, N Y 11552-1923U.S.A.Emai l:stucke@adl ibv.adel phi .edu

Dr T.N. TaylorDepartment of Botany,Haworth HallUniversity of KansasLawrence, KS 66045U.S.A.Emai l:ttayl [email protected]

Dr T.L. ThompsonMissour i Geological SurveyBox 250Rolla, M O 65401U.S.A.

Dr Alan L. TitusGrand Stai rcase- EscalanteNational Monument180 W 300 NKanab, U T 84741U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

U.S. Geolog ical Sur vey Library12201 Sunr ise Valley D riveNational Center, MS 950Res ton, VA 20192U.S.A.

Dr Peter R. VailDept Geol., Ri ce UniversityP.O. Box 1892Houston, TX 77251U.S.A.

Dr G.P. WahlmanBP AmocoP.O. Box 3092Houston, TX 77253U.S.A.Fax: 1-281-366-7567Email: [email protected]

Dr Bruce WardlawU.S. Geolog ical Survey970 N ational C enterRes ton, VA 22092U.S.A.

Dr J.A. WatersDepartment of Geol ogyWest Georg ia CollegeCarr ollton, GA 30118U.S.A.Email: j water [email protected]

Dr W. Lynn WatneyKansas Geological Sur vey1930 Constant Avenue -Campus WestLawrence, KS 66047U.S.A.Email : l watney@kg s.ukans.edu

Dr Gary WebsterDepartment of Geol ogyWashington State Univers ityPhysical Science 1228Pul lman, WA 99164U.S.A.Fax: 509- 335-7816

Dr R.R. WestDept Geol., Thompson HallKansas State U nivers ityManhattan, KS 66506-3201U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr Brian WitzkeIowa Geological Sur vey109 Trowbridge HallUni versity of IowaIowa City, IA 52242-1319U.S.A.Emai l:bwitzke@i gsb.uiowa.edu

Dr David M. WorkMai ne State Museum83 State House StationAugusta, ME 04333- 0083U.S.A.Email : [email protected] ov

Dr Thomas YanceyDepartment of Geol ogyTexas A&M Univer sityCollege Station, TX 77843U.S.A.Email : [email protected]

UKRAINEDr N.I. BojarinaIns titute of Geol ogyUkr ainian Academy of Scienceul . Chkalova 55b252054 Ki evUKRAINE

Dr R.I. KozitskayaIns titute of Geol ogyUkr ainian Academy of Scienceul . Chkalova 55b252054 Ki evUKRAINE

Dr T.I. N emyrovskaInst itute of Geologi cal SciencesUkr ainian Academy ofSc iencesGonchar Str., 55b252054 Ki evUKRAINEEmail : tnemyr [email protected]

Dr V.I. PoletaevIns titute of Geol ogyUkr ainian Academy of Scienceul . Chkalova 55b252054 Ki evUKRAINE

Dr Z.S. Rumyantsevaul . Vasil ovskaja 42, Kv.33252022 Ki evUKRAINE

Dr A.K. ShchegolevIns titute of Geol ogyUkr ainian Academy of Scienceul . Chkalova 55b252054 Ki evUKRAINE

Dr N.P. VassiljukDonetski j Pol itekhn. Inst.ul. Artema 58DonetskUKRAINE

Mrs M.V. VdovenkoIns titute of Geol ogyUkr ainian Academy of Scienceul . Chkalova 55b252054 Ki evUKRAINE

UZBEKISTANDr F.R. BenshIns t. Geol. & Geophys.ul. Sul ejmanovoj 33700017 TashkentUZBEKISTAN

Dr Iskander M . Nigmadjanovul. G. Lopati na 80, kv. 35700003 TashkentUZBEKISTAN

59


SUBCOMMISSION ON CARBONIFEROUS STRATIGRAPHY (SCCS)OFFICERSAND VOTING MEMBERS 2004-2008

CHAIR:

Dr Philip H. HeckelDepartment of GeoscienceUniversity of IowaIowa City, IA 52242U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

VICE-CHAIR:

