Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T18:45:29.926Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uppermost Cambrian slope deposits at Highgate Gorge, Vermont: a minor miscorrelation with major consequences for conodont- and trilobite-based chronocorrelation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

J. F. Taylor ,
D. J. Kennedy ,
J. F. Miller  and
J. E. Repetski
J. F. Taylor
Affiliation:
1Geoscience Department, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, Pennsylvania 15705
D. J. Kennedy
Affiliation:
280 Rockwood Avenue, Apt. #404C, St. Catherines, L2P 3P2 Ontario
J. F. Miller
Affiliation:
3Geosciences Department, Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield, 65804-0089
J. E. Repetski
Affiliation:
4U.S. Geological Survey, MS970, National Center, Reston, Virginia, 22092
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Uppermost Cambrian and lowest Ordovician slope deposits in Highgate Gorge, northwestern Vermont, yield a succession of conodont faunas (and a few associated trilobite species) similar to that observed in coeval North American carbonate-platform sequences. Decimeter-scale sampling of a 15-m-interval in two sections comprising thin-bedded limestone–shale rhythmites alternating with thick-bedded debris flow conglomerates yielded 60 trilobite specimens and more than 5,000 conodont elements from 48 productive horizons. The new biostratigraphic control does not support earlier claims that the lowest occurrence of Cordylodus proavus in the Gorge Formation and presumably in other slope sequences is significantly older than the base of the C. proavus Zone in platform deposits; rather, it demonstrates the isochronous persistence of this boundary across the North American (Laurentian) shelf margin into Iapetan slope deposits. The common occurrence of the deep, cool-water conodont Eoconodontus alisonae and the agnostoid trilobite Lotagnostus hedini in the Eoconodontus Zone at Highgate Gorge makes it possible to extend the correlation even farther from the Laurentian platform into uppermost Cambrian strata in Kazakhstan and China. This new information greatly strengthens arguments in favor of using this zonal boundary for defining the international boundary between the Cambrian and Ordovician Systems.

In earlier studies of Highgate Gorge strata, composite treatment of biostratigraphic data from similar but non-correlative intervals (Zones 2 and 3) in two sections created an illusion of significant stratigraphic overlap of C. proavus with older faunas and direct association of some trilobite species for which overlap has never been established. Composite treatment of data from Zones 2 and 3 under designations such as “main zone’ or “upper zone’ should be discontinued and species that have been reported as occurring together in the “main zone’ should not be assumed (on the basis of that association alone) to have come from the same stratigraphic level.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 65 , Issue 5 , September 1991 , pp. 855 - 863
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Apollonov, M. K., Chugaeva, M. N., Dubinina, S. V., and Zhemchuzhnikov, V. G. 1988. Batyrbay section, south Kazakhstan, U.S.S.R.—potential stratotype for the Cambrian–Ordovician boundary. Geological Magazine, 125:445–449.Google Scholar
Derby, J. R. 1986. Great progress but no decision by the Cambrian-Ordovician Boundary Committee. Palaios, 1:98–103.Google Scholar
Dumoulin, J. A., and Harris, A. G. 1988. Off-platform Silurian sequences in the Ambler River Quadrangle, p. 35–38. In Galloway, J. P. and Hamilton, T. D. (eds.), Geologic Studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey during 1987. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1016.Google Scholar
Gilman Clark, M., and Shaw, A. B. 1968a. Paleontology of northwestern Vermont XV. Trilobites of the Upper Cambrian Gorge Formation (lower part of Bed 3). Journal of Paleontology, 42:382–396.Google Scholar
Gilman Clark, M., and Shaw, A. B. 1968b. Paleontology of northwestern Vermont XVI. Trilobites of the Upper Cambrian Gorge Formation (Upper Bed 3). Journal of Paleontology, 42:1014–1026.Google Scholar
Harris, A. G., Bergström, S. M., Ethington, R. L., and Ross, R. J. Jr. 1979. Aspects of Middle and Upper Ordovician conodont biostratigraphy of carbonate facies in Nevada and southeast California and comparison with some Appalachian successions. Brigham Young University Geology Studies 26(3):7–43.Google Scholar
James, N. P., and Stevens, R. K. 1986. Stratigraphy and correlation of the Cambro-Ordovician Cow Head Group, western Newfoundland. Geological Survey of Canada Bulletin 336, 143 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landing, E. 1983. Highgate Gorge: Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician continental slope deposition and biostratigraphy, northwest Vermont. Journal of Paleontology, 57:1149–1187.Google Scholar
Landing, E., Ludvigsen, R., and von Bitter, P. H. 1980. Upper Cambrian to Lower Ordovician conodont biostratigraphy and biofacies, Rabbitkettle Formation, District of Mackenzie. Life Sciences Contributions No. 126, Royal Ontario Museum, 42 p.Google Scholar
