4.5 Review

The distribution of microfossil assemblages in Proterozoic rocks

Journal

PRECAMBRIAN RESEARCH
Volume 173, Issue 1-4, Pages 212-222

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.precamres.2009.04.002

Keywords

Biostratigraphy; Units; Precambrian; Proterozoic; Riphean; Vendian; Eurasia; Microfossils

Funding

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research [07-05-00457, 08-05-00429]
  2. Russian Academy of Sciences [15]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A biostratigraphic model of the temporal distribution of distinctive Proterozoic microfossil assemblages is suggested, based on studies of upper Precambrian chert-embedded and compression-preserved organic-walled microfossils from the reference sections of Eurasia, North America and Australia. Microfossils from 2.0 to 0.542 Ga can be divided into seven successive informal global units which can be compared to standard units of the International and Russian time scales. Each unit is characterized by a particular association of taxa, typified by the fossil assemblage that gives it its name. These form broad biostratigraphic units comparable to assemblage zones of Phanerozoic successions; in general (but with minor differences) they correspond to chronostratigraphic units accepted by the Internal Commission on Stratigraphy. The units are: (1) Labradorian, the upper part of the Paleoproterozoic (Orosirian and Statherian), 2.0-1.65 Ga; (2) Anabarian, lower Mesoproterozoic (Calyrnmian-Ectasian)/Lower Riphean-lower Middle Riphean, 1.65-1.2Ga; (3) Turukhanian, upper Mesoproterozoic (Stenian)/upper Middle Riphean, 1.2-1.03 Ga: (4) Uchuromayan, lower Neoproterozoic (late Stenian-Tonian)/lower Upper Riphean, 1.03-0.85 Ga: (5) Yuzhnouralian, upper Neoproterozoic (Cryogenian)/upper Upper Riphean, 0.85-0.63 Ga; (6) Amadeusian, lower Ediacaran/lower Vendian, 0.63-0.55 Ga; (7) Belomorian, upper Ediacaran/upper Vendian, 0.55-0.542 Ga. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available