Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
    • Journal home
    • Lyell Collection home
    • Geological Society home
  • Content
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • All issues
    • Thematic Collections
    • Supplementary publications
    • Open Access
  • Subscribe
    • GSL fellows
    • Institutions
    • Corporate
    • Other member types
  • Info
    • Authors
    • Librarians
    • Readers
    • GSL Fellows access
    • Other member types access
    • Press office
    • Accessibility
    • Help
    • Metrics
  • Alert sign up
    • eTOC alerts
    • Online First alerts
    • RSS feeds
    • Newsletters
    • GSL blog
  • Submit
  • Geological Society of London Publications
    • Engineering Geology Special Publications
    • Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis
    • Journal of Micropalaeontology
    • Journal of the Geological Society
    • Lyell Collection home
    • Memoirs
    • Petroleum Geology Conference Series
    • Petroleum Geoscience
    • Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society
    • Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology
    • Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society
    • Scottish Journal of Geology
    • Special Publications
    • Transactions of the Edinburgh Geological Society
    • Transactions of the Geological Society of Glasgow
    • Transactions of the Geological Society of London

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society
  • Geological Society of London Publications
    • Engineering Geology Special Publications
    • Geochemistry: Exploration, Environment, Analysis
    • Journal of Micropalaeontology
    • Journal of the Geological Society
    • Lyell Collection home
    • Memoirs
    • Petroleum Geology Conference Series
    • Petroleum Geoscience
    • Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society
    • Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology
    • Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society
    • Scottish Journal of Geology
    • Special Publications
    • Transactions of the Edinburgh Geological Society
    • Transactions of the Geological Society of Glasgow
    • Transactions of the Geological Society of London
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
  • Follow gsl on Twitter
  • Visit gsl on Facebook
  • Visit gsl on Youtube
  • Visit gsl on Linkedin
Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society

Advanced search

  • Home
    • Journal home
    • Lyell Collection home
    • Geological Society home
  • Content
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • All issues
    • Thematic Collections
    • Supplementary publications
    • Open Access
  • Subscribe
    • GSL fellows
    • Institutions
    • Corporate
    • Other member types
  • Info
    • Authors
    • Librarians
    • Readers
    • GSL Fellows access
    • Other member types access
    • Press office
    • Accessibility
    • Help
    • Metrics
  • Alert sign up
    • eTOC alerts
    • Online First alerts
    • RSS feeds
    • Newsletters
    • GSL blog
  • Submit

The ‘Black Band’: local expression of a global event

Malcolm B. Hart
Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 62, 217-226, 29 March 2018, https://doi.org/10.1144/pygs2017-007
Malcolm B. Hart
School of Geography, Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The organic-rich, black mudstones that were initially described as the Black Band in Lincolnshire, Humberside and Yorkshire are known to be a local representation of the Cenomanian–Turonian Boundary Event (CTBE). This world-wide event is known as Oceanic Anoxic Event ll (OAEll) and it marks a distinctive extinction event within the Cretaceous biota. Since some of the original work on the benthic foraminifera that are found in both the Black Band and coeval sedimentary rocks, there has been a significant increase in the understanding of the biology of foraminifera, and their response to both modern and fossil low-O2 environments. While the overall event is clearly global, the local response appears to be a function of both geological setting and water depth with the occurrence of organic-rich sediments as a combination of this setting, plankton productivity and preservation.

The Cenomanian–Turonian Boundary Event (CTBE) or Oceanic Anoxic Event ll (OAEll) is regarded as one of the major global bioevents, though not as dramatic as one of the ‘big five’ (Raup & Sepkoski 1982, 1984; Milne et al. 1985; Hart 2005). The biotic changes at the CTBE are at the generic or species level, rather than that of family or above, and the percentage change is not so significant on a global scale (Gale et al. 2000). Perhaps more significant is the importance of this event as one of the Cretaceous OAEs that begun in the early Cretaceous (Weissert Event, Faraoni Event, etc.) and continued into the Santonian (OAElll): see Leckie et al. (2002). The Black Band of Yorkshire, Humberside and Lincolnshire is, of course, where the study of Cretaceous OAEs began with the seminal work of Schlanger & Jenkyns (1976) and the subsequent work on stable isotopes by Schlanger et al. (1987). The quarry on the south bank of the Humber Estuary, at South Ferriby, was the location where the first description of an oceanic anoxic event was related to changes in the water column, notably anoxia. Since that time, OAEll has been recognized as a global event (Hart & Ball 1986; Koutsoukos et al. 1990; Leckie et al. 2002), being recorded in most of the world's oceans (DSDP, ODP, IODP cores), and on every continent in both deep water mudstones (Bąk et al. 2001; Bąk 2006, 2007a, b) and relatively shallow water carbonate successions (Caus et al. 1997; Parente et al. 2008; Wohlwend et al. 2015, 2016).

Cretaceous stratigraphy in NE England

The Chalk Group of the East Midlands Shelf in NE England is represented by a succession different to that in southern England. As a result, an alternative lithostratigraphy has been developed (Wood & Smith 1978; Jeans 1980; Sumbler 1999; Mortimore et al. 2001). While other authors (e.g. Hart et al. 1991, 1993) attempted to use this ‘local’ stratigraphy, some authors (e.g. Jeans et al. 1991) have mixed the nomenclature, referring to the ‘Black Band’ and overlying nodular chalks as the Plenus Marls and Melbourn Rock (see Jefferies 1962, 1963; Jarvis et al. 1988) rather than the Flixton Member, thereby complicating the understanding of the NE England succession.

In Norfolk, Lincolnshire, Humberside and Yorkshire there is a transition from the typical ‘southern’ succession of the pale green/grey mudstones of the Plenus Marls Member (at Marham) to an omission surface at Hillingdon and the appearance of the more typical ‘northern’ succession at Heacham (Fig. 1). The CTBE succession north of Heacham was described over twenty years ago by Hart et al. (1991, 1993) and more fully by Mortimore et al. (2001). Between South Thoresby and Louth (Hart et al. 1993, Fig. 2) black mudstones appear within the CTBE succession, continuing northwards through Caistor (UK National Grid Reference TA 1234 0019), Elsham (TA 038 131), South Ferriby (SE 9930 2030), Welton (SE 9668 2788) and in the cliffs of Flamborough Head (TA 195 743), SE of Speeton (Bempton Cliff).

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Locality map of the Cretaceous strata in NE England and location of sections discussed in the text (modified after Hart et al. 1993, fig. 1). Line A–A marks the southern limit of the ‘Black Band’. Between lines A–A and B–B the chalks and nodular chalks of the uppermost Cenomanian are dull red in colour, while south of line B–B the chalks are the same stratigraphical level are pale green/grey in colour.

At South Thoresby (TA 773 406) chalks have been described (Hart et al. 1993, p. 506) as including ‘pink’ levels and some ‘reddened’ horizons, but there are no black or grey mudrocks. The three most important successions were those at South Ferriby, Caistor and Elsham, although the latter has now been infilled and landscaped. When accessible, all these quarries exposed the black or grey mudstones that were separated into distinct beds by paler-coloured chalks and marlstones. In the darkest of the black mudstones at South Ferriby (Figs 2–4), Hart et al. (1993, fig. 4, p. 500) recorded almost 9000 dinoflagellate cysts per gram, though species richness (diversity) was less than comparable levels in the Plenus Marls Member of southern England (Jarvis et al. 1988). The data presented by Hart et al. (1993) was in agreement with the earlier work of Marshall & Batten (1988) who concluded that the palynological data from the South Ferriby succession represented a stressed environment with low levels of dissolved O2 extending up into the water column. Low O2 levels at the sediment/water interface had also been suggested by Hart & Bigg (1981) on the basis of foraminiferal evidence. The black mudstones within the Flixton Member contain low diversity assemblages dominated by simple agglutinated taxa such as Ammodiscus and Glomospira (Fig. 5). This restricted assemblage is also recorded at Elsham (Hart et al. 1993, figs 5 and 6). While some aspects of the distribution of planktic foraminifera are typical of the CTBE interval, it is noteworthy that Rotalipora cushmani always disappears at the base of the Flixton Member and that Thalmanninella greenhornensis is not recorded in any of the successions. The latter is probably due to the palaeolatitude, with T. greenhornensis being at its northern limit in southern England, but the absence of R. cushmani needs careful consideration. In the Plenus Marls succession of southern England R. cushmani invariably disappears at the Bed 3/4 boundary, with the succession up to the first appearance of Helvetoglobotruncana helvetica being known as the Whiteinella archaeocretacea Interval Zone. Helvetoglobotruncana helvetica is not recorded in NE England and this is probably due to palaeobiogeography as this species is widely regarded as a warm-water (Tethyan) taxon. Dicarinella imbricata and Marginotruncana marginata are often associated with H. helvetica in southern England and so indicate the general position of the Cenomanian/Turonian boundary; see Gebhardt et al. (2010). The changes in the benthic foraminifera are also supportive of this interpretation with species such as Gavelinella baltica, G. cenomanica and Plectina mariae all disappearing alongside R. cushmani and the benthic assemblage subsequently being dominated by Gavelinella berthelini (= Gavelinella dakotensis of some authors) and Lingulogavelinella globosa (Fig. 5). The disappearance of R. cushmani is noted below several CTBE ‘anoxic events’ (e.g. DSDP Site 551, Goban Spur; Leary & Hart 1989). In the Goban Spur successions R. cushmani and T. greenhornensis disappear together, which is not the normal situation in stratigraphically complete sections and indicates that the black mudstones are not recording the full ranges of the species.

