Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

Journal of the Geological Society

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by DRAKE, R. E. Articles by HARRIS, J. A. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

New chronology for the Early Miocene mammalian faunas of Kisingiri, Western Kenya

¹ Berkeley Geochronology Center, 2453 Ridge Road, Berkeley, CA 94709, USA
² American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024, USA
³ Institut de Paléontologie, 8 Rue Buffon F-75005 Paris, France
⁴ Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
⁵ University of Colorado Museum, Boulder, CO 80302, USA

New total-fusion K-Ar ages indicate that all of the fossiliferous formations that make up the lower part of the Early Miocene Kisingiri sequence in western Kenya at Rusinga Island, Mfwangano Island, and Karungu were deposited during an interval of less than 0.5 million years at c. 17.8 Ma ago. This contrasts markedly with K-Ar ages previously published from these detrital-tuffaceous formations, which suggested that they were deposited over an interval of as much as 7 million years between 23 and 16 Ma, overlapping the age-ranges of all other East African Early Miocene sites including Koru, Songhor, Napak, Bukwa, Loperot, Muruarot and Buluk. In addition, the analytical problems revealed by the new Kisingiri results cast doubt on biotite ages which provide dating for the most important sites. Thus, the strong differences between the Kisingiri fauna and those of Koru, Sonhor and Napak, long held to be due to ecology because of the apparent overlap in ages, may actually be due to a difference in time. If this view of the geochronology is correct, it may now be possible to identify adaptive trends and evolutionary succession in the East African Early Miocene faunas.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Cote, L. Werdelin, E. R. Seiffert, and J. C. Barry Additional material of the enigmatic Early Miocene mammal Kelba and its relationship to the order Ptolemaiida PNAS, March 27, 2007; 104(13): 5510 - 5515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Reassessing hominoid phylogeny: evaluating congruence in the morphological and temporal data Paleobiology, December 1, 2004; 30(4): 614 - 651.

				MOLECULAR CLOCK DIVERGENCE ESTIMATES AND THE FOSSIL RECORD OF CETARTIODACTYLA Journal of Paleontology, January 1, 2004; 78(1): 39 - 44.

				E. A. BESTLAND and E. S. KRULL Palaeoenvironments of Early Miocene Kisingiri volcano Proconsul sites: evidence from carbon isotopes, palaeosols and hydromagmatic deposits Journal of the Geological Society, October 1, 1999; 156(5): 965 - 976. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. A. BESTLAND A Miocene Gilbert-type fan-delta from a volcanically influenced lacustrine basin, Rusinga Island, Lake Victoria, Kenya Journal of the Geological Society, December 1, 1991; 148(6): 1067 - 1078. [Abstract] [PDF]