Search

Time indications for the correlation and calibration of the Rotliegend of Germany are integrated and presented in a new way. The correlations are based on the visual balance of bio- and ecostratigraphic indications and radio-isotopic age determinations (RIA), whereby confidence limits, equivalent to those of the RIA, are applied also for other time indications (conchostracans, aquatic tetrapods, fishes, insects, macroflora, and ecostratigraphic indications). In contrast, terrestrial tetrapods and their tracks, chemo- and sequence stratigraphy, and magnetic susceptibility did not contribute to correlations in the Rotliegend in Central Europe. The Illawarra Reversal of the Earth' magnetic field (≈ 265 Ma) is fundamental for correlation and calibration. In general, however, the Regional Stratigraphic Scale is calibrated using U-Pb CA-ID-TIMS-RIA on zircon, Ar-Ar- and Rb-Sr-based RIA and, in addition, in the Early and Late Rotliegend using orbital-climatically controlled eccentricity cycles (≈ 100 ka, ≈ 400 ka). The boundary ages of the subgroups and of most formations are rounded to 0.5 Ma to avoid overinterpretation. Because of some inconsistent time indications alternative interpretations are also offered. The hitherto differing ages for the global Carboniferous-Permian boundary are the result of different dating methods: The ≈ 296 Ma in the Stratigraphic Tables of Germany 2002 and 2016 A (STG 2002; STG 2016 A) is an integrative age based on RIA from Central Europe, whereas the ≈ 299 Ma in the Global Stratigraphic Scales 2004 ff. and the STG 2016 B is based on a CA-ID-TIMS RIA on zircon from the southern Ural area. The age of ≈ 299 Ma is plausible from the perspective of the current Rotliegend RIA because the Rb-Sr age of 290.7 ± 0.9 Ma for the Donnersberg Formation (Lippolt & Hess 1989) has been replaced by the age of 294.5 ± 2.2 Ma, as recalculated in the present work. The updated time scale developed here will be integrated in the Stratigraphische Tabelle von Deutschland Kompakt 2022 (STDK 2022) and into the Stratigraphic Table of Germany Compact 2022 (STGC 2022). The age of the base of the Rotliegend in the Saar-Nahe Basin (SN, base Remigiusberg Formation and Glan Subgroup) is ≈ 299 Ma (U-Pb CA-ID-TIMS, zircon) resp. ≈ 300 Ma (Ar-Ar); the balanced compromise age of both is ≈ 299.5 Ma. In the Thüringer Wald (TW), the Rotliegend begins with the Ilmenau Formation (Subkommission Perm-Trias 2011) at ≈ 299.5 Ma (U-Pb CA-ID-TIMS). On the Flechtingen Block, at the southern margin of the Central European Basin, the oldest volcanic rock of the Altmark Subgroup is dated at 302 ± 3 Ma (U-Pb SHRIMP data). Accordingly, the Rotliegend in the STG 2002 and STG 2016 A starts at ≈ 302 Ma. However, the mean age calculated in the present work for the SHRIMP data of Breitkreuz & Kennedy (1999) is 298.6 ± 1.9 Ma, so that the base of the Altmark volcanic succession is here re-dated as ≈ 300.5 Ma. Thus, the ages of the present lithostratigraphic lower limits of the Rotliegend in northern Germany (CEB), in the TW and in the SN are, with ≈ 300.5 Ma to ≈ 299.5 Ma, only weakly diachronous if the nominal (face) values, which are both in the latest Carboniferous, are compared without the confidence intervals. For the first time, the Rotliegend of Germany is geochronologically subdivided into Early (≈ 300.5-295.5/294 Ma), Middle (≈ 295.5/294-266 Ma) and Late Rotliegend (≈ 266-257.5 Ma). The very long lasting Middle Rotliegend includes numerous and also extremely long stratigraphic gaps as a result of the amalgamation and the associated immense uplift of Pangaea in the area of Central and Western Europe. A very large stratigraphic gap in the Central European Basin (CEB) of ≈ 15 Ma (≈ 281-266 Ma, here called the Pangaea Gap) is supported by conchostracans, the Illawarra Reversal and the different palaeomagnetic properties of the sediments below and above the gap, which are discussed here for the first time. The Middle Rotliegend (duration of ≈ 29.5/28 Ma) is approx. twice as long as the Early (≈ 5.5/7 Ma) and Late Rotliegend (≈ 8.5 Ma) combined. The latter, however, contain the thickest successions in the Saar-Nahe Basin and the Central European Basin, respectively, which are free of gaps in the basin centre, with 'gaps' being defined in this context as time spans of ≤ 100 ka and ≤ 400 ka, respectively. In the CEB, the Elbe Subgroup is cyclostratigraphically calibrated to 5.6 Ma. A gapless area in the Saar-Nahe Basin is the Glan Subgroup, which covers only 4 Ma and 3 Ma, respectively; correspondingly, its subunits G1 to G10 (Glan 1 to Glan 10), introduced here, last on average 0.4 Ma and 0.3 Ma, respectively. This results in a maximum accumulation rate of 870 Bubnoff (Bub, m/Ma, mm/ka) and of 1150 Bub, respectively, which can be explained by a maximum of tectonic activity along the Hunsrück Southern Border Fault. For the lower Nahe Subgroup (N1 to N5, Nahe 1 to Nahe 5), the maximum accumulation rates are ≈ 450-200 Bub and for the upper Nahe Subgroup (N6-N8), at an estimated duration of 12 Ma ≈ 125 Bub and ≈ 50 Bub at a duration of 30 Ma, respectively. In the Central European Basin the maximum accumulation rates