1991
DOI: 10.1016/s0195-6671(05)80020-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stratigraphic placement of the Santonian-Campanian boundary (Upper Cretaceous) in the North American Gulf Coastal Plain and Western Interior, with implications to global geochronology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1995
1995
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Pessagno (1969) placed the Santonian/Campanian boundary higher in the section, based on planktonic foraminifers. Lillegraven ( 1991) reviewed the discrepancy at this boundary, and ultimately agreed with Young. Stratigraphy: Nomenclature and thickness data are from Young (1963, p. 23 ( 1967) reported the Turonian ammonite Coilopoceras at the top of the underlying Ernst Member.…”
Section: Point Id: L11comentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Pessagno (1969) placed the Santonian/Campanian boundary higher in the section, based on planktonic foraminifers. Lillegraven ( 1991) reviewed the discrepancy at this boundary, and ultimately agreed with Young. Stratigraphy: Nomenclature and thickness data are from Young (1963, p. 23 ( 1967) reported the Turonian ammonite Coilopoceras at the top of the underlying Ernst Member.…”
Section: Point Id: L11comentioning
confidence: 72%
“…The planktonic Santonian -Campanian boundary has been placed just below the base of chron 33r (Alvarez et al 1977) and is marked by either the first appearance of Globotruncana elevata (Dowsett 1984) or the last appearance of Globotruncana concavata (P. Marks 1984). For purposes of discussion we follow Lillegraven (1991) in considering G. concavata the senior synonym of Dicarinella asymetrica and Dicarinella concavata. As the base of the Campanian in Europe as defined by ammonites, belemnites, and crinoids is within the lower part of chron 33r, the two boundaries do not coincide.…”
Section: Comparisons With Planktonic Foraminiferamentioning
confidence: 99%