4.7 Article

Silicified glendonites in the Ediacaran Doushantuo Formation (South China) and their potential paleoclimatic implications

Journal

GEOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 115-118

Publisher

GEOLOGICAL SOC AMER, INC
DOI: 10.1130/G38613.1

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. State Key R&D Project of China [2016YFA0601100]
  2. Integrated Marine Biogeochemistry and Ecosystem Research (IMBER) project
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41472085, 41272011]
  4. U.S. National Science Foundation [EAR-1528553]
  5. China Scholarship Council
  6. Division Of Earth Sciences
  7. Directorate For Geosciences [1528553] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Ediacaran Period is punctuated by the ca. 580 Ma Gaskiers glaciation in Newfoundland. However, paleoclimatic data are scarce in Ediacaran successions in South China, where abundant geochemical and paleobiological data are shaping current understanding of Ediacaran evolutionary and environmental history. Here, we report the occurrence of silicified glendonites in the Ediacaran Doushantuo Formation deposited in an inner-shelf environment on the South China block. Petrographic evidence suggests that these silicified glendonites are pseudomorphs after syndepositional or early authigenic ikaites formed at near-freezing temperatures. The glendonite- bearing stratigraphic interval is characterized by positive delta C-13 values. It predates both the negative delta C-13 excursion EN3 (widely believed to be an equivalent of the Shuram negative excursion) and excursion EN2. Although alternative interpretations may be possible, these glendonites may be related to and correlated with the Gaskiers glaciation. If confirmed, this correlation suggests that the Shuram event postdates the Gaskiers glaciation, thus having important implications for Ediacaran climate changes, carbon cycles, and biological evolution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available