Abstract
THE geological pioneer in any newly explored area distinguishes certain broad stratigraphical units, based primarily on lithic characters, and secondarily on the contained fossils. He correlates these units roughly with those on the familiar time-scale. As subsequent research, in the course of years, is extended in area and intensified in each locality, palæontological evidence becomes increasingly important, and problems of interpretation and correlation arise. Does a well-marked lithic change, say, from shale to sandstone or limestone, correspond to a definite moment of time, or did it take place earlier here than there ? What faunai aggregates may be trusted as exact age-indexes (zone-fossils), and which give ecological evidence (facies-fossils)? How can time-divisions based on Foraminifera be correlated with those based on Mollusca, echinoids or vertebrates? All these problems are faced by Mr. Kleinpell in his revision of the Miocene of California.
Miocene Stratigraphy of California
By Robert M. Kleinpell. Pp. ix + 450 + 22 plates. (Tulsa, Okla.: American Association of Petroleum Technologists; London: Thomas Murby and Co., 1938). 22s. 6d.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
D., A. Miocene Stratigraphy of California. Nature 144, 1030 (1939). https://doi.org/10.1038/1441030a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/1441030a0