In part 1 of this work we discussed the possibilities for the selection of a GSSP for the Berriasian Stage of the Cretaceous System, based on prevailing practical methods for correlation in that J/K interval, traditional usage and the consensus over the best boundary markers that had developed in the last forty years. This consensus has developed further, based on the results of multidisciplinary studies on numerous sites over the last decade. Here in Part 2 we give an account of the application of those results by the Berriasian Working Group (ISCS), and present the stratigraphic evidence that justifies the selection of the locality of Tré Maroua (Hautes-Alpes, SE France) as the proposed GSSP. We describe a 45 m-thick section in the Calcaires Blancs vocontiens – that part of the formation covering the calpionellid Chitinoidella, Remanei. Intermedia, Colomi, Alpina, Ferasini, Elliptica and Simplex biozones. The stratigraphic data collected here has been compiled as part of a wider comparative study of complementary Vocontian Basin sites (with localities at Charens, St Bertrand, Belvedere and Le Chouet). Evidence from Tré Maroua thus sits in this substantial regional biostratigraphic and magnetostratigraphic con- text. For the purposes of the GSSP definition, here we particularly concentrate on the unbroken sequence and biotic markers in the interval immediately below the boundary, the Colomi Subzone (covering circa 675,000 years), and immediately above, the Alpina Subzone (covering circa 725,000 years). Particularly significant fossil datums identified in the Tré Maroua profile are the primary basal Berriasian marker, the base of the Alpina Subzone (a widespread event marked by dominance of small Calpionella alpina, with rare Crassicollaria parvula and Tintinopsella carpathica): the base of the Berriasian Stage is placed at the base of bed 14, which coincides with the base of the Alpina Subzone. Secondary markers bracketing the base of the Calpionella Zone are the FOs of the calcareous nannofossil species Nannoconus wintereri, close below the boundary, and the FO of Nannoconus steinmannii minor, close above. The Tithonian/Berriasian boundary level occurs within M19n.2n, in common with many documented sites, and is just below the distinctive reversed magnetic subzone M19n.1r (the so-called Brodno reversal). We present data which is congruent with magnetostratigraphic and biostratigraphic data from other key localities in France and in wider regions (Le Chouet, Saint Bertrand, Puerto Escaño, Rio Argos, Bosso, Brodno, Kurovice, Theodosia...), and thus the characteristics and datums identified at Tré Maroua are key for correlation and, in general, they typify the J/K boundary interval in Tethys and connected seas.
STATUS OF THIS PROPOSAL: After more than ten years of work the Berriasian WG completed its discussions and arrived at what was considered to be the best possible proposal for the Berriasian GSSP. The work has demanded important effort, time and financial input from the WG members, with considerable diversion from their everyday aims, functions and duties. The informed specialists of the WG overwhelmingly voted, firstly to choose a primary marker (by 75%) and then to choose a GSSP (by 73%). These decisions were based on sound correlations, founded on documentation of many sites and their fossil, magnetic and other characters. The derived data for the GSSP compares well and in some cases are even superior to those used to define other ratified Cretaceous GSSP's. The approved proposal was first submitted to the Cretaceous Subcommission on 1st December 2019, and during the following six weeks the WG received some negative comments produced by three members of the Subcommission. On that basis the proposal was reviewed and most observations and criticisms were answered with a direct written reply and/or by inserting explanations and improvements into the original text. Regrettably, the WG never got back any comment on its detailed revision. The revised proposal covered all the limitations and positives for correlation in the J/K interval and all that is correlatively possible and useful was described, and what is less possible was discussed, even at some length. Its conclusions have already been cited (Gradstein et al., 2020). Finally, in September 2020 the reviewed proposal was resubmitted and was the subject of a vote by the Cretaceous Subcommission. Of the twenty-two persons in the Subcommission, eight (32%) voted against the proposal, eight voted “Yes”, four did not vote, and two abstained. When the Subcommission Chairperson was asked for the concrete reasons that justified the negative votes the only reply was that “the voting members of the Subcommission are free to express their opinions and provide explanations if they are willing to do so”. Clearly, an unexpected answer within a scientific organization like ICS/IUGS. Although, as here explained, this proposal has not been approved and its final status remains open, the authors continue with research on the site and with publication of Part 2, as it contains a wealth of information that could be useful for future research.
GRADSTEIN F.M., OGG J.G., SCHMITZ M.D., OGG G.M. (Eds.), 2020 – Geologic time scale. Elsevier.