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

The working quarry at South Ferriby. (1) Ancholme Clay Group; (2) Thin development of the ‘Carstone’; (3) Thin development of the Red Chalk; (4) Ferriby Chalk Formation; and (5) Welton Chalk Formation. Reproduced with permission from Mortimore (2014, fig. 4.15)

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

The location of the ‘Black Band’ at the base of the Welton Chalk Formation, which lies above the Ferriby Chalk Formation. Reproduced with permission from Mortimore (2014, fig. 4.21).

Fig. 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

Close-up of the ‘Black Band’. Abbreviations are as follows: SKM, ‘silty khaki marl’; BB, Black band; GM, gungy marl; XBU, ‘cross-bedded unit; and AP, ‘Adrian's pair of marls’. Reproduced with permission from Mortimore (2014, fig. 4.23a).

Fig. 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 5.

The lithological succession at South Ferriby and the distribution of some key species of foraminifera (modified after Hart et al. 1993, fig. 3). Letter (a) denotes the ‘60 cm bed’; letter (b) denote the ‘Black Band’; and letter (c) denote the ‘Inoceramus Pebble Bed’.

In many of the successions investigated by Hart et al. (1993, fig. 2) and Dodsworth (1996) in Lincolnshire and Humberside the general distribution of foraminifera varies little from that shown in Figure 5. The erosive boundary at the top of the Ferriby Chalk Formation appears to be co-extensive with the sub-Plenus Marls erosion surface of southern England. The overlying Flixton Member, and particularly the ‘Black Band’, have often been taken as the Northern Province equivalent of the Plenus Marls Member. This view was initially supported by the occurrence of the belemnite Actinocamax plenus (Hill 1888), although this record is unsubstantiated (see Wood in Gaunt et al. 1992; Wood & Mortimore 1995; Wood et al. 1997). Wood (in Gaunt et al. 1992, p. 88) listed the fossils typical of the Plenus Marls Member (Beds 4‒6 and Bed 7) and noted (op. cit., pp. 88–89) the extinction of R. cushmani at the top of the Ferriby Chalk Formation while its range in southern England invariably extends to the top of Bed 3 in the Plenus Marls Member. While this is all true, one must be careful at making biostratigraphical conclusions using a species at the very northern limit of its distribution.

At Melton Ross, which is located immediately SE of Elsham, Wood & Mortimore (1995) and Wood et al. (1997) described an anomalously thick succession of the Flixton Member with – as shown in Wood & Mortimore (1995, fig. 2) and Wood et al. (1997, fig. 3) – a number of dark-coloured mudstones that appear to be stratigraphically older than the successions at South Ferriby, Caistor and Elsham. Though studied for palynomorphs and geochemistry these ‘older’ mudstones were not investigated for foraminifera. The presence of characteristic benthic foraminifera of the Plenus Marls Member (Beds 1–3) and/or the presence of R. cushmani (and T. greenhornensis) would have confirmed the placing of the R.cushmani/W. archaeocretacea boundary and facilitated an accurate correlation of these mudstones with Beds 1‒3 of the Plenus Marls succession in southern England. Should this anomalous succession at Melton Ross ever be exposed again, then it is imperative that a foraminiferal analysis is undertaken.

Wood et al. (1997, p. 342) equated their ‘Bed 3’ with Bed 3 of the Plenus Marls Member succession using the distribution of the dinoflagellates cyst Lithosphaeridium siphoniphorum. This correlation would confirm that the main peaks in the stable isotope excursion (CIE) occur in Beds 4–6 of the southern England succession, just as in the Rheine succession of Germany where black shales appear to equate with the higher parts of the Plenus Marls succession (Ernst et al. 1983, 1984).

The Black Band ‘proper’ is, therefore, coeval with Bed 4 of the southern England succession (Wood et al. 1997). It contains virtually no macrofossils aside from fish debris that is often concentrated into slightly lighter coloured mudstones within the overall black mudstones. Fish debris (scales and ichthyoliths) are common in the microfossil residues (Fig. 5), together with an unusual assemblage of simple, agglutinated foraminifera (e.g. Ammodiscus, Glomospira).

Δ13C stable isotope excursion at the CTBE

Stable isotope data now provide valuable evidence on the global carbon cycle and the complex interplay between the biosphere–atmosphere–hydrosphere–lithosphere (Jenkyns 2010; Jarvis et al. 2015 and references therein). Major episodes of organic-rich, black shale deposition of Cretaceous age, corresponding to the ‘Oceanic Anoxic Events’ (OAE) such as OAEll at the Cenomanian/Turonian boundary have been described by many authors (e.g. Leckie et al. 2002). As organic carbon is preferentially enriched in the lighter isotope 12C, its removal from the oceanic reservoir renders global sea waters relatively enriched in 13C (Marshall 1992). Hence, positive carbon-isotope excursions (e.g. at the CTBE) have been interpreted in terms of increased burial of organic carbon attributed to enhanced preservation under reduced O2 conditions (e.g. Bralower & Thierstein 1984) or driven by changes in surface water productivity (delivering more organic carbon to the sea floor, e.g. Erba 1994). Positive δ13C excursions indicate higher levels of organic carbon burial and imply a global change in the ocean system that can be stratigraphically important for correlation. In recent years the use of such data in precise correlation has become an important part of stratigraphy, often giving more precision than biostratigraphical data (Jarvis et al. 2006, 2015; Jenkyns 2010). Associated with the positive δ13C excursion at the CTBE are a number of locations, again world-wide, that record the presence of anoxic, black mudstones often with a high TOC content. One of the first described was that in South Ferriby (Schlanger & Jenkyns 1976). At the time, and subsequently, an expansion of the oxygen minimum zone (OMZ) has been postulated as the causal mechanism (e.g. Jarvis et al. 1988).

Warming/cooling at the CTBE

In the early descriptions of the Plenus Marls Member in south-east England, Jefferies (1962, 1963) drew attention to warm/cool alternations between Beds 1–8 of the succession, especially at Merstham (his type locality). These warming/cooling events were related to faunal changes and, especially, the influx of the cool-water belemnites that give their name to the member. Jeans et al. (1991) suggested that the Plenus Marls Member was recording a ‘glacial’ event in high latitudes, despite the prevailing view of the mid-Cretaceous being that of a ‘greenhouse world’ (Wilson et al. 2002; Bice et al. 2003; Schouten et al. 2003; Moriya et al. 2007; Gallagher et al. 2008; Wang et al. 2014; Wendler & Wendler 2016). Over the last 20+ years numerous authors have taken up the ‘Plenus Cold Event’ theme (e.g. Voigt et al. 2003, 2006, 2015) using both palaeontological and geochemical information.

A number of ‘cold’ – or cool – events taking place within the 500 kyrs – 750 kyrs of the Plenus Marls Member implies either palaeoceanographic change (disturbing water masses) or volcanic activity. The latter, in the short term, can cause cooling as seen in northern Europe in 1783, after the famous eruption of the Laki Fissure in Iceland. Europe suffered three exceptionally harsh winters and failed harvests in the summer months. In Iceland, 75% of the livestock died, as did c. 25% of the population. Benjamin Franklin, who at the time was the Commissioner for the United States in Paris, wrote one of the first papers that tried to link volcanic eruptions to changing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and climate change in 1784. Though not a scientist, his work is often forgotten, but his ideas were extended by Chamberlin (1897) who must be regarded as the first geoscientist to attempt the link between atmospheric pCO2 and climate, a debate that continues today. In the longer term (climate rather than weather), the CO2 erupted normally causes warming, as evidenced by the Deccan Traps in the latest Cretaceous and earliest Paleogene (Courtillot & Renne 2003; Chenet et al. 2007, 2009; Adatte et al. 2014; Keller 2014; Punekar et al. 2014; Schoene et al. 2015).

