The evolution of Oppel's ‘Macrocephalusbett’ (Callovian, Middle Jurassic)

Mönnig, Eckhard

doi:10.1111/let.12220

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8; numbers 1–13 for taxa added here). This figure shows the typical problematic situation that results from re‐investigating Oppel zones by a log‐based bed‐by‐bed sampling approach (see text for additional explanations and also Mönnig this issue). Bed‐by‐bed sampling of sections where Oppel zones are known to occur, inevitably reveals that the FO s and LO s of the characteristic species (‘wichtigsten’ and ‘leitenden Arten’ sensu Oppel 1856–58) are not coeval, and that the range of these species overlaps only in part.…”

Section: The Evolution Of the Concept Of Zonementioning

confidence: 99%

The Contribution of Fossils to Chronostratigraphy, 150 Years after Albert Oppel

Balini

Ferretti

Finney

et al. 2017

LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 150th anniversary of the death of Albert Oppel (1831–65) provided the opportunity to celebrate this outstanding stratigrapher with a Thematic Issue dedicated to the importance of fossils for dating and correlating of sedimentary rocks. In this issue, we analyse Oppel's significant contribution to modern chronostratigraphy, before exploring the Phanerozoic through all its major fossil groups, to verify if fossils are still able to make a significant contribution to chronostratigraphy. The extraordinary merit of Oppel's work has been the demonstration that fossils can be used to sub‐divide sedimentary sequences into zones, which in turn might be organized in higher chronostratigraphical units. The zone for Oppel is characterized by the distinctive fossil content, and his view strongly influenced the development of the standard chronostratigraphical scale for about one century, until the introduction, in the 1950s, of the log‐based range chart as the common practice to study the fossil record of sedimentary successions. This approach forced the stratigraphers to shift the focus from the fossil content of the zones to their boundaries. This new view allowed for the introduction of new kind of zones with precisely defined boundaries based on bioevents and to the decline of the Oppel Zone. This turning point in the history of chronostratigraphy was fuelled by the International Commission on Stratigraphy programme of definition of the units of the International Chronostratigraphic Chart based on the boundary stratotype and point (GSSP) concept, which started in 1973.

show abstract

Section: The Evolution Of the Concept Of Zonementioning

confidence: 99%

The Contribution of Fossils to Chronostratigraphy, 150 Years after Albert Oppel

Balini

Ferretti

Finney

et al. 2017

LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Note on the earliest records of genus Macrocephalites Zittel: implications for biostratigraphic correlations

Jain

2024

Historical Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From Oppel to Callomon (and beyond): building a high-resolution ammonite-based biochronology for the Jurassic System

Page

2017

LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By 1849, Alcide d'Orbigny had proposed a very modern looking global subdivision of a Jurassique ‘System’, into a sequence of 10 étages. D'Orbigny's stages were based on a basic biostratigraphical framework, but there were still a number of issues with its actual demonstrable applicability internationally. In 1856, Albert Oppel took d'Orbigny's framework and, as stated by W.J.Arkell in 1933, ‘breath[ed] new life into it…placing the whole science of stratigraphical geology on a new footing’. Oppel recognized eight ‘Etagen’, divided into a sequence of ‘zones’ which he considered to be time‐related to correlation units of theoretically universal application – a very clear and unambiguous statement of what now would be considered to be chronostratigraphical practice. Subsequently, evolution of Jurassic stratigraphy had, by the end of the 18th century led to S.S Buckman's high‐resolution ammonite correlation schemes using hemera – essentially the same as modern biohorizons. Although some of this detail was subsequently lost in his syntheses, from around 1933–1956, W.J. Arkell took many pre‐existing ‘zonal’ schemes and began to develop global ‘standard’ ammonite correlation schemes – again explicitly chronostratigraphical. Nevertheless, the potential for very high‐resolution ammonite‐based correlation schemes – with a resolution of only around 100,000 or less – was soon rediscovered and promoted by J.H. Callomon and by a very active ‘French School’. Despite all this activity, however, we still have not quite realized the ordered stratigraphical dreams of Oppel and his successors. Of the 11 stages now formally recognized within the Jurassic, four still do not have a ratified GSSP, and within the entire system, there still appear to be no formal agreements on what really are the ‘standard’ zones for each stage. Crucially, however, confusion is still widespread as to the ‘meaning’ of these zones – Jurassic ‘Standard Zones’ are chronozones not biozones – they have been explicitly so since Oppel's day, and as the stratigraphical building blocks of all ‘modern’ Jurassic stages, they must still be.

show abstract

The evolution of Oppel's ‘Macrocephalusbett’ (Callovian, Middle Jurassic)

Cited by 4 publications

References 22 publications

The Contribution of Fossils to Chronostratigraphy, 150 Years after Albert Oppel

The Contribution of Fossils to Chronostratigraphy, 150 Years after Albert Oppel

Note on the earliest records of genus Macrocephalites Zittel: implications for biostratigraphic correlations

From Oppel to Callomon (and beyond): building a high-resolution ammonite-based biochronology for the Jurassic System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About