1997
DOI: 10.1016/s0037-0738(96)00053-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stratigraphic correlation of oligocene marginal marine and fluvial deposits across the middle and lower coastal plain, South Carolina

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
30
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
30
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Regardless, Sanders & Barnes (2002b, p. 317) remarked upon the similarity of the vertebrate assemblages from the Chandler Bridge Formation and the underlying Ashley Formation and concluded that the "two formations belong to the same biostratigraphical interval (NP24) and that very little time (probably no more than about 2 My) elapsed between the deposition of these two units." The lower two beds of the Chandler Bridge Formation have yielded dinoflagellates assignable to the dinoflagellate zone D14 (Katuna et al 1997), which are correlative with zones NP24 and 25 (Katuna et al 1997 29.0À28.75 Ma, and reported four new Strontium dates ranging from 24.7À24.5 for the Chandler Bridge Formation and a date from the overlying Edisto Formation of 23.5 Ma. Strontium isotope ratios from the Chandler Bridge Formation and overlying Edisto Formation constrain an age of 24.7À23.5 Ma (Weems et al, 2016).…”
Section: Eomysticetus Carolinensis Sanders and Barnes 2002bmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Regardless, Sanders & Barnes (2002b, p. 317) remarked upon the similarity of the vertebrate assemblages from the Chandler Bridge Formation and the underlying Ashley Formation and concluded that the "two formations belong to the same biostratigraphical interval (NP24) and that very little time (probably no more than about 2 My) elapsed between the deposition of these two units." The lower two beds of the Chandler Bridge Formation have yielded dinoflagellates assignable to the dinoflagellate zone D14 (Katuna et al 1997), which are correlative with zones NP24 and 25 (Katuna et al 1997 29.0À28.75 Ma, and reported four new Strontium dates ranging from 24.7À24.5 for the Chandler Bridge Formation and a date from the overlying Edisto Formation of 23.5 Ma. Strontium isotope ratios from the Chandler Bridge Formation and overlying Edisto Formation constrain an age of 24.7À23.5 Ma (Weems et al, 2016).…”
Section: Eomysticetus Carolinensis Sanders and Barnes 2002bmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Calcareous nannoplankton reported by Edwards et al (1997) confirmed assignment of the Ashley Formation to zone NP24 or possibly NP25; the more convincing assignment to zone NP24 is followed here (see Systematic review of Eomysticetidae, below). D14 which is broadly correlative with zones NP24 and NP25 (Katuna et al 1997), and no finer biostratigraphical resolution is currently available; newly reported Strontium isotope dates indicate an age of 24.7À23.5 Ma (Weems et al 2016). The Jinnobaru Formation (Kyushu, Japan), which produced Yamatocetus, has not yielded any direct dates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A better understanding of cranial ontogeny is needed to determine how these two species relate to the holotype of the genus, which is almost certainly an immature individual. Manuscript to be reviewed Chandler Bridge Formation, with silhouette indicating bed that produced the new specimens, modified from Katuna et al (1997). Figure 2.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Chandler Bridge Formation was deposited in a coastal marine setting, with estuarine, lagoonal, beach, and shallow marine environments being represented (Sanders et al 1982;Weems and Sanders 1986;Katuna et al 1997;Cicimurri and Knight 2009). There apparently was little fluvial input into this depositional environment (contra Katuna et al 1997) because the preserved vertebrate fauna overwhelmingly consists of marine sharks and rays (Cicimurri and Knight 2009), marine bony fishes (e.g., Fierstine and Weems 2009), cetaceans, dugongs, sea turtles, and sea birds (Sanders 1980).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There apparently was little fluvial input into this depositional environment (contra Katuna et al 1997) because the preserved vertebrate fauna overwhelmingly consists of marine sharks and rays (Cicimurri and Knight 2009), marine bony fishes (e.g., Fierstine and Weems 2009), cetaceans, dugongs, sea turtles, and sea birds (Sanders 1980). Other animal remains are encountered only rarely, such as land birds, land mammals, and salt-water tolerant crocodilians (Erickson and Sawyer 1996).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%