The CTBE has been linked to volcanic activity in the Caribbean Large Igneous Province (Sinton & Duncan 1997; Kerr 1998; Wignall 2001; Turgeon & Creaser 2008), though the dating of this is uncertain. More recently Bond & Grasby (2017, fig. 8) have shown the close proximity of volcanic activity on the Ontong Java Plateau (2), the Caribbean LIP and on Madagascar. While such volcanic activity has been linked to extinctions (Courtillot 1999; Wignall 2001, 2007; Courtillot & Renne 2003; Bond & Wignall 2014) cooling is not – apparently – part of the processes involved. Recent work on strontium, osmium, molybdenum, neodinium, sulphur and iodine geochemistry around the CTBE suggests that the intrusion and/or weathering of a mafic, Large Igneous Province (LIP) – either Caribbean or High Arctic – may have been occurring at this time (Owens et al. 2013; Jenkyns et al. 2017). The changes in water geochemistry may have been responsible for increased productivity (generating the OAE) and the draw-down of CO2 produced the Plenus Cold Event(s), which can now be correlated quite widely.

Oxygen minimum zone in modern oceans

In the modern ocean, surface water productivity often creates an oxygen-deficient layer that is (approximately) located between 200–700 m water depth (see, for example, Hart & Koutsoukos 2015, fig. 4). Below the OMZ, oxygen levels recover and by a depth of c. 1250 m can be back to surface values. These deeper, oxygenated, waters are created by the present-day, cold water driven ‘global oceanographic conveyor’ (Broecker 1969, 1991).

In the Cretaceous ocean the modern ‘global oceanographic conveyor’ (Hay et al. 2005, fig. 8) did not exist and the oceanographic circulation was more fragmented: this was the ‘Eddy Ocean’ of Hay et al. (2005, fig. 11) and Hay (2008). If O2 levels did not recover (as today) below the OMZ, what effect would that have on both the sedimentary succession and the enclosed benthic biota?

If the benthic foraminiferal assemblage changes that we see in the mid-Cretaceous are the result of the interaction with a mid-Cretaceous OMZ, then what can we learn about this process from modern oceans? The present-day OMZ intersects with many continental shelves, with good examples being offshore Pakistan and Oman in the Indian Ocean. In these areas, the sediments deposited within the OMZ are rarely – if ever – organic-rich and there are certainly no ‘black shales’ (= anoxic events) recorded. While changes in foraminiferal distributions are recorded (Gooday et al. 2000, 2009; Larkin & Gooday 2009), there is no evidence of significant, oxygen-depleted assemblages. Unlike these modern occurrences, there is evidence from the Tarfaya Atlantic Coastal Basin (Morocco) that, in the mid-Cretaceous, organic-rich sediments were being deposited on comparable shelves (Kuhnt et al. 1997, 2005; Tsikos et al. 2004; Kolonic et al. 2005; Poulton et al. 2015; Jenkyns et al. 2017).

In southern England, the Plenus Marls Member records changes in both the planktic and benthic assemblages of foraminifera (Jefferies 1962, 1963; Carter & Hart 1977; Jarvis et al. 1988; Hart & Leary 1989; Leary et al. 1989; Paul et al. 1999; Dodsworth 2000; Keller et al. 2001; Tsikos et al. 2004), but no confirmed oxygen-depleted assemblage. In the models provided by Jarvis et al. (1988, fig. 34) the distribution of foraminifera shows a reduction to a limited number of taxa, including two characteristic species (Gavelinella berthelini and Lingulogavelinella globosa), well-known in the chalk facies of the Anglo-Paris Basin. These two species are also ‘survivors’ in many other areas, though often known by different names (e.g. Gavelinella dakotensis).

The primary controls on benthic foraminifera in modern seas and oceans are the presence of O2 and nutrients (Gooday 1988; Moodley et al. 1998; Van der Zwaan et al. 1999; Friedrich 2010), with temperature and salinity of – possibly – lesser importance (Murray 1973; Van der Zwaan et al. 1999). In many of these accounts, sediment characteristics are not considered. In an area such as Plymouth Sound (Oxford et al. 2004, figs 6 and 7), clean, mobile sand-waves support hardly any in-situ living foraminifera while the more muddy, organic-rich sediments record the highest living population. This is, of course, the result of nutrient levels, but it is the sedimentary regime that is the ultimate control.

Food availability, O2 content and benthic foraminifera were included in the TROX-model of Jorissen et al. (1992). This indicated that, in shallower-water environments O2 was the important factor while nutrients were more critical in deeper-water settings.

A measure of benthic foraminiferal abundance (BFN – Benthic Foraminiferal Number) has become an important part of environmental assessment in both modern, and fossil, environments (Bernhard 1986; Erbacher et al. 1998; Holbourn et al. 1999; Van der Zwaan et al. 1999; Gebhardt 2006; Friedrich & Hemleben 2007). In both modern high carbon flux environments (Gooday 1994, 2003) and Cretaceous black shales (e.g. OAElb, Holbourn et al. 2001; Herrle et al. 2003a, b) BFN values increase with organic matter flux to the sea floor. However, this increase is reduced as the organic matter consumes O2 on the sea floor (Murray 1991). The reduced O2 levels on the sea floor have led to the suggestion that some species are able to ‘cope’ with the environment better; the so-called opportunistic species such as modern Stainforthia and Bulimina (Jorissen et al. 1992; Alve 1995) or mid-Cretaceous Osangularia and Gavelinella (Herrle et al. 2003a, b). In the OAEll record described by Jarvis et al. (1988, fig. 34), Gavelinella berthelini and Lingulogavelinella globosa were two of the ‘survivors’. In many Cretaceous OAE successions, a number of authors have identified Neobulimina, Tappanina and other praebuliminids as being capable of surviving in low-O2 conditions (Koutsoukos et al. 1990; Koutsoukos & Hart 1990a; Erbacher et al. 1998; Holbourn et al. 1999; Gebhardt 2006; Friedrich et al. 2009).

A similar assemblage (Gavelinella, Lingulogavelinella, Praebulimina, etc.) is reported within, and adjacent to OAEll in the Upper Eagle Ford Formation of Texas (Lowery & Leckie 2017, fig. 3). The associated radiolarians illustrated by Lowery & Leckie (2017, fig. 14) closely resemble, in terms of species and preservation, taxa reported by Koutsoukos & Hart (1990b) from the Brazilian Margin and their model for the distribution of the foraminifera (Koutsoukos & Hart 1990a, fig. 5) might well be applicable to the situation in Texas.

Many benthic foraminifera in low-O2 environments are often much smaller in size (e.g. Bernhard 1986). While this could be an adaption strategy to low-O2 conditions, it might also be a function of more rapid reproduction rates leading to an ‘apparent’ size reduction. It is noticeable that, in many areas, such events are also characterized by an increase in agglutinated taxa (Bernhard 1986; Koutsoukos & Hart 1990a; Coccioni & Galeotti 1993). In the Black Band there are a small number of black mudstones within the equivalent of the Plenus Marls Member, with a record of a limited, or agglutinated, assemblage (Hart & Bigg 1981). In the Carpathian Orogenic Belt, deeper-water assemblages record much higher numbers of, often simple (Ammodiscus, Glomospira, etc.), agglutinated foraminifera (Bąk et al. 2001, 2014; Bąk 2006, 2007a, b). Between these ‘extremes’ are numerous examples of mixed black, organic-rich, mudstones, inter-bedded with grey mudstones or limestones, with a mixture of benthic foraminiferal assemblages (Fisher et al. 2005; Gebhardt et al. 2010) some of which also include occurrences of radiolaria. Hart & Koutsoukos (2015, fig. 8) attempted to explain this by means of water depth, using evidence from the Brazilian margin (Mello et al. 1989; Koutsoukos & Hart 1990a, b; Koutsoukos et al. 1990, 1991, 1993) as a guide. In the offshore areas east of Brazil, the CTBE record of enhanced TOC simply adds to the continuing ‘anoxia’ of that silled basin that developed in the latest Aptian and Albian. In other areas, such as in the Black Band of Humberside, the Crimea (Fisher et al. 2005) and the Rehkogelgraben succession of central Austria (Gebhardt et al. 2010), there are black, organic-rich mudstones inter-bedded with the normal ‘oxygenated’ succession.

In other locations (e.g. Contessa Highway, Gubbio, Italy: see Hart & Koutsoukos 2015, fig. 2) the black, organic-rich mudstones occupy the whole of the positive stable isotope excursion and, in these locations, there are no intervening pale-coloured, carbonate-rich, horizons. There are, however, a number of locations where black, TOC-rich mudstones are known outside the carbon isotope excursion at the CTBE. In northern Germany, black mudstones are recorded inter-bedded with chalks in the Lower Turonian (Hilbrecht & Hoefs 1986) while in Texas Lowery & Leckie (2017) reported pre-OAEll organic-rich shales (of economic importance to the hydrocarbons industry). Lowery & Leckie (2017) attributed these organic-rich sedimentary rocks to upwelling generated by a significant transgressive event in the Cenomanian. In Oman, Wohlwend et al. (2016, fig. 9) recorded the presence of organic-rich mudstones (TOC >4%) in the Natih B Member of Jabal Qusaybah and other localities in the area immediately inland of the Oman Mountains. The locations where this occurs are in Central Oman (Wohlwend et al. 2016, fig. 2) in the middle of a carbonate platform/shelf, well away from a shelf edge where upwelling might occur. These occurrences of pre- and post-OAEll organic-rich sediments are, currently, little understood. If they are not related to local upwelling, can they be generated by sea-level rise ‘lifting’ the OMZ into the depositional areas, although the carbonate sediments in Oman do not appear to have been deposited in 200+ m water depth?

