Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
  Journal of the Geological Society   Email Content Delivery
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Journal of the Geological Society; October 1988; v. 145; no. 5; p. 881-882; DOI: 10.1144/gsjgs.145.5.0881
© 1988 Geological Society of London
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Article

Discussion on biostratigraphical correlation and the stages of the Llandovery

C. H. Holland & M. G. Bassett write:

Negativism in stratigraphy. Temple's critique of methods of biostratigraphical correlation and his particular analysis of the definition of Stage units within the Llandovery Series of the Silurian System, do little to encourage the role of stratigraphy as a practical subject. The Geological Society’s Guide to stratigraphical procedure (Holland et al. 1978) was published in an attempt to provide something that is concise,actually useful to practising stratigraphers,and yet clear in its principles; it is specifically a guide and not a rigid code of rules. It is fair to say that the Guide has been well received and used within its spirit, although not, apparently by Temple who now some 9 years later finds its treatment of biostratigraphy to be unsatisfactory.

It is true that in using an assemblage biozone onedoes not necessarily expect to find all the fossils in question at all the localities. This is not a precise kind of division and,as every where in stratigraphy, the scienceis better when individual authors explain what they mean by what they are doing.But such units are useful. Of course,there is vagueness in using terms such as ‘exceptional abundance’ or criteria for ‘presence’ or ‘absence’ of certain taxa, but these can be qualified as necessary in particular circumstances. Temple’s objections to biozones do not extend in the same way to the consecutive-range biozone, althoughherehe refers to dependence ‘on the assumption of objectivity of tax on definition’, a matter that he raises earlier

...

This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of the Geological SocietyHome page
A. WHITTAKER, J. C. W. COPE, J. W. COWIE, W. GIBBONS, E. A, HAILWOOD, M. R. HOUSE, D. G. JENKINS, P. F. RAWSON, A. A. W. RUSHTON, et al.
A guide to stratigraphical procedure
Journal of the Geological Society, October 1, 1991; 148(5): 813 - 824.
[Abstract] [PDF]




JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Geological Society of London