Search

The inaugural meeting of the Anthropocene Working Group of the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy in Berlin (Oct. 2014) produced a consensus statement that “humans have altered geologic processes across the Earth system sufficiently to cause a planetary transition to a new interval of geological time”, with the timing of the onset the focus of continued debate, but with a majority in favour of a mid-20th century beginning. The name has driven the assumption that the Anthropocene should be an epoch, but are its signatures truly driven out of the range evident for most of the Holocene, or are changes comparable or subsidiary to Holocene stages? The evidence rests upon a broad range of signatures reflecting humanity’s significant and increasing modification of Earth systems. These are visible in anthropogenic deposits in the form of the greatest expansion of novel minerals in the last 2.4 billion years and development of ubiquitous materials, such as plastics, present in the environment only in the last 60 years. Globally distributed spherical carbonaceous particles of fly ash represent another near-synchronous and permanent proxy. The artefacts we produce, the technofossils of the future, provide a decadal to annual stratigraphical resolution. These materials and deposits have in recent decades extended into the oceans and increasingly into the subsurface both onshore and offshore. These anthropogenic deposits are transported at rates exceeding those of the sediment carried by rivers by an order of magnitude, fluvial systems themselves showing widespread sediment retention in response to dam construction across most major river systems. The Anthropocene is evident in sediment and glacial ice strata as chemical markers. CO2 in the atmosphere has risen by ~45 percent above pre-Industrial Revolution levels, mainly through combustion of hydrocarbons over a few decades. Although average global temperature increases and resultant sea-level rises are still comparativel

A recently published analysis by Lewis and Maslin (Lewis SL and Maslin MA (2015) Defining the Anthropocene. Nature 519: 171–180) has identified two new potential horizons for the Holocene−Anthropocene boundary: 1610 (associated with European colonization of the Americas), or 1964 (the peak of the excess radiocarbon signal arising from atom bomb tests). We discuss both of these novel suggestions, and consider that there is insufficient stratigraphic basis for the former, whereas placing the latter at the peak of the signal rather than at its inception does not follow normal stratigraphical practice. Wherever the boundary is eventually placed, it should be optimized to reflect stratigraphical evidence with the least possible ambiguity.

The Anthropocene was proposed as a term (Crutzen and Stoermer 2000) before consideration was given to the nature of the key signatures, contrasting with standard procedures for defining such units. The term is being widely used in both popular and scientific publications before a decision is made as to whether it warrants formalisation and definition of a Global Stratigraphic Section and Point (GSSP). The deliberate human modification of the landscape and its subsurface, and the creation of human-generated novel sedimentary deposits, minerals, and landforms, are characteristic features of the development of Earth’s surface and near surface, which has accelerated in the past two centuries. The large-scale intentional excavation, transportation, and deposition of mixtures of rock and soil to form anthropogenic deposits and landforms represent a new geological process that could be used as a diagnostic signature of the Anthropocene.

Bioturbation by humans (‘anthroturbation’), comprising phenomena ranging from surface landscaping to boreholes that penetrate deep into the crust, is a phenomenon without precedent in Earth history, being orders of magnitude greater in scale than any preceding non-human type of bioturbation. These human phenomena range from simple individual structures to complex networks that range to several kilometres depth (compared with animal burrows that range from centimetres to a few metres in depth), while the extraction of material from underground can lead to topographic subsidence or collapse, with concomitant modification of the landscape. Geological transformations include selective removal of solid matter (e.g. solid hydrocarbons, metal ores), fluids (natural gas, liquid hydrocarbons, water), local replacement by other substances (solid waste, drilling mud), associated geochemical and mineralogical changes to redox conditions with perturbation of the water table and pH conditions and local shock-metamorphic envelopes with melt cores (in the case of underground nuclear tests). These transformations started in early/mid Holocene times, with the beginning of mining for flint and metals, but show notable inflections associated with the Industrial Revolution (ca 1800 CE) and with the ‘Great Acceleration’ at ∼1950 CE, the latter date being associated with the large-scale extension of this phenomenon from sub-land surface to sub-sea floor settings. Geometrically, these phenomena cross-cut earlier stratigraphy. Geologically, they can be regarded as a subsurface expression of the surface chronostratigraphic record of the Anthropocene. These subsurface phenomena have very considerable potential for long-term preservation.

