The holotype partial skull of Agorophius pygmaeus (the monotypic form for both the genus Agorophius and the Family Agorophiidae) has been missing for approximately 140 years. Since the discovery of Agorophius pygmaeus, many additional taxa and specimens have been placed in the Family Agorophiidae, only to be reclassified and removed later. This has created confusion as to what is and what is not an agorophiid and a lack of clarity as to what characteristics delimit the Agorophiidae. A newly discovered skull of an agorophiid recently collected from an underwater cliff face of the Ashley River, South Carolina, USA, is assigned to Agorophius pygmaeus. It derives from the base of the Ashley Formation (early Oligocene). The new specimen consists of most of the skull and periotics, which are well preserved and described for the first time in an agorophiid. The new specimen provides an opportunity to diagnose the Agorophiidae and place the genus and species within the phylogenetic context of the early odontocete radiation in the Oligocene, along with other taxa such as the Ashleycetidae, Mirocetidae, Patriocetidae, Simocetidae, Waipatiidae, and Xenorophidae. Based on this new understanding, Agorophiidae are known with certainty only from the early Oligocene of South Carolina, with other undescribed, potential agorophiid specimens from the Oligocene of the North Pacific region (Japan, Mexico, and Washington State).

Two protocetid whale vertebrae, here referred to “Eocetus” wardii, have been recovered from the riverbed of the Pamunkey River in east-central Virginia. Neither bone was found in situ, but both were found with lumps of lithified matrix cemented to their surfaces. Most of this matrix was removed and processed for microfossils. Specimens of dinoflagellates were successfully recovered and this flora clearly demonstrates that both vertebrae came from the middle Eocene Piney Point Formation, which crops out above and below river level in the area where the bones were discovered. These vertebrae are the oldest whale remains reported from Virginia and are as old as any cetacean remains known from the western hemisphere.

The Savannah River Site (SRS) has produced and disposed of a variety of potentially hazardous materials since the early 1950's; as a result, ground water is contaminated at several locations on the site. In 1991, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Energy and the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, began a 6-year study to determine if ground water is flowing from aquifers in South Carolina beneath the Savannah River and into aquifers in Georgia and, if not, under what conditions such flow could occur. A conceptual model based on physical data and a digital ground-water-flow model will be developed to better understand the ground-water-flow system in the study area. Biostratigraphic interpretations will be used to help define the hydrogeologic framework for the conceptual and digital models.

The SRS is located in the South Carolina Coastal Plain on the eastern side of the Savannah River, approximately 100 miles upriver from the Atlantic Ocean. In this area, aquifers of Late Cretaceous and Tertiary age are recharged by precipitation. The age and stratigraphic correlation of sediments in the study area have been controversial because existing fossil evidence is sparse, lithologies of adjacent units are commonly similar, and facies changes occur in relatively short distances. These three factors have also complicated understanding of the ground-water-flow system, because clay and silt confining units are more discontinuous updip; therefore identification of ground-water flow paths and delineation of aquifers and confining units are difficult. Detailed biostratigraphy, using marine and nonmarine fossils, is essential to understanding the depositional history of the region and to determining the complex three-dimensional relations of stratigraphic and hydrogeologic units needed for accurate conceptual and ground-water-flow models.

Development of the hydrogeologic framework will require data on the geologic, hydrologic, and water-quality characteristics of coastal plain sediments. To provide these data, clusters of seven to ten wells will be constructed at each of seven sites. At each site, a continuous core will be collected from land surface to basement rock, and monitor wells will be installed in each water-bearing zone. The first three cluster sites are located in Georgia along an updip-downdip transect parallel to the Savannah River. The southernmost of the three sites will serve as a biostratigraphic and lithostratigraphic reference section because it will have the thickest section of sediments and will contain marine facies in which a greater abundance of fossil evidence can be expected. Paleoenvironmental data will help predict the continuity of confining units between cluster sites.

I find myself in the position of discussing a rather unfortunate misnomer. In the first place, topics that traditionally have been called “quantitative biostratigraphy” seldom deal with quantities of anything. In the second place, much of “quantitative biostratigraphy” deals more with chronostratigraphy and geochronology than with biostratigraphy. The operational concept is time, not fossil content, although, of course, the fossil content is the starting point. Nonetheless, the phrase “quantitative biostratigraphy” is quite firmly entrenched in the working vocabulary and I will use it here. I will focus on three very different techniques that all involve stratigraphic correlation based on the ranges of fossils.