MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110533935 · doi:10.1144/sp334.1

The Triassic timescale: an introduction

2010· article· en· W2110533935 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Spencer G. Lucas

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society London Special Publications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLadinianConodontPaleontologyBiostratigraphyGeologyEarly TriassicTriasGlobal Boundary Stratotype Section and PointPermianPhanerozoicStructural basinCenozoic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract German geologists began to study rocks now recognized as Triassic during the late 1700s. In 1823, one of those German geologists, a very astute mining engineer named Friedrich August von Alberti (1795–1878), coined the term ‘Trias formation’ for an c . 1 km thick, tripartite succession of strata in southwestern Germany – the Bunten Sandsteins, Muschelkalk and Keuper of the German miners. Alberti also recognized Triassic rocks outside of Germany, throughout much of Europe and as far away as India and the United States. By the end of the nineteenth century, Triassic rocks had been identified across Europe and Asia, and in North America, South America and Africa. Indeed, in 1895, the Austrian geologist Edmund von Mojsisovics (1839–1907) and his collaborators published a complete subdivision of Triassic time based on ammonoid biostratigraphy and, in so doing, introduced many of the Triassic chronostratigraphic terms still used today. The twentieth century saw the elaboration of an ammonoid-based Triassic timescale, especially due to the work of Canadian palaeontologist E. Timothy Tozer (1928-). During the last few decades, work also began on developing a global magnetic polarity timescale for the Triassic, a variety of precise numerical ages tied to reliable Triassic biostratigraphy have been determined, and conodont biostratigraphy has become an important tool in Triassic chronostratigraphic definition and correlations. The current Triassic chronostratigraphic scale is a hierarchy of three series (Lower, Middle, Upper) divided into seven stages (Lower = Induan, Olenekian; Middle=Anisian, Ladinian; and Upper=Carnian, Norian, Rhaetian) further divided into 15 substages (Induan=upper Griesbachian, Dienerian; Olenekian=Smithian, Spathian; Anisian=Aegean, Bithynian, Pelsonian, Illyrian; Ladinian=Fassanian, Longobardian; Carnian=Julian, Tuvalian; Norian=Lacian, Alaunian, Sevatian). Ammonoid and conodont biostratigraphies provide the primary basis for the chronostratigraphy. A sparse but growing database of precise radioisotopic ages support these calibrations: base of Triassic c . 252 Ma, base Olenekian c . 251 Ma, base Anisian c . 247 Ma, base Ladinian c . 242 Ma, base Jurassic c . 201 Ma. A U/Pb age of c . 231 Ma from the Italian Pignola 2 section is lower Tuvalian, and U/Pb ages on detrital zircons from the nonmarine Chinle Group of the western USA of c . 219 Ma are in strata of late Carnian (Tuvalian) age based on the biostratigraphy of palynomorphs, conchostracans and tetrapods. These data support placement of the Norian base at c . 217 Ma, and indicate that the Tuvalian is more than 10 million years long and that the Carnian and Norian are the longest Triassic stages. Magnetostratigraphic data establish normal polarity for all of the Triassic stage bases except Anisian and Ladinian. An integrated biostratigraphic correlation web for the marine Triassic consists of ammonoids, bivalves, radiolarians and conodonts, whereas a similar web exists for the nonmarine Triassic using palynomorphs, conchostracans and tetrapods. Critical to cross correlation of the two webs is the Triassic section in the Germanic basin, where a confident correlation of nonmarine biostratigraphy to Triassic stage boundaries has been achieved. The major paths forward in development of the Triassic timescale are: finish formal definition of all Triassic stage boundaries, formally define the 15 Triassic substages, improve the integration of the Triassic biostratigraphic webs and develop new radioisotopic and magnetostratigraphic data, particularly for the Late Triassic.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society London Special PublicationsSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207