As humans have colonised and modified the Earth’s surface, they have developed progressively more sophisticated tools and technologies. These underpin a new kind of stratigraphy, that we term technostratigraphy, marked by the geologically accelerated evolution and diversification of technofossils – the preservable material remains of the technosphere (Haff, 2013), driven by human purpose and transmitted cultural memory, and with the dynamics of an emergent system. The technosphere, present in some form for most of the Quaternary, shows several thresholds. Its expansion and transcontinental synchronisation in the mid 20th century has produced a global technostratigraphy that combines very high time-resolution, great geometrical complexity and wide (including transplanetary) extent. Technostratigraphy can help characterise the deposits of a potential Anthropocene Epoch and its emergence marks a step change in planetary mode.

Recognition of intimate feedback mechanisms linking changes across the atmosphere, biosphere, geosphere and hydrosphere demonstrates the pervasive nature of humankind's influence, perhaps to the point that we have fashioned a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. To what extent will these changes be evident as long-lasting signatures in the geological record? To establish the Anthropocene as a formal chronostratigraphical unit it is necessary to consider a spectrum of indicators of anthropogenically induced environmental change, and to determine how these show as stratigraphic signals that can be used to characterize an Anthropocene unit and to recognize its base. It is important to consider these signals against a context of Holocene and earlier stratigraphic patterns. Here we review the parameters used by stratigraphers to identify chronostratigraphical units and how these could apply to the definition of the Anthropocene. The onset of the range of signatures is diachronous, although many show maximum signatures which post-date1945, leading to the suggestion that this date may be a suitable age for the start of the Anthropocene.

We consider the Anthropocene as a physical, chronostratigraphic unit across terrestrial and marine sedimentary facies, from both a present and a far future perspective, provisionally using an approximately 1950 CE base that approximates with the ‘Great Acceleration’, worldwide sedimentary incorporation of A-bomb-derived radionuclides and light nitrogen isotopes linked to the growth in fertilizer use, and other markers. More or less effective recognition of such a unit today (with annual/decadal resolution) is facies-dependent and variably compromised by the disturbance of stratigraphic superposition that commonly occurs at geologically brief temporal scales, and that particularly affects soils, deep marine deposits and the pre-1950 parts of current urban areas. The Anthropocene, thus, more than any other geological time unit, is locally affected by such blurring of its chronostratigraphic boundary with Holocene strata. Nevertheless, clearly separable representatives of an Anthropocene Series may be found in lakes, land ice, certain river/delta systems, in the widespread dredged parts of shallow-marine systems on continental shelves and slopes, and in those parts of deep-water systems where human-rafted debris is common. From a far future perspective, the boundary is likely to appear geologically instantaneous and stratigraphically significant.

We evaluate the boundary of the Anthropocene geological time interval as an epoch, since it is useful to have a consistent temporal definition for this increasingly used unit, whether the presently informal term is eventually formalized or not. Of the three main levels suggested e an ‘early Anthropocene’ level some thousands of years ago; the beginning of the Industrial Revolution at ~1800 CE (Common Era); and the ‘Great Acceleration’ of the mid-twentieth century e current evidence suggests that the last of these has the most pronounced and globally synchronous signal. A boundary at this time need not have a Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP or ‘golden spike’) but can be defined by a Global Standard Stratigraphic Age (GSSA), i.e. a point in time of the human calendar. We propose an appropriate boundary level here to be the time of the world's first nuclear bomb explosion, on July 16th 1945 at Alamogordo, New Mexico; additional bombs were detonated at the average rate of one every 9.6 days until 1988 with attendant worldwide fallout easily identifiable in the chemostratigraphic record. Hence, Anthropocene deposits would be those that may include the globally distributed primary artificial radionuclide signal, while also being recognized using a wide range of other stratigraphic criteria. This suggestion for the HoloceneeAnthropocene boundary may ultimately be superseded, as the Anthropocene is only in its early phases, but it should remain practical and effective for use by at least the current generation of scientists.

