Rogers et al. (2000) provided an interesting revision of the Upper Cretaceous succession of the central Mahajanga Basin, but they misinterpreted the regional correlation among their various units. We consider, therefore, that the Papini and Benvenuti (1998) stratigraphic framework is still meaningful in its overall significance. Besides formal terminology, we propose a lithostratigraphic revision (fig. 1) of Papini and Benvenuti’s framework, accepting some of the contributions by Rogers et al. (2000) such as the fully marine origin of the Berivotra Formation (i.e., our unit 7) and the Maastrichtian and Danian ages, respectively, of the Berivotra Formation and Betsiboka Limestone (i.e., our units 7–8). We consider the chronologic recalibration of the Maevarano Formation to the Campanian‐lower Maastrichtian as suffering from a weak biostratigraphic control. Therefore, in the absence of more hard data, the chronostratigraphic framework for the Upper Cretaceous, pre‐Berivotra Formation units established by previous authors (e.g., Besairie 1972) can still be valid.

STRATIGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF UPPER CRETACEOUS ROCKS IN THE MAHAJANGA BASIN, NORTHWESTERN MADAGASCAR: IMPLICATIONS FOR ANCIENT AND MODERN FAUNAS: A DISCUSSION / Benvenuti, Marco; Papini, Mauro. - In: THE JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY. - ISSN 0022-1376. - STAMPA. - 109:(2001), pp. 669-673. [10.1086/321963]

STRATIGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF UPPER CRETACEOUS ROCKS IN THE MAHAJANGA BASIN, NORTHWESTERN MADAGASCAR: IMPLICATIONS FOR ANCIENT AND MODERN FAUNAS: A DISCUSSION.

BENVENUTI, MARCO;PAPINI, MAURO
2001

Abstract

Rogers et al. (2000) provided an interesting revision of the Upper Cretaceous succession of the central Mahajanga Basin, but they misinterpreted the regional correlation among their various units. We consider, therefore, that the Papini and Benvenuti (1998) stratigraphic framework is still meaningful in its overall significance. Besides formal terminology, we propose a lithostratigraphic revision (fig. 1) of Papini and Benvenuti’s framework, accepting some of the contributions by Rogers et al. (2000) such as the fully marine origin of the Berivotra Formation (i.e., our unit 7) and the Maastrichtian and Danian ages, respectively, of the Berivotra Formation and Betsiboka Limestone (i.e., our units 7–8). We consider the chronologic recalibration of the Maevarano Formation to the Campanian‐lower Maastrichtian as suffering from a weak biostratigraphic control. Therefore, in the absence of more hard data, the chronostratigraphic framework for the Upper Cretaceous, pre‐Berivotra Formation units established by previous authors (e.g., Besairie 1972) can still be valid.
2001
109
669
673
Benvenuti, Marco; Papini, Mauro
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificatore per citare o creare un link a questa risorsa: https://hdl.handle.net/2158/2885
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact