Paleocene sea-level fluctuations recorded in benthic foraminiferal assemblages from Gebel Oweina (Esna, Egypt): local, regional or global patterns?
Paleocene sea-level fluctuations recorded in benthic foraminiferal assemblages from Gebel Oweina (Esna, Egypt): local, regional or global patterns?
复制标题
Gebel Oweina（埃及伊斯纳）的底栖有孔虫组合记录的古新世海平面波动：局部、区域或全球模式？
DOI：
10.1080/11035899409546158
复制
发表时间：
1994
期刊：
影响因子：
1
通讯作者：
R. Speijer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Speijer
GFF 116（1994）会议论文集“古新世地层学”63尺度未得到充分利用。全球层型点（GSP）的一个重要方面是它们代表了定义地质时间和岩石的参考点。传统上，人们以两种方式来理解地质历史，一种与岩石有关，一种与时间有关。这表现在传统的双分裂地层学（时间）尺度上，即将年代地层单位（体系、系列、阶段）与地质年代学单位（时期、世期、时代）相匹配。这种分裂的看法最初演变的一个主要原因是，由于（非物质）时间边界与（物质）岩石边界的关系没有得到令人满意的定义，从而引起相关性的不确定性。GSP代表岩石单位的基础和时间单位的开始，两者都延续到下一个GSP，并且在GSP标准化之后，传统的地球历史分割感知将具有有限的实用价值（至少在全球地层学研究中；然而，在区域研究中，区分时间和岩石单位可能仍然很重要）。Harland et al.（1989）指出，由于时间和岩石来源于相同的标准参考点，“地质年代学和年代地层学这两个明显不同的学科将成为单一程序的不同方面”。这些作者认为，在gssp标准尺度下，时间-岩石亚单位的不同层次可以用时期、时代和阶段来表示。他们从传统的地质年代学尺度中采用了“期”和“期”这两个术语，但对于下一级的时间-岩石单元，放弃了“年龄”的地质年代学概念，而采用了“阶段”的年代地层概念。“年龄”一词因泛指时间而被省略，以避免歧义。但是，如果将传统的地质年代学命名法，包括“年龄”一词，用于全球标准参考系限定的时间-岩石亚单位，则“塞兰地时代”概念将指这样的单位，而“塞兰地阶段”则可以在年代地层意义上使用，参照历史层型剖面。与引入术语“阶段”的两种地层学含义相比，“年龄”的双重含义是一个小问题（参见“时期”和“时代”也一般指时间间隔）。
GFF 116 (1994) Meeting proceedings" Stratigraphy of the Paleocene" 63 scale are not fully exploited. An important aspect of the Global Stratotype Points (GSP) is that they represent reference points where both geological time and rock are defined. Traditionally, geological history has been perceived in two ways, one rock-related and one time-related. This is manifested in the conventional twosplit stratigraphie (time) scale where chronostratigraphical units (system, series, stage) are matched against geochronological units (period, epoch, age). One principal reason why this divided perception originally evolved, were the uncertainties in correlation that arouse because (immaterial) time boundaries were not satisfactorily defined in relation to (material) rock boundaries. The GSP represents the base of a rock unit as well as the beginning of a time unit, which both continue up to the next GSP, and the conventional, divided perception of Earth history will be of limited practical value after GSSP-standardization (at least in global stratigraphie studies; in regional studies, however, it may still be important to distinguish between time and rock units). Harland et al.(1989) states that, with time and rock deriving from the same standard reference point," the two apparently distinct disciplines geochronology and chronostratigraphy will be different aspects of a single procedure". These authors suggest that the terms period, epoch, and stage shall be used for the different hierarchies of time-rock subunits in a GSSP-standardized scale. The terms period and epoch, they adopt from the traditionalgeochronologic scale, but for the next lower-in-rank time-rock unit, the geochronologic concept" age" is abandoned in favor of the chronostratigraphic concept" stage". The term" age" is dismissed in order to avoid ambiguity because of its general reference to time. However, if traditional geochronologic nomenclature, and including also the term" age", was used for the GSP-bounded time-rock subunits, the concept" Selandian Age" would refer to such a unit, whereas" Selandian Stage" could be used in a chronostratigraphic sense with reference to the historical stratotype sections. The double meaning of" age" is a minor problem (cf." period" and" epoch" that refer also to time intervals in general) compared with introducing two stratigraphie meanings of the term" stage".