The occurrence of benthic foraminifera within what appear to be anoxic mudstones has created what is known as the ‘anoxic benthic foraminiferal paradox’.

Anoxic benthic foraminiferal paradox

The occurrence of benthic foraminifera in what are perceived as anoxic, organic-rich mudstones is problematic (Friedrich 2010). In the Black Band of Humberside, the occurrence of a small-sized, agglutinated assemblage of foraminifera is an example of the problem that has been reported quite widely (Koutsoukos et al. 1990; Erbacher et al. 1998; Holbourn et al. 1999; Gebhardt 2006; Friedrich et al. 2009). In attempting to explain some of the problems, Friedrich (2010) drew attention to an issue raised by Oxford et al. (2004, fig. 8) some years earlier. Mudstone layers, after deposition, are subject to compaction by <70%–80%. The time represented by a typical micropalaeontological sample is, therefore, quite considerable and may contain numerous oxic-dysoxic-anoxic ‘mini-cycles’. Such samples could yield a reduced assemblage, with representatives from a range of harsh to less harsh environments. This problem arose at Christian Malford (Wiltshire, UK) where, in a series of borehole cores, every sample of the organic-rich mudstones of the Phaeinum Subzone (Upper Callovian) of the Oxford Clay Formation yielded diverse, well-preserved assemblages of foraminifera, statoliths and otoliths (Hart et al. 2016) despite exquisite, soft-bodied, preservation of squid-like cephalopods that would imply sea-floor anoxia (Wilby et al. 2004, 2008). In both the Jurassic and Cretaceous examples, having mudstones containing benthic foraminifera finely inter-bedded with organic-rich, anoxic mudstones implies that the foraminifera are able to re-colonize the favourable environments almost immediately. If this requires sea floor migration of the benthic species then this could not be instantaneous within a large basin. Water depths during deposition of the Black Band would also be deeper than storm wave base and so the re-deposition of living individuals from suspension following storms would be impossible (see Hart et al. 2017).

In many other European successions there are several instances where, within the overall CTBE isotope excursion, there is a number of discrete black, mudstone, TOC-rich, reportedly anoxic, horizons. It is this aspect of OAEll that is further explored and related back to the successions on Humberside. Successions with black, organic-rich, beds within the carbon isotope excursion of OAEll are reported in the Crimea (Fisher et al. 2005; Dodsworth 2004) and Central Austria (Gebhardt et al. 2010). In both of these examples the black shales are almost devoid of foraminifera and there is no comparable assemblage of agglutinated taxa to that reported from the Black Band.

In the deeper waters of the Carpathian Mountains (Skole Nappe, Outer Carpathians, southern Poland) Bąk (2007a) and Bąk et al. (2001, 2014) recorded assemblages of radiolarian associated with deep-water agglutinated foraminifera (Rhizammina sp., Psammosiphonella sp., Ammodiscus sp., Recurvoides sp., Trochammina sp. and Gerochammina sp.). This setting is mid-upper bathyal and a much deeper-water setting than the successions in Austria (Gebhardt et al. 2010) and the Crimea (Fisher et al. 2005). When recorded against water depths (Fig. 6), the locations discussed in the text appear to indicate that the microfossil assemblages recorded are a function of depth and, presumably, dissolved oxygen. This also suggests that, in the Cretaceous Ocean, there is no evidence for oxygen recovery with depth below an expanded minimum zone.

Fig. 6.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 6.

Schematic interpretation of the potential water depths represented by the various successions discussed in the text. The model is based on the profiles developed by Koutsoukos & Hart (1990a) for the Atlantic Margin of Brazil. S.L., sea level; O.M.Z., postulated position of the oxygen minimum zone.

Summary

The Black Band that we see outcropping in Lincolnshire, Humberside and Yorkshire forms a distinctive horizon within the overall chalk succession. The high concentrations of dinoflagellates cysts recorded in the black mudstones appear to have been stimulated by enhanced nutrient supply from the intrusion and/or weathering of Large Igneous Provinces (in the Caribbean or High Arctic). This enhanced productivity removed dissolved oxygen from the sediments, creating a biological response and the occurrence of assemblages dominated by agglutinated foraminifera. The water depths of the various locations discussed here created the particular response that is recorded in the geological record and point to a general depletion of O2 in the mid-Cretaceous water column.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank a number of colleagues for fruitful discussions on the problems associated with the Black Band and coeval strata in various parts of the world, including Haydon Bailey (Network Stratigraphic, Potters Bar, UK), Holger Gebhardt (Geological Survey of Austria, Vienna), Ian Jarvis (Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK), Hugh Jenkyns (Oxford University, Oxford, UK), Eduardo Koutsoukos (Faro, Portugal), Mark Leckie (University of Massachussetts, Amherst, USA), Christopher Lowery (University of Austin, Texas, USA), Bruce Tocher (Stavanger, Norway), Michael Wagreich (University of Vienna, Austria), Helmut Weissert (ETH Zurich, Switzerland) and the late Christopher Wood (to whom this paper is dedicated). The two reviewers (Rory Mortimore and Christopher Paul) and editor are thanked for their invaluable assistance, as are the technical staff (Tim Absalom and James Quinn) at Plymouth University who provided some of the final figures.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Scientific editing by Stephen K. Donovan

