High-Precision U-Pb Zircon Age Calibration of the Global Carboniferous Time Scale and Milankovitch Band Cyclicity in the Donets Basin, Eastern Ukraine

High-precision ID-TIMS U-Pb zircon ages for 12 interstratified tuffs and tonsteins are used to radiometrically calibrate the detailed lithostratigraphic, cyclostratigraphic, and biostratigraphic framework of the Carboniferous Donets Basin of eastern Europe. Chemical abrasion of zircons, use of the internationally calibrated EARTHTIME mixed U-Pb isotope dilution tracer, and improved mass spectrometry guided by detailed error analysis have resulted in an age resolution o

Problems correlating the late Brigantian–Arnsbergian Western European substages within northern England

A detailed study of foraminiferal assemblages recorded in limestones from northern England in the Stainmore Trough and Alston Block permits their assignment to different European substages than in previous studies. Comparisons with foraminiferal assemblages, mostly from Russia, allow the biozonations to be correlated with the Viséan, Serpukhovian and Bashkirian international stages, as well as with the Russian (and Ukrainian) substages for the Serpukhovian (Tarussian, Steshevian, Protvian and Zapaltyubian). The Scar Limestone and Five Yard Limestone Members are assigned to the Tarussian and, thus, represent the lowermost part of the formal Serpukhovian Stage. This new correlation coincides closely with the first occurrence of the conodont Lochriea ziegleri from levels equivalent to the Single Post Limestone that could potentially form the revised base for the Serpukhovian. The Three Yard Limestone Member is correlated with the base of the Steshevian substage which also includes the Four Fathom Limestone Member, Great Limestone Member and Little Limestone. The base of the Protvian is considered to lie within the Crag Limestone, whereas the Rookhope Shell Band contains foraminiferal assemblages more typical of the Zapaltyubian in the Ukraine and Chernyshevkian in the Urals. Assemblages of the Upper Fell Top Limestone and Grindstone/Botany Limestones contain foraminiferal species that have been used for the recognition of the Bashkirian elsewhere. There is no other fossil group which allows the calibration of those foraminiferal assemblages, because ammonoids are virtually absent in the shallow‐water cyclothemic successions and conodonts have not been studied in detail in this region. The Mid‐Carboniferous boundary and the Voznessenian substage might be reasonably located below the Upper Fell Top Limestone.Field work was funded by the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (research project CGL2012‐30922BTE).Peer reviewe

Foraminifers of the Viséan–Serpukhovian boundary interval in Western Palaeotethys: a review

A detailed revision of foraminiferal zonal schemes in sections throughout Europe and North Africa for the Viséan–Serpukhovian boundary interval suggests that several foraminiferal taxa might have the potential to form reliable markers throughout the Palaeotethys. This would support the currently investigated boundary definition based on the First Appearance Datum of the conodont Lochriea ziegleri. However, correlation of these foraminiferal markers in the Western Palaeotethys region has encountered several problems, partly arising from taxonomic issues, but mainly because of apparent discrepancies between the First Occurrence Data (FOD). Analysis of the available foraminiferal data has revealed that some taxa show marked delays in their FODs, due to the timing of westward dispersal within the Palaeotethys, emanating from a probable source in eastern Russia. As a result of this investigation, two dispersal routes have been identified, a northern branch and a southern branch. In general, the displacements within the southern branch occurred more rapidly than in the northern branch. In addition to different dispersal routes, separation of the main foraminiferal markers in stratigraphical sections from different regions can result from isolation of shallow‐water facies of the inner platform from those of relatively deeper‐water settings in the outer platform, the latter showing more consistent foraminiferal FODs. The differences in palaeobathymetry and associated energy levels have enabled two foraminiferal zonal schemes to be distinguished for the Viséan–Serpukhovian boundary interval in the Western Palaeotethys, one for the inner platform and a second one for the outer platform