Potencial de correlación estratigráfica de los paleopasciquínidos del Ediacárico

Kolesnikov, Anton

doi:10.3989/egeol.43588.557

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Note that such barriers did not impede exchanges between northern Norway and northwestern Russia as suggested by comparable continental to shallow marine faunal assemblages in the Ediacaran–Cambrian ( e.g. , Desiatkin et al , 2021 ; Högström et al , 2013 ; Jensen et al , 2018 ; Kolesnikov, 2019 ; Kolesnikov & Desiatkin, 2022 ). Additional obstacles to faunal mixing between Svalbard and Baltica may have been related to (1) climatic and environmental barriers due to the latitude difference between Svalbard, which was located at relatively low latitude comparable to Laurentia and Siberia (both of which also display bathyurid trilobite assemblage), and Baltica, which was located at mid to high southerly latitudes ( e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Fossil assemblages are still very useful in inferring connections between continents, e.g. , juxtaposition of South America and western Africa in the late Paleozoic–Mesozoic ( Cisneros et al , 2015 ; Colosi, 1925 ; de Beaufort, 1925 ; Eckhardt, 1922 ; Modesto, 2006 ; Trewick, 2017 ; von Ubisch, 1921 ; von Ubisch, 1928 ) or a connection of northern Norway with northwestern Russia in the Ediacaran–Cambrian ( Desiatkin et al , 2021 ; Högström et al , 2013 ; Jensen et al , 2018 ; Kolesnikov, 2019 ; Kolesnikov & Desiatkin, 2022 ), but the present study shows that the use of paleontological markers to infer disconnection between continents should be considered with care. In the present case, the Svalbard Archipelago was accreted to Baltica and to Laurentia in the latest Neoproterozoic during the Timanian Orogeny ( Koehl, 2020 ; Koehl et al , 2022a ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implications of Timanian thrust systems in the Barents Sea and Svalbard on using paleontological constraints for plate tectonics reconstructions

Koehl

2023

Open Res Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Svalbard Archipelago is commonly believed to have been located at comparable latitude and, possibly, to have been attached to Laurentia in the early Paleozoic (500–420 Ma) based on trilobite assemblage similarities. Trilobite assemblage differences and lack of mixing between Laurentia–Svalbard and Baltica were further used to propose that these continents were separated by the Iapetus Ocean at that time. However, recent structural correlation of Timanian (650–550 Ma) thrust systems throughout the Barents Sea show that Svalbard was already attached to Baltica in the latest Neoproterozoic and remained so during the Phanerozoic. Methods The present study presents a new interpretation of seismic reflection data from the DISKOS database, which were tied to nearby exploration wells. The study uses recently acquired knowledge of the seismic facies of intensely deformed pre-Caledonian rocks and principles of sequence stratigraphy to interpret the data. Results The present study reconciles the proximity of Svalbard and Laurentia with the early accretion of Svalbard to Baltica in the latest Neoproterozoic. It also describes the influence of Timanian thrust systems on paleoenvironments and possible effects on trilobite assemblages, e.g., the lack of mixing between those of Laurentia–Svalbard and Baltica. Conclusions The results suggest that paleontological constraints are robust markers to discuss continent amalgamation but should be considered with greater care when discussing continent separation since other factors, such as major thrust systems, may create major, linear, topographical boundaries, which may act as major faunal barriers within a single tectonic plate. Other factors to consider include paleoclimatic belts.

show abstract