What status for the Quaternary?

Gibbard, Philip L.; Smith, Alan G.; Zalasiewicz, Jan A.; Barry, Tiffany L.; Cantrill, David; Coe, Angela L.; Cope, John C. W.; Gale, Andrew S.; Gregory, F. John; Powell, John H.; Rawson, Peter F.; Stone, Phillip; Waters, Colin N.. 2005 What status for the Quaternary? Boreas, 34 (1). 1-6. 10.1111/j.1502-3885.2005.tb01000.x

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1502-3885.2005.tb01000...

Abstract/Summary

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:	Publication - Article
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):	10.1111/j.1502-3885.2005.tb01000.x
Programmes:	BGS Programmes > Geology and Landscape Southern
ISSN:	03009483
Date made live:	09 Jan 2015 09:33 +0 (UTC)
URI:	https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/509291

Item Type:

Publication - Article

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

10.1111/j.1502-3885.2005.tb01000.x

Programmes:

BGS Programmes > Geology and Landscape Southern

ISSN:

03009483

Date made live:

09 Jan 2015 09:33 +0 (UTC)

URI:

https://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/509291