are much lower compared to the Glan Subgroup, with 200 Bub in the Elbe Subgroup and ≈ 360 Bub in the Havel Subgroup (Fig. 27), although here the subsidence rate may have been higher than the accumulation rate, as the basin was ≈ 130 m below sea level at the end of Folge ro4 (Top of the Hannover Formation; this paper). We recommend (1) Bubnoff (Bub) as unit of measure of the accumulation rate and (2) the stratigraphic terminology of the Subkommission Perm-Trias (2011) and the STG 2016 A. We here propose that numerous tuffs of the Glan Subgroup could originate from volcanic centres of the TW, whereas so far only source areas south of the SN were discussed: On the one hand, the tuff-rich time of the upper Jeckenbach Subformation - Odernheim Formation (= Glan units 7 and 8 = G7/G8) seems to correlate with the volcanogenic Oberhof time in the TW and, on the other hand, the tuff-poor time of the Wahnwegen Formation - middle Jeckenbach Subformation (G2/G6) seems to correlate with the upper Ilmenau, Manebach, Goldlauter and lowest Oberhof formations, which are devoid of volcanic rocks in the TW. Should causality exist here, an additional and also precise criterion for correlation would be established. At present there are two variants: On the one hand, volcanism in the Oberhof Formation, according to RIA (U-Pb CA-ID-TIMS on zircon), begins ≈ 1.8 Ma earlier and ends ≈ 0.8 Ma earlier than in the Donnersberg Formation (Ar-Ar, Rb- Sr recalculated). On the other hand, the conchostracan Lioestheria pseudotenella in the TW, if considered equivalent to L. cf. pseudotenella in the SN, the ecostratigraphic and lithofacial indications and the aquatic tetrapod D. pulcherrimus, point to for a similar age of these magmatites. The Sobernheim Lens (SN, Nahe units N4/N5) with its fossils so important for correlations is here assigned to the Jakobsweiler Member (N4, upper Donnersberg Formation), to the Quartzite-Conglomerate (N5, in literature often Wadern) and to the lowermost Standenbühl Formation (N4/N5). The youngest time indication Co13, the conchostracan Lioestheria arroyoensis sp. nov. correlates the upper Standenbühl Formation (N8, Martens 2020, where N8 may be extremely long), roughly with the Arroyo Formation in Texas (≈ early Kungurian). The here favoured age of the Tambach Formation of ≈ 294-292 Ma is significantly higher than the ≈ 286-283 Ma of STG 2016 A and the ≈ 284-281 Ma of STG 2016 B. It is based on RIA R25 (Table 9; lower Rotterode Formation, 295.8 ± 0.4 Ma; Lützner et al. 2021), which is the youngest CA-ID-TIMS RIA in the TW, and the duration estimate of the Rotterode - Tambach gap. In the SN, the youngest RIA R29 (Rb/Sr) is from the Donnersberg Formation (294.5 ± 2.2 Ma, this paper). From here on until ≈ 265 Ma (Illawarra Reversal), the numerical ages of all Rotliegend units and their connection to the Global Stratigraphic Scale (GSS) are uncertain and therefore correlations between Central Europe and the global reference section in the southern Ural area, partly biostratigraphically via North America, vary greatly. In this contect, the „series“ Wolfcampian and Leonardian (standard Permian units of the USA) played an important role. However, these lithostratigraphic units are at least unsuitabel as a reference system for large parts of North America, because they represent very variable time spans from region to region, similar with the "Lower Rotliegend" ("Autun") and "Upper Rotliegend" ("Saxon") of Central and Western Europe and therefore their assignement to the GSS is also very variable. This is due, among other things, to the fact that the Wolfcampian is often still understood as "lower Lower Permian", although considerable parts of it are now placed in the Carboniferous, because as a result of the introduction of the Global Stratigraphic Section and Point (GSSP) for the base of the Asselian Stage (= global base of the Permian in the southern Ural area), the conventional regional Carboniferous-Permian boundaries shifted to an higher stratigraphic level and thus to a younger age in the USA, China and the Donbass (Fig. 14). If the 57 sedimentary cycles in the Ottweiler and Glan subgroups (Königer & Stollhofen 2001: mean duration 245 ka each) in the SN are orbital-climatically induced, these cycles can only be 100 ka cycles (short eccentricity). This is also supported by the 6 cycles in units G7 and G8 that have been described in detail in the literature, which are consistent with the duration of the Glan Subgroup of 3 Ma and (preferred) 4 Ma, respectively. The total duration to be expected from 57 cycles à ≈ 100 ka is ≈ 5.7 Ma in contrast to the duration determined here according to RIA of ≤ 8 Ma. One reason for the difference could be that in the Ottweiler und Glan subgroups there are cycles that have not been recorded so far. The time span of ≤ 8 Ma is also an outcome of the new estimate for the duration of the Cantabrian Gap (early Stephanian) in the Saar-Nahe Basin of ≈ 3.6 Ma that is clearly longer than proposed in the STG 2002 and STG 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bulletin of Experimental Biology & Medicine is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)