Dr Geoffrey ClaytonDepartment of GeologyTrinityCollegeDublin 2IRELANDEmail: [email protected]

SECRETARY/EDITOR:

Dr David M. WorkMaine State Museum83 State House StationAugusta, ME 04333-0083U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

OTHER VOTING MEMBERS:

Dr Alexander S. AlekseevDept ofPalaeont., Geol. FacultyMoscow State University119899 Moscow GSP V-234RUSSIAEmail:[email protected]

Dr Demir AltinerDepartment of Geological EngineeringMiddle East Technical University06531 AnkaraTURKEYEmail: [email protected]

Dr Darwin R. BoardmanSchool of GeologyOklahoma State University105 Noble Research Ctr.Stillwater OK 74078U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr John GrovesDepartment of Earth SciencesUniversity of Northern IowaCedar Falls, IA 50614U.S.A.Email: [email protected]

Dr Luc HanceUnité de Géologie,Université Catholique de Louvain,3 place Louis Pasteur,1348, Louvain-la-Neuve,BELGIUMEmail: [email protected]

[email protected]

Dr Jin Xiao-chiInstitute of GeologyChinese Academy of Geological Sciences26 Baiwanzhuang RoadBeijing 100037CHINAEmail: [email protected]

Dr Jirí KalvodaDepartment of Geology andPaleontologyMasaryk UniversityKotlárská 261137 BrnoCZECH REPUBLICEmail: [email protected]

Dr Dieter KornMuseum für Naturkunde derHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinInvalidenstrasse 43D-10115 BerlinGERMANYEmail:[email protected]

Dr Olga L. KossovayaV.S.E.G.E.I.Sredni pr. 74199106 St PetersburgRUSSIAEmail:[email protected]

Dr Elena I. KulaginaInstitute of GeologyUralian Research CenterRussian Academy of SciencesUfaRUSSIAEmail: [email protected]

Dr Ian MetcalfeAsia CentreUniversity of New EnglandArmidale NSW 2351AUSTRALIAEmail: [email protected]

Dr T.I. NemyrovskaInstitute of Geological SciencesUkrainian Academy of SciencesGonchar Str., 55b252054 KievUKRAINEEmail: [email protected]

Dr Svetlana NikolaevaPaleontological InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesProfsoyuznaya 123117868 Moscow GSPRUSSIAEmail:[email protected]

Dr B.C. RichardsGeological Survey of Canada3303-33rd St. N.W.CalgaryAB, T2L 2A7CANADAEmail: [email protected]

Dr N.J. RileyBritish Geological SurveyKeyworthNottingham NG12 5GGUNITED KINGDOMEmail: [email protected]

Dr Katsumi UenoDept. Earth System ScienceFaculty of ScienceFukuoka University,Jonan-ku, Fukuoka 814-0180JAPANEmail: [email protected]

Dr Elisa VillaDepto de GeologíaUniversidad de OviedoArias de Velasco s/n33005 OviedoSPAINEmail: [email protected]

Dr Wang Xiang-dongNanjing Institute of Geology andPalaeontologyChinese Academy of Sciences39 East Beijing RoadNanjing 210008CHINAEmail: [email protected]

60

Jul y 2005

REQUEST FOR DONATIONS

Newsletter on Carboniferous Stratigraphy is expensive to prepareand mail and ICS subsidies have declined in recent years. Wemust rely on voluntary donations. If you would like to make a do-nation toward SCCS operational costs and publication of the News-letter, please send it (together with the form) to the address below.

IUGS SUBCOMMISSION ON CARBONIFEROUS STRATIGRAPHY

I would like to make a donation to the operating costs of SCCS.I enclose a bank draft made out to “Subcommission on CarboniferousStratigraphy” in the amount of:

I ( wish/ do not wish) my donation acknowledged in the next Newsletter

Name:

Address:

Please return form and donation to:

David M. Work,Maine State Museum,83 State House Station,Augusta, ME 04333, U.S.A.

international commission on stratigraphy subcommission on...

Documents