  • © 2018 The Author(s). Published by The Geological Society of London for the Yorkshire Geological Society. All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Adatte, T.,
    2. Fantasia, A. et al.
    2014. Deccan volcanism: a main trigger of environmental changes leading to the K/Pg mass extinction? Communicações Geológicas, 101(Especial lll), 1435–1437.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Alve, E.
    1995. Benthic foraminiferal distribution and recolonization of formerly anoxic environments in Drammensfjord, southern Norway. Marine Micropaleontology, 25, 2–3.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Bąk, K.
    2006. Sedimentological, geochemical and microfaunal responses to environmental changes around the Cenomanian-Turonian boundary in the Outer Carpathian Basin; a record from the Subsilesian Nappe, Poland. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 237, 335–358.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. ↵
    1. Bąk, K.
    2007a. Deep-water facies succession around the Cenomanian-Turonian boundary event in the Outer Carpathian Basin: Sedimentary, biotic and chemical records in the Silesian Nappe, Poland. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 248, 255–290.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  5. ↵
    1. Bąk, K.
    2007b. Organic-rich and manganese sedimentation during the Cenomanian–Turonian boundary event in the Outer Carpathian basin: a new record from the Skole Nappe, Poland, and a review from other tectonic units. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 256, 21–46.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Bąk, K.,
    2. Bąk, M. &
    3. Paul, Z.
    2001. Barnasiówka Radiolarian Shale Formation – a new lithostratigraphic unit in the Upper Cenomanian – lowermost Turonian of the Polish Outer Carpathians (Silesian Series). Annals of the Geological Society of Poland, 71, 75–103.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Bąk, K.,
    2. Bąk, M.,
    3. Górny, Z. &
    4. Wolska, A.
    2014. Environmental conditions in a Carpathian deep sea basin during the period preceeding Oceanic Anoxic Event 2 – a case study from the Skole Nappe. Geologica Carpathica, 65, 433–450.
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Bernhard, J.M.
    1986. Characteristic assemblages and morphologies of benthic foraminifera from anoxic, organic-rich deposits: Jurassic through Holocene. Journal of Foraminiferal Research, 16, 207–215.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Bice, K.L.,
    2. Huber, B.T. &
    3. Norris, R.D.
    2003. Extreme polar warmth during the Cretaceous greenhouse? Paradox of the Late Turonian δ18O record at Deep Sea Drilling Project Site 511. Paleoceanography, 18, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002PA000848
  10. ↵
    1. Bond, D.P.G. &
    2. Grasby, S.E.
    2017. On the causes of mass extinctions. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 478, 3–29.
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Bond, D.P.G. &
    2. Wignall, P.B.
    2014. Large igneous provinces and mass extinctions: an update. In: Keller, G. & Kerr, A.C. (eds) Volcanism, Impacts and Mass Extinctions: Causes and Effects. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 505, 29‒55, https://doi.org/10.1130/2014.2505(02)
  12. ↵
    1. Bralower, T.J. &
    2. Thierstein, H.R.
    1984. Low productivity and slow deep-water circulation in mid-Cretaceous oceans. Geology, 12, 614–618.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Broecker, W.S.
    1969. Why the deep ocean remains aerobic. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 1969, 20–21.
  14. ↵
    1. Broecker, W.S.
    1991. The great ocean conveyor. Oceanography, 42, 79–89.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Carter, D.J. &
    2. Hart, M.B.
    1977. Aspects of mid-Cretaceous stratigraphical micropalaeontology. Bulletin of the British Museum, Natural History (Geology), 29, 1–135.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Caus, E.,
    2. Teixell, A. &
    3. Bernaus, J.M.
    1997. Depositional model of a Cenomanian-Turonian extensional basin (Sopeira Basin, NE Spain): interplay between tectonics, eustasy and bioilogical productivity. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 129, 23–36.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  17. ↵
    1. Chamberlin, T.C.
    1897. A group of hypotheses bearing on climatic changes. Journal of Geology, 5, 653–683.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. ↵
    1. Chenet, A.L.,
    2. Quidelleur, X.,
    3. Fluteau, F.,
    4. Courtillot, V. &
    5. Bajpai, S.
    2007. 40K–40Ar dating of the Main Deccan large igneous province: Further evidence of KTB age and short duration. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 263, 1–15.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    1. Chenet, A.L.,
    2. Courtillot, V.
    et al. 2009. Determination of rapid Deccan eruptions across the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary using paleomagnetic secular variation: 2. Constraints from analysis of eight new sections and synthesis for a 3500 m-thick composite section. Journal of Geophysical Research, 114, B06103, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JB005644
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. Coccioni, R. &
    2. Galeotti, S.
    1993. Orbitally induced cycles in benthic foraminiferal morphogroups and trophic structure distribution patterns from the Late Albian ‘Amadeus Segment’ (Central Italy). Journal of Micropalaeontology, 12, 227–239.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. Courtillot, V.
    1999. Evolutionary Catastrophes: The Science of Mass Extinction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  22. ↵
    1. Courtillot, V. &
    2. Renne, P.R.
    2003. On the ages of flood basal events. Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 335, 113–140.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  23. ↵
    1. Dodsworth, P.
    1996. Stratigraphy, microfossils and depositional environments of the lowermost part of the Welton Chalk Formation (late Cenomanian to early Turonian, Cretaceous) in eastern England. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 51, 45–64, https://doi.org/10.1144/pygs.51.1.45
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    1. Dodsworth, P.
    2000. Trans-Atlantic dinoflagellate cyst stratigraphy across the Cenomanian-Turonian boundary. Journal of Micropalaeontology, 19, 69–84.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. ↵
    1. Dodsworth, P.
    2004. The palynology of the Cenomanian-Turonian (Cretaceous) boundary succession at Aksudere in Crimea, Ukraine. Palynology, 28, 129–141.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    1. Erba, E.
    1994. Nannofossils and superplumes: The early Aptian ‘nannoconid crisis’. Paleoceanography, 9, 483–501.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    1. Erbacher, J.,
    2. Gerth, W.,
    3. Schmiedl, G. &
    4. Hemleben, C.
    1998. Benthic foraminiferal assemblages of Late Aptian-Early Albian black shale intervals in the Vocontian Basin, SE France. Cretaceous Research, 19, 805–826.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  28. ↵
    1. Ernst, G.,
    2. Schmid, F. &
    3. Seibertz, E.
    1983. Event-Stratigraphie im Cenoman und Turon von NW-Deutschland. Zitteliana, 10, 531–554.
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Ernst, G.,
    2. Wood, C.J. &
    3. Hilbrecht, H.
    1984. The Cenomanian-Turonian boundary problem in NW-Germany with comments on the north–south correlation to the Regensburg Area. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Denmark, 33, 103–113.
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Fisher, J.K.,
    2. Price, G.D.,
    3. Hart, M.B. &
    4. Leng, M.J.
    2005. Stable isotope analysis of the Cenomanian-Turonian (Late Cretaceous) oceanic anoxic event in the Crimea. Cretaceous Research, 26, 853–863.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  31. ↵
    1. Friedrich, O.
    2010. Benthic foraminifera and their role to decipher paleoenvironment during mid-Cretaceous Oceanic Anoxic Events – the ‘anoxic benthic foraminifera’ paradox. Revue de Micropaléontologie, 53, 175–192.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. ↵
    1. Friedrich, O. &
    2. Hemleben, C.
    2007. Early Maastrichtian benthic foraminiferal assemblages from the western North Atlantic (Blake Nose) and their relation to paleoenvironmental changes. Marine Micropaleontology, 62, 31–44.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  33. ↵
    1. Friedrich, O.,
    2. Erbacher, J.,
    3. Wilson, P.A.,
    4. Moriya, K. &
    5. Mutterlose, J.
    2009. Paleoenvironmental changes across the Mid-Cenomanian Event in the tropical Atlantic Ocean (Demerara Rise, ODP Leg 207) inferred from benthic foraminiferal assemblages. Marine Micropaleontology, 71, 28–40.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  34. ↵
    1. Gale, A.S.,
    2. Smith, A.B.,
    3. Monks, N.E.A.,
    4. Young, J.A.,
    5. Howard, A.,
    6. Wray, D.S. &
    7. Huggett, J.M.
    2000. Marine biodiversity through the late Cenomanian-early Turonian: palaeoceanographic controls and sequence stratigraphic biases. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 157, 745–757, https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs.157.4.745
    OpenUrl
  35. ↵
    1. Gallagher, S.J.,
    2. Wagstaff, B.E.,
    3. Baird, J.G.,
    4. Wallace, M.W. &
    5. Li, C.L.
    2008. Southern high latitude variability in the Late Cretaceous greenhouse world. Global and Planetary Change, 60, 351–364.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  36. ↵
    1. Gaunt, G.D.,
    2. Fletcher, T.P. &
    3. Wood, C.J.
    1992. Chapter 5. Cretaceous. In: Gaunt, G.D., Fletcher, T.P. et al. (eds) Geology of the country around Kingston upon Hull and Brigg. Memoir of the British Geological Survey, Sheets 80 and 89 (England and Wales), HMSO, London, 71–101.
  37. ↵
    1. Gebhardt, H.
    2006. Resolving the calibration problem in Cretaceous benthic foraminifera paleoecological interpretation: Cenomanian to Coniacian assemblages from the Benue Trough analyzed by conventional methods and correspondence analysis. Micropaleontology, 52, 151–176.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    1. Gebhardt, H.,
    2. Friedrich, O.,
    3. Schenk, B.,
    4. Fox, L.,
    5. Hart, M. &
    6. Wagreich, M.
    2010. Paleoceanographic changes at the northern Tethyan margin during the Cenomanian-Turonian Oceanic Anoxic Event (OAE-2). Marine Micropaleontology, 77, 25–45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  39. ↵
    1. Gooday, A.J.
    1988. A response by benthic foraminifera to the deposition of phytodetritus in the deep sea. Nature, 332, 70–73.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  40. ↵
    1. Gooday, A.J.
    1994. The biology of deep-sea foraminifera: a review of some advances and their applications in paleoceanography. Palaios, 9, 14–31.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. ↵
    1. Gooday, A.J.
    2003. Benthic foraminifera (Protista) as tool in deep-water palaeoceanography: environmental influences on faunal characteristics. Advances in Biology, 46, 1–90.
    OpenUrl
  42. ↵
    1. Gooday, A.J.,
    2. Bernhard, J.M.,
    3. Levin, L.A. &
    4. Suhr, S.B.
    2000. Foraminifera in the Arabian Sea oxygen minimum zone and other oxygen-deficient settings: taxonomic composition, diversity, and relation to metazoan faunas. Deep Sea Research II, 47, 25–54.
    OpenUrl
  43. ↵
    1. Gooday, A.J.,
    2. Levin, L.A.
    et al. 2009. Faunal responses to oxygen gradients on the Pakistan margin: a comparison of foraminiferans, macrofauna and megafauna. Deep Sea Research II, 56, 903–910.
    OpenUrl
  44. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B.
    2005. Conversation with the Earth: A personal view. Report and Transactions of the Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science, Literature & the Arts, 137, 1–35.
    OpenUrl
  45. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B. &
