1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0012-821x(98)00050-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New U–Pb zircon ages and the duration and division of Devonian time

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

10
157
1
2

Year Published

2000
2000
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 259 publications
(170 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(36 reference statements)
10
157
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The age of Ma of Bed 36 bentonite fits 377.2 ‫ע‬ 1.7 well into the timescale of Tucker et al (1998), which is also based on U-Pb ID-TIMS zircon ages ( fig. 4).…”
Section: Timescale Implicationssupporting
confidence: 59%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The age of Ma of Bed 36 bentonite fits 377.2 ‫ע‬ 1.7 well into the timescale of Tucker et al (1998), which is also based on U-Pb ID-TIMS zircon ages ( fig. 4).…”
Section: Timescale Implicationssupporting
confidence: 59%
“…However, no isotopic ages have been acquired so far that fix the timing and duration of these events. Previous estimates for the age of the Frasnian-Famennian boundary range from 364.0 to 376.5 Ma (Harland et al 1990;Fordham 1992;Young 1995;Sandberg and Ziegler 1996;Tucker et al 1998;Compston 2000). This uncertainty is due to the lack of reliable and biostratigraphically well-constrained isotopic ages in the Late Devonian.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This potentially indicates a close similarity in absolute age, but the biostratigraphic interval in question could span several million years (e.g. Tucker et al 1998).…”
Section: Age Of the Rhynie Chertmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Givetian Stage can be considered the exponent of the Devonian timescale since it does not contain a single radiometric age. In recent Devonian timescales (Kaufmann 2006;Becker et al 2012), the age of the Givetian Stage boundaries is estimated by linear interpolation between the Eifelian Tioga Ash bed B (390.0 + 2.5 Ma; Klapper 1971;Roden et al 1990) and the Frasnian Belpre Ash (381.1 + 3.3 Ma; Tucker et al 1998;Rotondo & Over 2000). It goes without saying that the Givetian chronology is extremely poorly resolved when taking into account the broad error bars on these radiometric ages, the stratigraphic uncertainty and the dubiousness of the relative spans of biostratigraphical conodont zones within each (sub)stage.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%