Discovery of Shallow-Marine Biofacies Conodonts in a Bioherm Within the Carboniferous-Permian Transition in the Omalon Massif, NE Russia near the North Paleo-Pole: Correlation with a Warming Spike in the Southern Hemisphere

The conodont genera Hindeodus and Streptognathodus are reported for the first time within the Carboniferous-Permian transition in the northern high latitudes of the Paren’ River, Omolon Massif, NE Russia. Several fossil groups, including brachiopods, bivalves, scaphopods and microgastropods were found to be prolific in the invertebrate-dominated bioherms. These bioherms occur within predominantly siliciclastic sequences with extremely poor fauna, whereas in the studied bioherms the diversity of the bivalves and brachiopods exceeded observed diversity elsewhere in coeval facies in NE Russia. The bioherms are biostratigraphically constrained as uppermost Pennsylvanian to lowermost Cisuralian based on ammonoids. The very unusual peak of bivalve and brachiopod diversity and the occurrence of conodonts that require minimum sea water temperatures of at least 10-12 °C indicate a short lived, but significant warming event at that time, at least of provincial significance. This event most likely corresponds with a short-lived warming event recently discovered in the east of the southern hemisphere, in Timor and Australia. Thus, the event is possibly of global significance

A Synoptical Classification of the Bivalvia (Mollusca)