    2. Ball, K.C.
    1986. Late Cretaceous anoxic events, sea level changes and the evolution of the planktonic foraminifera. In: Summerhayes, C.P. & Shackleton, N.J. (eds) North Atlantic Palaeoceanography. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 21, 67–78, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1986.021.01.04
  46. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B. &
    2. Bigg, P.J.
    1981. Anoxic events in the Late Cretaceous chalk seas of NW Europe. In: Neale, J.W. & Brasier, M.D.  (eds) Microfossils of Recent and Fossil Shelf Seas. Ellis Horwood Ltd, Chichester, 177–185.
  47. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B. &
    2. Koutsoukos, E.A.M.
    2015. Paleoecology of Cretaceous Foraminifera: examples from the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico Region. Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, Transactions, 65, 175–199.
    OpenUrl
  48. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B. &
    2. Leary, P.N.
    1989. The stratigraphic and palaeogeographic setting of the late Cenomanian anoxic event. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 146, 305–310, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.146.2.0305
    OpenUrl
  49. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B.,
    2. Dodsworth, P.,
    3. Ditchfield, P.W.,
    4. Duane, A.M. &
    5. Orth, C.J.
    1991. The late Cenomanian event in eastern England. Historical Biology, 5, 339–354.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  50. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B.,
    2. Dodsworth, P. &
    3. Duane, A.M.
    1993. The late Cenomanian event in eastern England. Cretaceous Research, 14, 495–508.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  51. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B.,
    2. De Jonghe, A.,
    3. Page, K.N.,
    4. Price, G.D. &
    5. Smart, C.W.
    2016. Exceptional accumulations of statoliths in association with the Christian Malford lagerstätte (Callovian, Jurassic) in Wiltshire, United Kingdom. Palaios, 31, 203–220.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  52. ↵
    1. Hart, M.B.,
    2. Molina, G.S.,
    3. Smart, C.W. &
    4. Widdicombe, C.E.
    2017. The Western Channel Observatory: benthic foraminifera in the plankton following storms. Geoscience in South-West England, 14, 39–45 [for 2016].
    OpenUrl
  53. ↵
    1. Hay, W.W.
    2008. Evolving ideas about the Cretaceous climate and ocean circulation. Cretaceous Research, 29, 725–753.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  54. ↵
    1. Hay, W.W.,
    2. Flögel, S. &
    3. Söding, E.
    2005. Is the initiation of glaciations on Antarctica related to a change in the structure of the ocean? Global and Planetary Change, 45, 23–33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  55. ↵
    1. Herrle, J.O.,
    2. Pross, J.,
    3. Friedrich, O. &
    4. Hemleben, C.
    2003a. Short-term environmental changes in the Cretaceous Tethyan Ocean: micropaleontological evidence from the Early Albian Oceanic Anoxic Event 1b. Terra Nova, 15, 14–19.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  56. ↵
    1. Herrle, J.O.,
    2. Pross, J.,
    3. Friedrich, O.,
    4. Kößler, P. &
    5. Hemleben, C.
    2003b. Forcing mechanisms for mid-Cretaceous black shale formation: evidence from the Upper Aptian and Lower Albian of the Vocontian Basin (SE France). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 190, 399–426.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  57. ↵
    1. Hilbrecht, H. &
    2. Hoefs, J.
    1986. Geochemical and palaeontological studies of a δ13C anomaly in Boreal and North Tethyan Cenomanian-Turonian sediments in Germany and adjacent areas. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 53, 169–189.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  58. ↵
    1. Hill, W.
    1888. On the lower beds of the Upper Cretaceous Series in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 44, 320–367, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.JGS.1888.044.01-04.29
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  59. ↵
    1. Holbourn, A.,
    2. Kuhnt, W.,
    3. El Albani, A.,
    4. Ly, A.,
    5. Gomez, R. &
    6. Herbin, J.P.
    1999. Palaeoenvironments and palaeobiogeography of the Late Cretaceous Casamance transect (Senegal, NW Africa): distribution patterns of benthic foraminifera, organic carbon and terrigenous flux. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 212, 335–377.
    OpenUrl
  60. ↵
    1. Holbourn, A.,
    2. Kuhnt, W. &
    3. Erbacher, J.
    2001. Benthic foraminifers from Lower Albian black shales (Site 1049, ODP Leg 171): evidence for a non ‘uniformitarian’ record. Journal of Foraminiferal Research, 31, 60–74.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  61. ↵
    1. Jarvis, I.,
    2. Carson, G.A. et al.
    1988. Chalk microfossil assemblages and the Cenomanian-Turonian (Late Cretaceous) oceanic anoxic event, new data from Dover England. Cretaceous Research, 9, 3–103.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  62. ↵
    1. Jarvis, I.,
    2. Gale, A.S.,
    3. Jenkyns, H.C. &
    4. Pearce, M.A.
    2006. Secular variation in the Late Cretaceous carbon isotopes: a new δ13C carbonate reference curve for the Cenomanian-Campanian (99.6-70.6 Ma). Geological Magazine, 143, 561–608.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  63. ↵
    1. Jarvis, I.,
    2. Trabucho-Alexandre, J.,
    3. Grõcke, D.R.,
    4. Uličný, D. &
    5. Laurin, J.
    2015. Intercontinental correlation of organic carbon and carbonate stable isotope records: evidence of climate and sea-level change during the Turonian (Cretaceous). The Depositional Record, 1, 53–90.
    OpenUrl
  64. ↵
    1. Jeans, C.V.
    1980. Early submarine lithification in the Red Chalk and Lower Chalk of eastern England: a bacterial control model and its implications. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 43, 81–157, https://doi.org/10.1144/pygs.43.2.81
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. ↵
    1. Jeans, C.V.,
    2. Long, D.,
    3. Hall, M.A.,
    4. Bland, D. J. &
    5. Cornford, C.
    1991. The geochemistry of the Plenus Marls at Dover, England: evidence of fluctuating oceanographic conditions and of glacial control during the development of the Cenomanian-Turonian δ13C anomaly. Geological Magazine, 128, 603–632.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  66. ↵
    1. Jefferies, R.P.S.
    1962. The palaeoecology of the Actinocamax plenus subzone (lowest Turonian) in the Anglo-Paris Basin. Palaeontology, 4, 609–647 [for 1961].
    OpenUrl
  67. ↵
    1. Jefferies, R.P.S.
    1963. The stratigraphy of the Actinocamax plenus subzone (lowest Turonian) in the Anglo-Paris Basin. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, London, 74, 1–43.
    OpenUrl
  68. ↵
    1. Jenkyns, H.C.
    2010. Geochemistry of oceanic anoxic events. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 11, Q03004, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GC002788
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  69. ↵
    1. Jenkyns, H.C.,
    2. Dickson, A.J.,
    3. Ruhl, M. &
    4. van den Boorn, S.H.J.M.
    2017. Basalt-seawater interaction, the Plenus Cold Event, enhanced weathering and geochemical change: deconstructing Oceanic Anoxic Event 2 (Cenomanian-Turonian, Late Cretaceous). Sedimentology, 64, 16–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  70. ↵
    1. Jorissen, F.J.,
    2. Barmawiddjaja, D.M.,
    3. Puskaric, S. &
    4. Van der Zwann, G.J.
    1992. Vertical distribution of benthic foraminifera in the northern Adriatic Sea; the relation with organic flux. Marine Micropaleontology, 19, 1–2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  71. ↵
    1. Keller, G.
    2014. Deccan volcanism, the Chicxulub impact, and the end-Cretaceous mass extinctions: Coincidences? Cause and effect? In: Keller, G. & Kerr, A.C. (eds) Volcanism, Impacts, and Mass Extinctions: Causes and Effects. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 505, 57–90.
  72. ↵
    1. Keller, G.,
    2. Han, Q.,
    3. Adatte, T. &
    4. Burns, S.J.
    2001. Palaeoenvironment of the Cenomanian-Turonian transition at Eastbourne, England. Cretaceous Research, 22, 391–422.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  73. ↵
    1. Kerr, A.C.
    1998. Oceanic plateau formation: A cause of mass extinction and black shale deposition around the Cenomanian-Turonian boundary. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 155, 619–626, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.155.4.0619
    OpenUrl
  74. ↵
    1. Kolonic, S.,
    2. Wagner, T. et al.
    2005. Black shale deposition on the northwest African Shelf during the Cenomanian/Turonian Oceanic Anoxic Event: climate coupling and global organic carbon burial. Paleoceanography, 20, PA1006, https://doi.org/10.1029/2003PA000950
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  75. ↵
    1. Koutsoukos, E.A.M. &
    2. Hart, M.B.
    1990a. Cretaceous foraminiferal morphogroup distributional patterns, palaeocommunities and trophic structures: a case study from the Sergipe Basin, Brazil. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, 81, 221–246.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  76. ↵
    1. Koutsoukos, E.A.M. &
    2. Hart, M.B.
    1990b. Radiolarians and diatoms from the mid-Cretaceous successions of the Sergipe Basin, Northeastern Brazil: palaeoceanographic assessment. Journal of Micropalaeontology, 9, 45–64.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. ↵
    1. Koutsoukos, E.A.M.,
    2. Leary, P.N. &
    3. Hart, M.B.
    1990. Latest Cenomanian-earliest Turonian low-oxygen tolerant benthonic foraminifera: a case study from the Sergipe Basin (N.E. Brazil) and the western Anglo-Paris Basin (southern England). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 77, 145–177.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  78. ↵
    1. Koutsoukos, E.A.M.,
    2. Mello, M.R. &
    3. Azambuja Filho, N.C.
    1991. Micropalaeontological and geochemical evidence of mid-Cretaceous dysoxic-anoxic environments in the Sergipe Basin, northeastern Brazil. In: Tyson, R. V. & Pearson, P.H. (eds) Modern and Ancient Continental Shelf Anoxia. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 58, 427–447, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1991.058.01.27
  79. ↵
    1. Koutsoukos, E.A.M.,
    2. Destro, N.,
    3. Azambuja Filho, N.C. &
    4. Spadini, A.R.
    1993. Upper Aptian-lower Coniacian carbonate sequences in the Sergipe Basin, northeastern Brazil. In: Simo, T., Scott, R.W. & Masse, J.-P. (eds) Cretaceous Carbonate Platforms. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir, 56, 127–144.
  80. ↵
    1. Kuhnt, W.,
    2. Nederbragt, A. &
    3. Leine, L.
    1997. Cyclicity of Cenomanian-Turonian organic-carbon-rich sediments in the Tarfaya Atlantic Coastal Basin (Morocco). Cretaceous Research, 18, 587–601.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  81. ↵
    1. Kuhnt, W.,
    2. Luderer, F.,
    3. Nederbragt, A.,
    4. Thurow, J. &
    5. Wagner, T.
    2005. Orbital-scale record of the late Cenomanian-Turonian Oceanic Anoxic Event (OAE-2) in the Tarfaya Basin (Morocco). International Journal of Earth Sciences, 94, 147–159.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  82. ↵
    1. Larkin, K.E. &
    2. Gooday, A.J.
    2009. Foraminiferal faunal responses to monsoon-driven changes in organic matter and oxygen availability at 140 and 300 m water depth in the NE Arabian Sea. Deep Sea Research II, 56, 403–421.
    OpenUrl
  83. ↵
    1. Leary, P.N. &
    2. Hart, M.B.
    1989. The use of the ontogeny of deep water dwelling planktonic foraminifera to assess basin morphology, the development of water masses, eustacy and the position of the oxygen minimum zone in the water column. Mesozoic Research, 2, 67–74.
    OpenUrl
  84. ↵
    1. Leary, P.N.,
    2. Carson, G.A. et al.
    1989. The biotic response to the late Cenomanian oceanic anoxic event; integrated evidence from Dover, SE England. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 146, 311–317, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.146.2.0311
