1977
DOI: 10.1080/00206817709471134
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Changes in distribution, volumes, and rates of deposition of sedimentary and volcanogenic deposits during the Phanerozoic (within the present continents)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1978
1978
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This assumption seems reasonable, but some exceptions to it have been documented. One such exception is the Permian system, which contains unusually large amounts of evaporites (Ronov et al, 1977;Stevens, 1977). Included here is the assumption that diagenetic destruction of lower Paleozoic fossils is no less common than diagenetic destruction of Cenozoic fossils.…”
Section: A Methods For Predicting Apparent Species Richnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This assumption seems reasonable, but some exceptions to it have been documented. One such exception is the Permian system, which contains unusually large amounts of evaporites (Ronov et al, 1977;Stevens, 1977). Included here is the assumption that diagenetic destruction of lower Paleozoic fossils is no less common than diagenetic destruction of Cenozoic fossils.…”
Section: A Methods For Predicting Apparent Species Richnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this case the apparent species richness predicted for the period would be much higher than the species richness actually ob- served. The data compiled by Ronov et al (1977) show that the proportions of the different sediment groups have changed drastically at various times in the Phanerozoic. Therefore, any justification for making this assumption must be regarded as tenous.…”
Section: A Methods For Predicting Apparent Species Richnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The crucial defining feature of the Great Unconformity is that erosion occurred across a vast area, especially the cratonic interior. The most quantitative reflection of this feature is arguably provided by the coeval stepwise increase in preserved sediment abundance per unit time across the unconformity—a step change first accurately quantified by Ronov et al ( 7 , 8 ) and Ronov ( 9 ) and observed on every continent with the possible exception of Africa. This fivefold discontinuity in global preserved sediment abundance ( 8 ) suggests profound changes in both erosional and depositional processes ( 5 ) and in any event provides a quantitative metric for the significance of the Great Unconformity as a global feature.…”
mentioning
confidence: 95%
“…His general conclusion was that it is erroneous to think that there have been worldwide transgressions and regressions in geologic history. This problem, as A. L. Yanshin [1,20]. After analyzing quantitative data on changes in areas of epicontinental seas during the Phanerozoic, we came to the conclusion that global transgressions and regressions did actually take place and that they were confined to particular stages of the Caledonian, Hercynian and Alpine cycles of Earth history.…”
mentioning
confidence: 94%