Paleontology - Spring 2201

Biostratigraphy


Biostratigraphy is the traditional use of paleontological data since the time of Smith and Cuvier. The aim is to use fossils to make correlations, that is, placing rocks in a relative time context. the basic notion is that any fossil existed for a limited time interval so that all rocks containing that fossil formed during the specific time interval. You have two reading selections. Raup and Stanley provide some insight to some of the techniques and questions. Clarkson more briefly summarizes the current status (and terminology). The major topics are stratigraphy, correlation, quantitative correlation, and precision of correlation.

Stratigraphy (Raup and Stanley, p. 197-207, 222-225) and Clarkson (p. 20-23)

A few basic points to keep in mind as you read over this section: (1) there are several different types of geological units - each of which is defined in a particular way; (2) there are rules regarding how this is all done - and embedded in the rules are certain concepts.

The "North American Stratigraphic Code" (AAPG Bull., 1983, v. 67, p. 841-875 with periodic refinements) established the formal rules on the types of units, how to define them, etc. The different types of units are: lithostratigraphic (rock-stratigraphic), biostratigraphic, chronostratigraphic (time-rock), and geochronologic (time) units. Clarkson outlines the formal nomenclature, so you may want to read it first. Raup and Stanley discuss some of the controversies (the nature of chronostratigraphic units) and why some units are limited in practice. As you read these sections, please make a list of the attributes of the following types of units: lithostratigraphic (rock-stratigraphic), biostratigraphic, chronostratigraphic (time-rock), and geochronologic (time) units. You also may want to consider why we have these varied types of geological units.

Here are a couple of things to consider about biozones and correlation.

(1) You will notice that there are several types of biozones (Clarkson) - we need not worry about all the details. The zones that are used are range zones, including the concept of overlapping zones. An important point mentioned by Raup and Stanley is the notion that a biozone has inherent limits on its extent. Consider the following sketch:

A barrier divides a region into two depositional basins for most of the history of fossil X. During that time, A has the index fossil of interest, but B does not. Within A, there will be barren zones without fossils. Furthermore, within A the fossil has a point and place where it evolved and where the last population survived. The first and last occurrences of the fossil are not exactly simultaneous across A (let alone B). Biostratigraphic units would not include all of the rocks in both basins, but chronostratigraphic units would - of course, recognizing them is another matter.

(2) Raup and Stanley mention the philosophical shift toward defining chronostratigraphic units by defining boundaries. This has become quite important in the last few decades and this approach is replacing the earlier practice of defining a chronostratigraphic unit by a type section approach (to see why, see Raup and Stanley, p. 222-224). But, how does this actually take place? International commissions meet for a decade or two to consider such boundaries. They attempt to select the most useful faunal group and to identify the best (continuous) section. A specific horizon in a specific section is selected by vote after years of debate (and lots of ink) to be the stratotype (reference) point for the boundary. The horizon is often marked by a spike (a.k.a. the "golden spike"). Notice that the basal boundaries of systems, series, and stages are being defined in this manner. The tops are defined by the base of the next unit. (This ensures stability in case of missing time or overlap.)

Correlation (Raup and Stanley, p. 207-216)

This section is fairly straightforward (I hope) - if not, ASK. You should be familiar with the basic idea of using index fossils. The text goes beyond this to consider other techniques for determining equivalency. We could also add other features: ash beds, regional unconformities, etc.

Quantification of correlation (Raup and Stanley, p. 216-222)

Please carefully read over this section on Shaw's method of quantitative correlation. The importance of this method grows every year. I will review this topic in some detail during class with some real databases. This will (hopefully) help clarify this - it seems a bit mysterious the first time through!

Precision of correlation (Raup and Stanley, p. 225-229)

Finally, we need to consider what level of precision should we expect in biostratigraphy? The text suggests (p. 225-226) that long-range (across continents or between continents) correlations based upon fossils may have a considerable error (several millions of years or more). This has been the topic for considerable debate in recent years as there has been a international effort to delineate global stages (not just series). The general consensus is considerably more optimistic than the text. Efforts to define boundary stratotypes and new models for stratigraphy have forced biostratigraphers to focus their efforts on improving the precision of correlation. Precision has improved due to several strategies: careful examination of evolving lineages, the use of multiple fossil groups, and quantitative correlation.