    OpenUrl
  85. ↵
    1. Leckie, R.M.,
    2. Bralower, T.J. &
    3. Cashman, R.
    2002. Oceanic anoxic events and plankton evolution: Biotic response to tectonic forcing during the mid-Cretaceous. Paleoceanography, 17, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001PA000623
  86. ↵
    1. Lowery, C.M. &
    2. Leckie, R.M.
    2017. Biostratigraphy of the Cenomanian–Turonian Eagle Ford Shale of south Texas. Journal of Foraminiferal Research, 47, 105–128.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  87. ↵
    1. Marshall, J.D.
    1992. Climatic and oceanographic isotopic signals from the carbonate rock record and their preservation. Geological Magazine, 129, 143–160.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  88. ↵
    1. Marshall, K.L. &
    2. Batten, D.J.
    1988. Dinoflagellate cyst associations in Cenomanian-Turonian ‘Black Shale’ sequences of northern Europe. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 54, 85–103.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  89. ↵
    1. Mello, M.R.,
    2. Koutsoukos, E.A.M.,
    3. Hart, M.B.,
    4. Brassell, S.C. &
    5. Maxwell, J.R.
    1989. Late Cretaceous anoxic events in the Brazilian continental margin. Organic Geochemistry, 14, 529–542.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  90. ↵
    1. Milne, D.,
    2. Raup, D.,
    3. Billingham, J.,
    4. Niklaus, K. &
    5. Padian, K.
    (eds) 1985. The evolution of complex and higher organisms. NASA SP-478. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
  91. ↵
    1. Moodley, L.,
    2. Van der Zwaan, G.J.,
    3. Rutten, G.M.W.,
    4. Boom, R.C.E. &
    5. Kempers, L.
    1998. Subsurface activity of benthic foraminifera in relation to porewater oxygen content: laboratory experiments. Marine Micropaleontology, 34, 91–106.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  92. ↵
    1. Moriya, K.,
    2. Wilson, P.A.,
    3. Friedrich, O.,
    4. Erbacher, J. &
    5. Kawahata, H.
    2007. Testing for ice sheets during the mid-Cretaceous greenhouse using glassy foraminiferal calcite from the mid-Cenomanian tropics on Demerara Rise. Geology, 35, 615–618.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  93. ↵
    1. Mortimore, R.N.
    2014. Logging the Chalk. Whittles Publishing, Dunbeath, Scotland.
  94. ↵
    1. Mortimore, R.N.,
    2. Wood, C.J. &
    3. Gallois, R.W.
    2001. British Upper Cretraceous Stratigraphy. Geological Conservation Review Series, No. 23, Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
  95. ↵
    1. Murray, J.W.
    1973. Distribution and ecology of benthic foraminiferids. Heinemann, London.
  96. ↵
    1. Murray, J.W.
    1991. Ecology and paleoecology of benthic foraminifera. Longman, Harlow.
  97. ↵
    1. Owens, J.D.,
    2. Gill, B.C. et al.
    2013. Sulfur isotopes track the global extent and dynamics of euxinia during Cretaceous Oceanic Anoxic Event 2. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 110, 18407–18412.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  98. ↵
    1. Oxford, M.J.,
    2. Hart, M.B. &
    3. Watkinson, M.P.
    2004. Foraminiferal characterisation of mid-Upper Jurassic sequences in the Wessex Basin (United Kingdom). Revista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 110, 209–218.
    OpenUrl
  99. ↵
    1. Parente, M.,
    2. Frijia, G.,
    3. Di Lucia, M.,
    4. Jenkyns, H.C.,
    5. Woddfine, R.G. &
    6. Baroncini, F.
    2008. Stepwise extinction of large foraminifers at the Cenomanian-Turonian boundary: a shallow-water perspective on nutrient fluctuations during Oceanic Anoxic Event 2 (Bonarelli Event). Geology, 36, 715–718.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  100. ↵
    1. Paul, C.R.C.,
    2. Lamolda, M.A.,
    3. Mitchell, S.F.,
    4. Vaziri, M.R.,
    5. Gorostidi, A. &
    6. Marshall, J.D.
    1999. The Cenomanian-Turonian boundary at Eastbourne (Sussex, UK): a proposed European reference section. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 150, 83–121.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  101. ↵
    1. Poulton, S.W.,
    2. Henkel, S. et al.
    2015. A continental-weathering control on orbitally driven redox-nutrient cycling during Cretaceous Oceanic Anoxic Event 2. Geology, 43, 963–966.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  102. ↵
    1. Punekar, J.,
    2. Mateo, P. &
    3. Keller, G.
    2014. Effects of Deccan volcanism on paleoenvironment and planktonic foraminifera: A global survey. In: Keller, G. & Kerr, A.C. (eds) Volcanism, Impacts, and Mass Extinctions: Causes and Effects. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 505, 91–116.
  103. ↵
    1. Raup, D.M. &
    2. Sepkoski, J.J. Jr.
    1982. Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record. Science, 215, 1501–1503.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  104. ↵
    1. Raup, D.M. &
    2. Sepkoski, J.J. Jr.
    1984. Periodicity of extinctions in the geological past. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 81, 801–805.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  105. ↵
    1. Schlanger, S.O. &
    2. Jenkyns, H.C.
    1976. Cretaceous oceanic anoxic events: Causes and consequences. Geologie en Mijnbouw, 55, 179–184.
    OpenUrl
  106. ↵
    1. Schlanger, S.O.,
    2. Arthur, M.A.,
    3. Jenkyns, H.C. &
    4. Scholle, P.A.
    1987. The Cenomanian–Turonian Oceanic Anoxic Event, 1 Stratigraphy and distribution of organic carbon-rich beds and the marine δ13C excursion. In: Brooks, J. & Fleet, A.J. (eds) Marine Petroleum Source Rocks. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 26, 371–399, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1987.026.01.24
  107. ↵
    1. Schoene, B.,
    2. Samperton, K.M. et al.
    2015. U-Pb geochronology of the Deccan Traps and relation to the end-Cretaceous mass extinction. Science, 347, 182–184, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa0118
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  108. ↵
    1. Schouten, S.,
    2. Hopmans, E.C.,
    3. Forster, A.,
    4. van Breugel, Y.,
    5. Kuypers, M.M.M. &
    6. Sinninghe Damsté, J.S.
    2003. Extremely high sea-surface temperatures at low latitudes during the middle Cretaceous as revealed by archaeal membrane lipids. Geology, 31, 1069–1072.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  109. ↵
    1. Sinton, C.W. &
    2. Duncan, R.A.
    1997. Potential links between ocean plateau volcanism and global ocean anoxia at the Cenomanian-Turonian boundary. Economic Geology, 92, 836–842.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  110. ↵
    1. Sumbler, M.G.
    1999. The stratigraphy of the Chalk Group in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Unpublished Report, British Geological Survey, Nottingham (WA/99/002), British Geological Survey, Nottingham, 30. Available online www.nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/509937/1/WA99002.pdf [last accessed 30 June 2017].
  111. ↵
    1. Tsikos, H.,
    2. Jenkyns, H.C. et al.
    2004. Carbon isotope stratigraphy recorded by the Cenomanian-Turonian Oceanic Anoxic Event; correlation and implications based on three localities. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 161, 711–719, https://doi.org/10.1144/0016-764903-077
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  112. ↵
    1. Turgeon, S.C. &
    2. Creaser, R.A.
    2008. Cretaceous oceanic anoxic event 2 triggered by a massive magmatic episode. Nature, 454, 323–326.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  113. ↵
    1. Van der Zwaan, G.J.,
    2. Duijnstee, I.A.P.,
    3. den Dulk, M.,
    4. Ernst, S.R.,
    5. Jannink, N.T. &
    6. Kouwenhoven, T.J.
    1999. Benthic foraminifers: proxies or problems? A review of paleoecological concepts. Earth Science Reviews, 46, 213–236.
    OpenUrl
  114. ↵
    1. Voigt, S.,
    2. Wilmsen, M.,
    3. Mortimore, R.N. &
    4. Voigt, T.
    2003. Cenomanian palaeotemperatures derived from the oxygen isotopic composition of brachiopods and belemnites: evaluation of Cretaceous palaeotemperature proxies. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 92, 285–299.
    OpenUrlWeb of Science
  115. ↵
    1. Voigt, S.,
    2. Gale, A.S. &
    3. Voigt, T.
    2006. Sea-level change, carbon cycling and palaeoclimate during the Late Cenomanian of northwest Europe; an integrated palaeoenvironmental analysis. Cretaceous Research, 27, 836–858.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  116. ↵
    1. Voigt, S.,
    2. Erbacher, J.,
    3. Pälike, H. &
    4. Westerhold, T.
    2015. Orbital chronology for the Cenomanian-Turonian Oceanic Anoxic Event 2 and the timing of the Plenus Cold Event. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 17, EGU 2015–8604.
  117. ↵
    1. Wang, Y.,
    2. Huang, C.,
    3. Sun, B.,
    4. Quan, C.,
    5. Wu, J. &
    6. Lin, Z.
    2014. Paleo-CO2 variation trends and the Cretaceous greenhouse climate. Earth Science Reviews, 129, 136–147.
    OpenUrl
  118. ↵
    1. Wendler, J.E. &
    2. Wendler, I.
    2016. What drove sea-level fluctuation during the mid-Cretaceous greenhouse climate. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 441, 412–419.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  119. ↵
    1. Wignall, P.B.
    2001. Large igneous provinces and mass extinctions. Earth Science Reviews, 53, 1–33.
    OpenUrl
  120. ↵
    1. Wignall, P.B.
    2007. The end-Permian mass extinction – how bad did it get? Geobiology, 5, 303–309.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  121. ↵
    1. Wilby, P.R.,
    2. Hudson, J.D.,
    3. Clements, R.G. &
    4. Hollingworth, N.T.J.
    2004. Taphonomy and origin of an accumulate of soft-bodied cephalopods in the Oxford Clay Formation (Jurassic, England). Palaeontology, 47, 1159–1180.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  122. ↵
    1. Wilby, P.R.,
    2. Duff, K.,
    3. Page, K. &
    4. Martin, S.
    2008. Preserving the unpreservable: a lost world discovered at Christian Malford, UK. Geology Today, 24, 95–98.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  123. ↵
    1. Wilson, P.A.,
    2. Norris, R.D. &
    3. Cooper, M.J.
    2002. Testing the Cretaceous greenhouse hypothesis using glassy foraminiferal calcite from the core of the Turonian tropics on Demerara Rise. Geology, 30, 607–610.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  124. ↵
    1. Wohlwend, S.,
    2. Hart, M. &
    3. Weissert, H.
    2015. Ocean current intensification during Cretaceous oceanic anoxic event 2 – evidence from the northern Tethys. Terra Nova, 27, 147–155.
    OpenUrl
  125. ↵
    1. Wohlwend, S.,
    2. Hart, M.B. &
    3. Weissert, H.
    2016. Chemostratigraphy of the Upper Albian to mid-Turonian Natih Formation (Oman) – or: how authigenic carbonate changes a global pattern. The Depositional Record, 2, 97–117, https://doi.org/10.1002/dep2.15
    OpenUrl
  126. ↵
    1. Wood, C.J. &
    2. Mortimore, R.N.
    1995. An anomalous Black Band succession (Cenomanian – Turonian boundary interval) at Melton Ross, Lincolnshire, eastern England and its international significance. Berliner Geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen, E16 (Gundolf Ernst Festschrift), 277–287.
    OpenUrl
  127. ↵
    1. Wood, C.J. &
    2. Smith, E.G.
    1978. Lithostratigraphical classification of the Chalk in North Yorkshire, Humberside and Lincolnshire. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 42, 263–287, https://doi.org/10.1144/pygs.42.2.263
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  128. ↵
    1. Wood, C.J.,
    2. Batten, D.J.,
    3. Mortimore, R.N. &
    4. Wray, D.S.
    1997. The stratigraphy and correlation of the Cenomanian – Turonian boundary interval succession in Lincolnshire, eastern England. Freiberger Forschungsheft, C468, 333–346.
    OpenUrl
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological 				Society: 62 (3)
Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society
Volume 62, Issue 3
May 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation tools