Yan-Hao, Lu, and Huan-Ling, Lin. 1980. Cambrian–Ordovician boundary in western Zhejiang and the trilobites contained therein. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 19:118–135.Google Scholar
Yan-Hao, Lu, and Huan-Ling, Lin. 1984. Late Cambrian and earliest Ordovician trilobites of Jiangsha-Changshan area, Zhejiang, p. 45–164. In Stratigraphy and Paleontology of System Boundaries in China. Cambrian–Ordovician Boundary. Anhui Science and Technology Publishing House.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R. 1982. Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician trilobite biostratigraphy of the Rabbitkettle Formation, western District of Mackenzie. Life Sciences Contributions 134, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Canada, 188 p.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R., and Westrop, S. R. 1983. Trilobite biofacies of the Cambrian–Ordovician boundary interval in northern North America. Alcheringa, 7:301–319.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R., and Kindle, C. H. 1989. Sunwaptan (Upper Cambrian) trilobites of the Cow Head Group, western Newfoundland, Canada. Palaeontolographica Canadiana 6, 175 p.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, R., Pratt, B. R., Tuffnel, P. A., and Young, G. A. 1986. Paleoscene #3. Dual biostratigraphy: zones and biofacies. Geoscience Canada, 13:139–154.Google Scholar
Miller, J. F. 1988. Conodonts as biostratigraphic tools for redefinition and correlation of the Cambrian–Ordovician boundary. Geological Magazine, 125:349–362.Google Scholar
Miller, J. F., Taylor, M. E., Stitt, J. H., Ethington, R. L., Hintze, L. F., and Taylor, J. F. 1982. Potential Cambrian–Ordovician boundary stratotype sections in the western United States, p. 155–180. In Bassett, M. G. and Dean, W. T. (eds.), The Cambrian–Ordovician boundary: sections, fossil distributions, and correlations. National Museum of Wales, Geological Series No. 3, Cardiff.Google Scholar
Norford, B. S. 1988. Introduction to papers on the Cambrian–Ordovician boundary. Geological Magazine, 125:232–326.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1944. Upper Cambrian trilobites from the Levis Conglomerate. Journal of Paleontology, 18:229–258.Google Scholar
Rasetti, F. 1946. Revision of some late Upper Cambrian trilobites from New York, Vermont, and Quebec. American Journal of Science, 244:537–546.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1924. New Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician trilobites from Vermont. Boston Society of Natural History Proceedings, 37:389–466.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E. 1937. Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician Trilobita and Ostracoda from Vermont. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 48:1079–1146.Google Scholar
Repetski, J. E., Dutro, J. T. Jr., and Schuster, J. E. 1989. Upper Metaline Limestone is Ordovician. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, Rocky Mountain–Cordilleran Section Meeting, 21(5):643.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C. 1937. Cambrian and Ordovician of northwestern Vermont. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 48:1001–1078.Google Scholar
Schuster, J. E., Repetski, J. E., Carter, C., and Dutro, J. T. Jr. 1989. Nature of the Mataline Formation–Ledbetter Formation contact and age of the Metaline Formation in the Clugstone Creek area, Stevens County, Washington: a reinterpretation. Washington Geologic News-letter, 17:13–20.Google Scholar
Shaw, A. B., and Gilman Clark, M. 1968. Paleontology of northwestern Vermont XIV. Type section of the Upper Cambrian Gorge Formation. Journal of Paleontology, 42:374–381.Google Scholar
Stanley, D. J. 1985. Mud redeposition and problems of assessing microfossil isotopic and radiocarbon data in the Mediterranean. Marine Geology, 62:381–389.Google Scholar
Stanley, D. J., Culver, S. J., and Stubblefield, W. L. 1986. Petrologic and foraminiferal evidence for active downslope transport in Wilmington Canyon. Marine Geology, 69:207–218.Google Scholar
Stitt, J. H. 1977. Late Cambrian and earliest Ordovician trilobites, Wichita Mountains area, Oklahoma. Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin 124, 79 p.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. E. 1977. Late Cambrian of western North America: trilobite biofacies, environmental significance, and biostratigraphic implications, p. 397–425. In Kauffman, E. G. and Hazel, J. E. (eds.), Concepts and Methods of Biostratigraphy. Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Inc., Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Jinbin, Wang, Shoude, Cheng, Liwen, Xiang, and Tairong, Zhang. 1985. Stratigraphy and trilobite faunas of the Cambrian in the western part of northern Tian Shan, Xinjiang. People's Republic of China, Ministry of Geology and Mineral Resources Geological Memoirs, Series Z, 4, 243 p.Google Scholar
Westrop, S. R. 1986. Trilobites of the Upper Cambrian Sunwaptan Stage, southern Canadian Rocky Mountains, Alberta. Paleontographica Canadiana 3, 197 p.Google Scholar
Winston, D., and Nicholls, H. 1967. Late Cambrian and Early Ordovician faunas from the Wilberns Formation of central Texas. Journal of Paleontology, 41:66–96.Google Scholar