The concept that the autochthonous, parautochthonous and allochthonous Permian–Cretaceous sequences in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Oman record the transition from platform, slope to basin sedimentation within the southern part of Neotethys has been fundamental to the interpretation of the geological history of the region. The results of a major geological mapping programme of the UAE, carried out by the British Geological Survey for the Federal Government of the UAE, coupled with the detailed examination of key sections within northern Oman has led to a re-evaluation of the geological evolution of this region. This detailed study has led to a greater appreciation of the sedimentology and depositional setting of the sediments laid down along the northeastern Arabian continental margin during the Jurassic to Cretaceous, allowing a more refined model of Neotethys Ocean basin evolution to be established. The model charts the progressive breakup of the Arabian continental margin and closure of Neotethys during the mid to late Cretaceous and is divided into three main stages: Stage 1—Initial rifting and formation of the Neotethys Ocean, followed by a prolonged period of stable, passive margin sedimentation which extended from the Permian to Late Jurassic times; Stage 2—Uplift and erosion of the shelf margin during the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous, coincident with increased carbonate-clastic sedimentation in the outer ramp, distal slope and basinal areas; Stage 3—Increased instability during the Late Cretaceous leading to the breakup of the platform margin and foreland basin sedimentation accompanying the obduction of the Oman-UAE ophiolite. Data obtained for the upper part of the platform and platform margin to slope successions has revealed that the topography of the “shelf”-slope-basinal margin was more subdued than previously thought, with this more gentle ramp margin morphology persisting until early to mid-Cretaceous times when the platform margin started

The Pennine Basin of northern England contains a comparatively complete Serpukhovian– Moscovian succession characterized by high-resolution ammonoid zonation and cyclic paralic sedimentation. Two new isotope dilution thermal ionization mass spectrometry zircon ages from a bentonite deposited during the Arnsbergian (mid-Serpukhovian) regional substage and tonstein of earliest Bolsovian (early Moscovian) regional substage have been determined. The weighted mean 206Pb/238U ages of 328.34 ± 0.55 and 314.37 ± 0.53 Ma (total uncertainty), respectively, require modification of the time scale for the Western Europe regional chronostratigraphy. The areal extent of acme ammonoid facies is used as a proxy for the magnitude of 47 discrete flooding events. Incised valleys (major sequence boundaries) are used as a proxy for the magnitude of sea-level falls. The frequency of these events, in the light of the new radiometric dating, indicates the following: (1) there is temporal coincidence between major glaciations in Gondwana and phases of increased frequency of sequence boundaries in the Pennine Basin; (2) high-amplitude flooding surfaces have an average frequency of c. 400 ka; (3) average cycle durations during the Pendleian–early Arnsbergian and Chokierian–Bolsovian, of c. 111 and c. 150 ka, respectively, reflect short-duration eccentricities; (4) multiple flooding surfaces with the same ammonoid assemblages may equate with sub-100 ka precession or obliquity frequencies.

The status of the Quaternary, long regarded as a geological period effectively coincident with the main climatic deterioration of the current Ice Age, has recently been questioned as a formal stratigraphic unit. We argue here that it should be retained as a formal period of geological time. Furthermore, we consider that its beginning should be placed at the Gauss-Matuyama magnetic chron boundary at about 2.6 Ma, rather than at its current position at about 1.8 Ma. The Quaternary would be formally subdivided into the Pleistocene and Holocene epochs. The global chronostratigraphical correlation table proposed is enclosed at the back of this issue.