The ‘Black Band’: local expression of a global event

Malcolm B. Hart
Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 62, 217-226, 29 March 2018, https://doi.org/10.1144/pygs2017-007
Malcolm B. Hart
School of Geography, Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Permissions
View PDF
Share

The ‘Black Band’: local expression of a global event

Malcolm B. Hart
Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 62, 217-226, 29 March 2018, https://doi.org/10.1144/pygs2017-007
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Email to

Thank you for sharing this Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The ‘Black Band’: local expression of a global event
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Download PPT
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Cretaceous stratigraphy in NE England
    • Δ13C stable isotope excursion at the CTBE
    • Warming/cooling at the CTBE
    • Oxygen minimum zone in modern oceans
    • Anoxic benthic foraminiferal paradox
    • Summary
    • Acknowledgements
    • Funding
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Similar Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • The Chalk of the Northern Province: a synopsis
  • Summary of the new stratigraphic guide to the Chalk Group in the UK and Norwegian sectors of the North Sea
  • The Chalk Group (Upper Cretaceous) of the Northern Province, eastern England – a review
Show more: Thematic set: Chalk of the Northern Province
  • Most read
  • Most cited
Loading
  • Age of the Acadian deformation and Devonian granites in northern England: a review
  • Peter Crichton Robinson (1936–2019)
  • Emplacement of oil in the Devonian Weardale Granite of northern England
  • Cretaceous Oceanic Anoxic Event 2 in eastern England: further palynological and geochemical data from Melton Ross
  • Erratum for ‘The Chalk Group (Upper Cretaceous) of the Northern Province, eastern England – a review’, Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 62, 153–177
More...

Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society

  • About the journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Submit a manuscript
  • Author information
  • Supplementary Publications
  • Subscribe
  • Pay per view
  • Alerts & RSS
  • Copyright & Permissions
  • Activate Online Subscription
  • Feedback
  • Help

Lyell Collection

  • About the Lyell Collection
  • Lyell Collection homepage
  • Collections
  • Open Access Collection
  • Open Access Policy
  • Lyell Collection access help
  • Recommend to your Library
  • Lyell Collection Sponsors
  • MARC records
  • Digital preservation
  • Developing countries
  • Geofacets
  • Manage your account
  • Cookies

The Geological Society

  • About the Society
  • Join the Society
  • Benefits for Members
  • Online Bookshop
  • Publishing policies
  • Awards, Grants & Bursaries
  • Education & Careers
  • Events
  • Geoscientist Online
  • Library & Information Services
  • Policy & Media
  • Society blog
  • Contact the Society

 

Yorkshire Geological Society logo

Published by The Geological Society of London, registered charity number 210161

Print ISSN 
0044-0604
Online ISSN 
2041-4811

Copyright © 2021 Yorkshire Geological Society