Gibbard, Philip L.; Smith, Alan G.; Zalasiewicz, Jan A.; Barry, Tiffany; Cantrill, David; Coe, Angela L.; Cope, John C. W.; Gale, Andrew S.; Gregory, F. John; Powell, John H.; Rawson, Peter F.; Stone, Philip and Waters, Colin N.
|DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link:||http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1502-3885.2005.tb01000.x|
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
The status of the Quaternary, long regarded as a geological period effectively coincident with the main climatic deterioration of the current Ice Age, has recently been questioned as a formal stratigraphic unit. We argue here that it should be retained as a formal period of geological time. Furthermore, we consider that its beginning should be placed at the Gauss-Matuyama magnetic chron boundary at about 2.6 Ma, rather than at its current position at about 1.8 Ma. The Quaternary would be formally subdivided into the Pleistocene and Holocene epochs. The global chronostratigraphical correlation table proposed is enclosed at the back of this issue.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Copyright Holders:||2005 Taylor & Francis|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) > Environment, Earth and Ecosystem Sciences
Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Centre for Earth, Planetary, Space and Astronomical Research (CEPSAR)|
|Depositing User:||Angela Coe|
|Date Deposited:||21 Mar 2011 16:25|
|Last Modified:||04 Oct 2016 10:05|
|Share this page:|