The Experts below are selected from a list of 288 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Harvey Weiss - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
formal subdivision of the holocene series epoch a discussion paper by a working group of intimate integration of ice core marine and terrestrial records and the subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy international commission on Stratigraphy
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
-
Formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch: a Discussion Paper by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice‐core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (International Commission on Stratigraphy)
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Mike Walker - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Formal Subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch
Springer Geology, 2014Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Philip L. Gibbard, Antony J. Long, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Sune Olander RasmussenAbstract:This proposal, by a Working Group of Integration of ice-core, marine, and terrestrial records (INTIMATE) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), is for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ("early", "middle" or "mid-", and "late"), and we propose that this de facto subdivision should now be formalised to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We advocate a formal Early-Middle Holocene boundary at 8200 a BP and a formal Middle-Late Holocene boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). (Less)
-
formal subdivision of the holocene series epoch a discussion paper by a working group of intimate integration of ice core marine and terrestrial records and the subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy international commission on Stratigraphy
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
-
Formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch: a Discussion Paper by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice‐core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (International Commission on Stratigraphy)
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Martin J Head - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the newly ratified definition of the Quaternary system period and redefinition of the pleistocene series epoch and comparison of proposals advanced prior to formal ratification
Episodes, 2010Co-Authors: P.l. Gibbard, Martin J HeadAbstract:The base of the Quaternary System is defined by the Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) of the Gelasian Stage at Monte San Nicola in Sicily, Italy, currently dated at 2.58 Ma. The base of the Pleistocene Series is redefined by the same GSSP, having previously been defined by the GSSP at Vrica, Calabria, Italy, which is dated at 1.806 Ma. These important changes to the geological time scale were formulated through extensive consultation with the Quaternary community through the International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA), pr oposed by the International Commission on Stratigraphy's (ICS) Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy, endorsed by the voting membership of the ICS, and ratified in June 2009 by the Executive Committee of the International Union of Geological Sciences. Two competing proposals had been advanced: a 'Neogene' proposal advocated by the ICS Subcommission on Neogene Stratigraphy, and a 'Quaternary' proposal championed by the ICS Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy. The status quo position would have persisted had neither proposal r eceived a majority of votes. These proposals are compared and evaluated, the 'Quaternary' proposal is presented in detail, and future directions are discussed.
-
The newly-ratified definition of the Quaternary System/Period and redefinition of the Pleistocene Series/Epoch, and comparison of proposals advanced prior to formal ratification
Episodes, 2010Co-Authors: Philip L. Gibbard, Martin J HeadAbstract:The base of the Quaternary System is defined by the Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) of the Gelasian Stage at Monte San Nicola in Sicily, Italy, currently dated at 2.58 Ma. The base of the Pleistocene Series is redefined by the same GSSP, having previously been defined by the GSSP at Vrica, Calabria, Italy, which is dated at 1.806 Ma. These important changes to the geological time scale were formulated through extensive consultation with the Quaternary community through the International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA), pr oposed by the International Commission on Stratigraphy's (ICS) Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy, endorsed by the voting membership of the ICS, and ratified in June 2009 by the Executive Committee of the International Union of Geological Sciences. Two competing proposals had been advanced: a 'Neogene' proposal advocated by the ICS Subcommission on Neogene Stratigraphy, and a 'Quaternary' proposal championed by the ICS Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy. The status quo position would have persisted had neither proposal r eceived a majority of votes. These proposals are compared and evaluated, the 'Quaternary' proposal is presented in detail, and future directions are discussed.
Svante Bjorck - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Formal Subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch
Springer Geology, 2014Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Philip L. Gibbard, Antony J. Long, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Sune Olander RasmussenAbstract:This proposal, by a Working Group of Integration of ice-core, marine, and terrestrial records (INTIMATE) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), is for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ("early", "middle" or "mid-", and "late"), and we propose that this de facto subdivision should now be formalised to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We advocate a formal Early-Middle Holocene boundary at 8200 a BP and a formal Middle-Late Holocene boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). (Less)
-
formal subdivision of the holocene series epoch a discussion paper by a working group of intimate integration of ice core marine and terrestrial records and the subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy international commission on Stratigraphy
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
-
Formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch: a Discussion Paper by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice‐core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (International Commission on Stratigraphy)
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Antony J. Long - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Formal Subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch
Springer Geology, 2014Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Philip L. Gibbard, Antony J. Long, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Sune Olander RasmussenAbstract:This proposal, by a Working Group of Integration of ice-core, marine, and terrestrial records (INTIMATE) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), is for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ("early", "middle" or "mid-", and "late"), and we propose that this de facto subdivision should now be formalised to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We advocate a formal Early-Middle Holocene boundary at 8200 a BP and a formal Middle-Late Holocene boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). (Less)
-
formal subdivision of the holocene series epoch a discussion paper by a working group of intimate integration of ice core marine and terrestrial records and the subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy international commission on Stratigraphy
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
-
Formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch: a Discussion Paper by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice‐core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (International Commission on Stratigraphy)
Journal of Quaternary Science, 2012Co-Authors: Mike Walker, Antony J. Long, Sun Olander Rasmussen, Rewi M. Newnham, J. John Lowe, Svante Bjorck, Les C. Cwynar, Max Berkelhammer, D A Fisher, Harvey WeissAbstract:This discussion paper, by a Working Group of INTIMATE (Integration of ice-core, marine and terrestrial records) and the Subcommision on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS), considers the prospects for a formal subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Although previous attempts to subdivide the Holocene have proved inconclusive, recent developments in Quaternary Stratigraphy, notably the definition of the Pleistocene-Holocene boundary and the emergence of formal subdivisions of the Pleistocene Series/ Epoch, mean that it may be timely to revisit this matter. The Quaternary literature reveals a widespread but variable informal usage of a tripartite division of the Holocene ('early', 'middle' or 'mid', and 'late'), and we argue that this de facto subdivision should now be formalized to ensure consistency in stratigraphic terminology. We propose an Early-Middle Holocene Boundary at 8200 a BP and a Middle-Late Holocene Boundary at 4200 a BP, each of which is linked to a Global Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP). Should the proposal find a broad measure of support from the Quaternary community, a submission will be made to the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), via the SQS and the ICS, for formal ratification of this subdivision of the Holocene Series/Epoch. Copyright# 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