The following classification summarizes the suprageneric taxono-my of the Bivalvia for the upcoming revision of the Bivalvia volumes of the Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part N. The development of this classification began with Carter (1990a), Campbell, Hoeks-tra, and Carter (1995, 1998), Campbell (2000, 2003), and Carter, Campbell, and Campbell (2000, 2006), who, with assistance from the United States National Science Foundation, conducted large-scale morphological phylogenetic analyses of mostly Paleozoic bivalves, as well as molecular phylogenetic analyses of living bivalves. Dur-ing the past several years, their initial phylogenetic framework has been revised and greatly expanded through collaboration with many students of bivalve biology and paleontology, many of whom are coauthors. During this process, all available sources of phylogenetic information, including molecular, anatomical, shell morphological, shell microstructural, bio- and paleobiogeographic as well as strati-graphic, have been integrated into the classification. The more recent sources of phylogenetic information include, but are not limited to, Carter (1990a), Malchus (1990), J. Schneider (1995, 1998a, 1998b, 2002), T. Waller (1998), Hautmann (1999, 2001a, 2001b), Giribet and Wheeler (2002), Giribet and Distel (2003), Dreyer, Steiner, and Harper (2003), Matsumoto (2003), Harper, Dreyer, and Steiner (2006), Kappner and Bieler (2006), Mikkelsen and others (2006), Neulinger and others (2006), Taylor and Glover (2006), Kříž (2007), B. Morton (2007), Taylor, Williams, and Glover (2007), Taylor and others (2007), Giribet (2008), and Kirkendale (2009). This work has also benefited from the nomenclator of bivalve families by Bouchet and Rocroi (2010) and its accompanying classification by Bieler, Carter, and Coan (2010).This classification strives to indicate the most likely phylogenetic position for each taxon. Uncertainty is indicated by a question mark before the name of the taxon. Many of the higher taxa continue to undergo major taxonomic revision. This is especially true for the superfamilies Sphaerioidea and Veneroidea, and the orders Pectinida and Unionida. Because of this state of flux, some parts of the clas-sification represent a compromise between opposing points of view. Placement of the Trigonioidoidea is especially problematic. This Mesozoic superfamily has traditionally been placed in the order Unionida, as a possible derivative of the superfamily Unionoidea (see Cox, 1952; Sha, 1992, 1993; Gu, 1998; Guo, 1998; Bieler, Carter, & Coan, 2010). However, Chen Jin-hua (2009) summarized evi-dence that Trigonioidoidea was derived instead from the superfamily Trigonioidea. Arguments for these alternatives appear equally strong, so we presently list the Trigonioidoidea, with question, under both the Trigoniida and Unionida, with the contents of the superfamily indicated under the Trigoniida.Fil: Carter, Joseph G.. University of North Carolina; Estados UnidosFil: Altaba, Cristian R.. Universidad de las Islas Baleares; EspañaFil: Anderson, Laurie C.. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology; Estados UnidosFil: Araujo, Rafael. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas. Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales; EspañaFil: Biakov, Alexander S.. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Bogan, Arthur E.. North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences; Estados UnidosFil: Campbell, David. Paleontological Research Institution; Estados UnidosFil: Campbell, Matthew. Charleston Southern University; Estados UnidosFil: Chen, Jin Hua. Chinese Academy of Sciences. Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology; República de ChinaFil: Cope, John C. W.. National Museum of Wales. Department of Geology; Reino UnidoFil: Delvene, Graciela. Instituto Geológico y Minero de España; EspañaFil: Dijkstra, Henk H.. Netherlands Centre for Biodiversity; Países BajosFil: Fang, Zong Jie. Chinese Academy of Sciences; República de ChinaFil: Gardner, Ronald N.. No especifica;Fil: Gavrilova, Vera A.. Russian Geological Research Institute; RusiaFil: Goncharova, Irina A.. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Harries, Peter J.. University of South Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Hartman, Joseph H.. University of North Dakota; Estados UnidosFil: Hautmann, Michael. Paläontologisches Institut und Museum; SuizaFil: Hoeh, Walter R.. Kent State University; Estados UnidosFil: Hylleberg, Jorgen. Institute of Biology; DinamarcaFil: Jiang, Bao Yu. Nanjing University; República de ChinaFil: Johnston, Paul. Mount Royal University; CanadáFil: Kirkendale, Lisa. University Of Wollongong; AustraliaFil: Kleemann, Karl. Universidad de Viena; AustriaFil: Koppka, Jens. Office de la Culture. Section d’Archéologie et Paléontologie; SuizaFil: Kříž, Jiří. Czech Geological Survey. Department of Sedimentary Formations. Lower Palaeozoic Section; República ChecaFil: Machado, Deusana. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Malchus, Nikolaus. Institut Català de Paleontologia; EspañaFil: Márquez Aliaga, Ana. Universidad de Valencia; EspañaFil: Masse, Jean Pierre. Universite de Provence; FranciaFil: McRoberts, Christopher A.. State University of New York at Cortland. Department of Geology; Estados UnidosFil: Middelfart, Peter U.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Mitchell, Simon. The University of the West Indies at Mona; JamaicaFil: Nevesskaja, Lidiya A.. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Özer, Sacit. Dokuz Eylül University; TurquíaFil: Pojeta, John Jr.. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Polubotko, Inga V.. Russian Geological Research Institute; RusiaFil: Pons, Jose Maria. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Popov, Sergey. Russian Academy of Sciences; RusiaFil: Sanchez, Teresa Maria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Sartori, André F.. Field Museum of National History; Estados UnidosFil: Scott, Robert W.. Precision Stratigraphy Associates; Estados UnidosFil: Sey, Irina I.. Russian Geological Research Institute; RusiaFil: Signorelli, Javier Hernan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Centro Nacional Patagónico; ArgentinaFil: Silantiev, Vladimir V.. Kazan Federal University; RusiaFil: Skelton, Peter W.. Open University. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences; Reino UnidoFil: Steuber, Thomas. The Petroleum Institute; Emiratos Arabes UnidosFil: Waterhouse, J. Bruce. No especifica;Fil: Wingard, G. Lynn. United States Geological Survey; Estados UnidosFil: Yancey, Thomas. Texas A&M University; Estados Unido

Palaeobiogeography and palaeogeographical implications of Permian marine bivalve faunas in Northeast Asia (Kolyma–Omolon and erkhoyansk–Okhotsk regions, northeastern Russia)

