Structural complexity at and around the Triassic–Jurassic GSSP at Kuhjoch, Northern Calcareous Alps, Austria

Palotai, Márton; Pálfy, József; Sasvári, Ágoston

doi:10.1007/s00531-017-1450-4

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Minor faults are present at Kuhjoch as described by Hillebrandt et al (2013). Palotai et al (2017) believe that the thickness of the Schattwald beds is underestimated due to tectonic complications and could be as much as 4-5 m thick (about 2 m in our Fig. 6).…”

Section: The Kuhjoch Sectionmentioning

confidence: 62%

"Short" or "long" Rhaetian ? Astronomical calibration of Austrian key sections

Galbrun

Boulila

Krystyn

et al. 2020

Global and Planetary Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Kuhjoch Sectionmentioning

confidence: 62%

"Short" or "long" Rhaetian ? Astronomical calibration of Austrian key sections

Galbrun

Boulila

Krystyn

et al. 2020

Global and Planetary Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, we use the St. Audrie's Bay (England) and Kuhjoch West (Austria) records as points of reference, as nearly all other Tethyan records are compared to these (e.g., Korte et al, 2019;Kovács et al, 2020). We note, however, that these records are inherently problematic: the TJB transition at St. Audrie's Bay records a transition from continental / marginal marine to fully marine environments, and a shear zone deforms the Kuhjoch West section at the stratigraphic interval that records the onset of the main NCIE (Ruhl et al, 2009, Palotai et al, 2017.…”

Section: Global Vs Regional Carbon Cycle Perturbations and The Etementioning

confidence: 94%

“…Although the Kuhjoch section in Austria was ratified as the GSSP for the base of the Jurassic (Hillebrandt et al, 2013), the choice of this section has drawn criticism (e.g., Palotai et al, 2017). The formal base of the Jurassic is defined by the lowest occurrence of Psiloceras spelae tirolicum (Hillebrandt et al, 2013) and several other variably utilized stratigraphic markers which typically include a combination of paleontological and geochemical data.…”

Section: The Triassic-jurassic Boundary Intervalmentioning

confidence: 99%

New evidence for a long Rhaetian from a Panthalassan succession (Wrangell Mountains, Alaska) and regional differences in carbon cycle perturbations at the Triassic-Jurassic transition

Caruthers

Marroquín

Gröcke

et al. 2022

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In 2010, a section at Kuhjoch, Austria, became the GSSP for the base of the Jurassic, even though nothing had been published on this section until the actual GSSP proposal (von Hillebrandt et al, 2007). We now know that this little studied section was poorly chosen, as the section is tectonized (Palotai et al, 2017), which is contrary to one of the requirements for a GSSP section (Remane et al, 1996). The GSSP for the base of the Jurassic thus needs to be relocated.…”

Section: Jurassicmentioning

confidence: 99%

The GSSP Method of Chronostratigraphy: A Critical Review

Lucas

2018

Front. Earth Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of boundary stratotypes to define chronostratigraphic units began in the 1960s, and, in the 1980s, these were called Global Stratotype Sections and Points (GSSPs). Approximately two-thirds of the GSSPs of the bases of the Phanerozoic stage (71 of 102 in September 2018) have been ratified by the International Commission on Stratigraphy. However, this apparent progress toward precise definition of a Phanerozoic chronostratigraphic timescale is underlain by multiple problems of philosophy and methodology that include: (1) inconsistency in how chronostratigraphic units are being named and defined; (2) arbitrary decisions as to GSSP level, many based on arbitrarily chosen points in hypothetical chronomorphoclines of microfossils; (3) hierarchical reductionism, which makes the stage base the same as the base of the series, system, erathem and eonothem, thereby trivializing the significance of the boundaries of these larger chronostratigraphic units; (4) stability achieved by the non-scientific process of designating a GSSP once ratified as immutable; (5) the unworkable concept of a standard set of global stages; (6) the fallacy that a GSSP location can somehow define a recognizable (correlateable) global time line; (7) imprecision in GSSP correlation because the primary signals are largely single taxon biotic events that are inherently diachronous due to the limitations of fossil distributions by sampling, facies and provincialism; and (8) the politics of the International Commission on Stratigraphy and the small groups of specialists who select and vote on GSSPs. Chronostratigraphy needs to return to the concepts of natural chronostratigraphy, with improvements based on modern techniques like quantitative biostratigraphy. We need to standardize the chronostratigraphic scale, and the International Commission on Stratigraphy needs to rethink the philosophy and practices by which this is being done, so that we can move forward to produce the most informative chronostratigraphy possible based on a consistent methodology that allows the updating and obtaining of high accuracy and precision as new data become available.

show abstract

Structural complexity at and around the Triassic–Jurassic GSSP at Kuhjoch, Northern Calcareous Alps, Austria

Cited by 10 publications

References 16 publications

"Short" or "long" Rhaetian ? Astronomical calibration of Austrian key sections

"Short" or "long" Rhaetian ? Astronomical calibration of Austrian key sections

New evidence for a long Rhaetian from a Panthalassan succession (Wrangell Mountains, Alaska) and regional differences in carbon cycle perturbations at the Triassic-Jurassic transition

The GSSP Method of Chronostratigraphy: A Critical Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About