The Quaternary is here to stay

The proposals to drop the name Quaternary, to extend the Neogene Period to the present day, and to confirm the base of the Pleistocene at 1.8 Ma are reviewed. It is concluded that there is no scientific case for dropping the name Quaternary and that an overwhelming volume of evidence points to 2.6 M...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of quaternary science 2007-01, Vol.22 (1), p.3-8
Main Authors: Bowen, D. Q., Gibbard, Philip L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
classification
Global Stratigraphic Timescale
Pleistocene
Quaternary
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The proposals to drop the name Quaternary, to extend the Neogene Period to the present day, and to confirm the base of the Pleistocene at 1.8 Ma are reviewed. It is concluded that there is no scientific case for dropping the name Quaternary and that an overwhelming volume of evidence points to 2.6 Ma as the most appropriate base for the Quaternary/Pleistocene, when extensive Northern Hemisphere mid‐latitude glaciation occurred under what were essentially similar physical boundary conditions of continents, oceans, seaways and mountain ranges that characterise, and are unique to, the Quaternary. It is desirable that all stratigraphical and geochronological evidence is tied rigorously into the Global Stratigraphic Timescale. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
ISSN:0267-8179
1099-1417
DOI:10.1002/jqs.1082