The paper considers the biogeography and palaeogeographic implications of the Permian marine bivalve faunas of Northeast Asia, with a focus on the dynamic relationships between biotic similarities and palaeogeographic distance through an interval of ca. 50 million years. A stage-by-stage time series analysis of the biotic similarities between two previously recognized biochores in Northeast Asia, the Kolyma&ndash;Omolon and Verkhoyan&ndash;Okhotsk provinces, has been carried out using both the Jaccard and Dice similarity indices based on the spatio-temporal distributions of 355 Permian marine bivalve species in Northeast Asia. The outcome of this analysis, combined with other empirical data and previously published tectonic, sedimentological and palaeontological information, suggests that (1) the bivalve faunas from these two provinces were distinctive from one another as two separate biochores throughout all but the earliest (Asselian) Permian stages and (2) the biotic similarities between the Verkhoyan&ndash;Okhotsk and Kolyma&ndash;Omolon provinces remained consistently low since Sakmarian, all falling well below the minimum threshold of the Jaccard index of 0.42 required for distinguishing marine biotic provinces. We interpret these below-threshold Jaccard biotic similarities as an indication of significant palaeogeographic separation between the Verkhoyan-Okhotsk and Kolyma&ndash;Omolon provinces, which is in turn considered to indicate rifting and seafloor spreading of the Omolon microcontinent and associated terranes and island arcs away from the North Asian craton, at least from the Sakmarian to the beginning of the Late Permian. Palaeo-distance separation appears to be the primary and most significant biogeographic determinant in accounting for the differences in the spatial distribution of most Permian bivalve species in Northeast Asia. Several other variables also appear to have played a significant role, including regional climate conditions, ocean currents and merged island chains as geographic barriers. In particular, the relatively high biotic similarity between the Verkhoyan&ndash;Okhotsk and Kolyma&ndash;Omolon provinces during the Late Wuchiapingian and Changhsingian may have been related to the shallowing of the deep-water basins (Oimyakon, Ayan-Yuryakh, Balygychan and Sugoi basins) that had previously separated the two provinces and the flooding (submergence) of the Okhotsk&ndash;Taigonos volcanic arc system, thus allowing the invasion of lower latitude warm-water Palaeotethyan and even Gondwanan species into Northeast Asia.<br /

Late Permian to Middle Triassic palaeogeographic differentiation of key ammonoid groups: evidence from the former USSR

Palaeontological characteristics of the Upper Permian and upper Olenekian to lowermost Anisian sequences in the Tethys and the Boreal realm are reviewed in the context of global correlation. Data from key Wuchiapingian and Changhsingian sections in Transcaucasia, Lower and Middle Triassic sections in the Verkhoyansk area, Arctic Siberia, the southern Far East (South Primorye and Kitakami) and Mangyshlak (Kazakhstan) are examined. Dominant groups of ammonoids are shown for these different regions. Through correlation, it is suggested that significant thermal maxima (recognized using geochemical, palaeozoogeographical and palaeoecological data) existed during the late Kungurian, early Wuchiapingian, latest Changhsingian, middle Olenekian and earliest Anisian periods. Successive expansions and reductions of the warm– temperate climatic zones into middle and high latitudes during the Late Permian and the Early and Middle Triassic are a result of strong climatic fluctuations

Permian Diamictites in Northeastern Asia: Their Significance Concerning the Bipolarity of the Late Paleozoic Ice Age

Despite a lack of detailed sedimentologic analyses, diamictites in the Middle Permian Atkan Formation were previously interpreted as glaciomarine and glacially-influenced marine deposits. This interpretation allowed this unit to play a prominent role in paleoclimatic and biogeographical reconstructions associated with presumed bipolar glaciation during the late Paleozoic ice age (LPIA). In this sense, the LPIA is considered to be a close analog to bipolar glaciation and climate change during the Cenozoic. Here, results are presented that challenge the glacigenic interpretation for these strata and negate interpretations of the bipolar nature of the LPIA. The 400 to 1500-m-thick Atkan Formation was deposited in back-arc basins associated with activity of the Okhotsk–Taigonos volcanic arc along the leading edge of Pangea as it drifted across the North Polar Circle. The occurrence of tuffs, volcanic clasts, and glass shards indicate derivation from a nearby arc. Cooling and solidification of some clasts during sedimentation is suggested by the occurrence of clasts with embayments and protrusions that extend into the surrounding matrix, clasts with columnar-like jointing, and alteration of the matrix surrounding some clasts. CA-TIMS dating of tuff zircons indicate a late Capitanian age, which is consistent with fossils within the strata. Bedded diamictites deposited as debrites dominate. These diamictites, which occur as tens of m thick downlapping packages that thicken then thin upward, were deposited as prograding and abandoning sediment gravity-flow fans. Chaotic and folded strata formed as slumps. Graded sandstones and conglomerates were deposited as turbidites, and mudstones were deposited as mudflows, low-density turbidites, and hemipelagic deposits. Striated clasts and outsized clasts piercing bedding were not observed in the study area. Strata above and below the Atkan Formation contain abundant graded beds and deep-water trace fossils indicating deposition as turbidites. The combination of debrites, turbidites, slumps, volcanic grains (clasts, glass, and tuffs), and an absence of glacigenic indicators suggest that Atkan strata were deposited in deep-water basins associated with the development of the volcanic arc rather than due to glacial activity. These findings are significant as they require reconsideration of current views of LPIA glaciation and suggest that ice sheets were limited to Gondwana