Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary ...

Research

Associated organisational units

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Comment/debate › peer-review

Published

Standard

Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit. / Knox, Robert O. B.; Pearson, P. N.; Barry, T. L. et al.
In: Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, Vol. 123, No. 3, 06.2012, p. 390-393.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Comment/debate › peer-review

Harvard

Knox, ROB, Pearson, PN, Barry, TL, Condon, D, Cope, J, Gale, AS, Gibbard, P, Kerr, AC, Hounslow, MW, Powell, JH, Rawson, PF, Smith, AJ, Waters, C & Zalasiewicz, J 2012, 'Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit', Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 390-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2012.05.004

APA

Knox, R. O. B., Pearson, P. N., Barry, T. L., Condon, D., Cope, J., Gale, A. S., Gibbard, P., Kerr, A. C., Hounslow, M. W., Powell, J. H., Rawson, P. F., Smith, A. J., Waters, C., & Zalasiewicz, J. (2012). Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 123(3), 390-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2012.05.004

Vancouver

Knox ROB, Pearson PN, Barry TL, Condon D, Cope J, Gale AS et al. Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association. 2012 Jun;123(3):390-393. doi: 10.1016/j.pgeola.2012.05.004

Author

Knox, Robert O. B. ; Pearson, P. N. ; Barry, T. L. et al. / Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit. In: Proceedings of the Geologists' Association. 2012 ; Vol. 123, No. 3. pp. 390-393.

Bibtex

@article{5f42a21b04254e05b6483124ca4ffd2c,
title = "Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit",
abstract = "The {\textquoteleft}Tertiary{\textquoteright}, omitted from IUGS-approved timescales since 1989, is still in common use. With the recent re-instatement of the Quaternary as a formal unit, the question arises as to whether the Tertiary too should be reinstated as a formal period, with the {\textquoteleft}Paleogene{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}Neogene{\textquoteright} being downgraded to sub-periods. This paper presents arguments for and against this proposal, stemming from discussions by members of the Geological Society Stratigraphy Commission. It is intended to stimulate discussion of the topic in the wider community.",
author = "Knox, {Robert O. B.} and Pearson, {P. N.} and Barry, {T. L.} and Dan Condon and John Cope and Gale, {A. S.} and Phil Gibbard and A.C. Kerr and Hounslow, {Mark William} and J.H. Powell and Rawson, {P. F.} and Smith, {Alan J.} and Colin Waters and Jan Zalasiewicz",
year = "2012",
month = jun,
doi = "10.1016/j.pgeola.2012.05.004",
language = "English",
volume = "123",
pages = "390--393",
journal = "Proceedings of the Geologists' Association",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Examining the case for the use of the Tertiary as a formal period or informal unit

AU - Knox, Robert O. B.

AU - Pearson, P. N.

AU - Barry, T. L.

AU - Condon, Dan

AU - Cope, John

AU - Gale, A. S.

AU - Gibbard, Phil

AU - Kerr, A.C.

AU - Hounslow, Mark William

AU - Powell, J.H.

AU - Rawson, P. F.

AU - Smith, Alan J.

AU - Waters, Colin

AU - Zalasiewicz, Jan

PY - 2012/6

Y1 - 2012/6

N2 - The ‘Tertiary’, omitted from IUGS-approved timescales since 1989, is still in common use. With the recent re-instatement of the Quaternary as a formal unit, the question arises as to whether the Tertiary too should be reinstated as a formal period, with the ‘Paleogene’ and ‘Neogene’ being downgraded to sub-periods. This paper presents arguments for and against this proposal, stemming from discussions by members of the Geological Society Stratigraphy Commission. It is intended to stimulate discussion of the topic in the wider community.

AB - The ‘Tertiary’, omitted from IUGS-approved timescales since 1989, is still in common use. With the recent re-instatement of the Quaternary as a formal unit, the question arises as to whether the Tertiary too should be reinstated as a formal period, with the ‘Paleogene’ and ‘Neogene’ being downgraded to sub-periods. This paper presents arguments for and against this proposal, stemming from discussions by members of the Geological Society Stratigraphy Commission. It is intended to stimulate discussion of the topic in the wider community.

U2 - 10.1016/j.pgeola.2012.05.004

DO - 10.1016/j.pgeola.2012.05.004

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 123

SP - 390

EP - 393

JO - Proceedings of the Geologists' Association

JF - Proceedings of the Geologists' Association

IS - 3

ER -