4.3 Review

Review of organic-walled microfossils research from the Cambrian of China: Implications for global phytoplankton diversity

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.revpalbo.2020.104191

关键词

Early Paleozoic; Acritarchs; Phytoplankton; Diversity; China

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41430101]
  2. State Special Fund from Ministry of Science and Technology [2017ZX05036002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, significant progress has been made in organic-walled microfossil research from the Paleozoic of China. In the present study, all palynological investigations from the Cambrian of China, including thin sections, are reviewed and a synthesis of the organic-walled microfossil record is presented. The stratigraphic ranges of the organic-walled microfossils for each geographical region of China are listed in chronological order according to the most recent international stratigraphic chart. The compilation reveals that 99 genera and 276 species of organic-walled microfossils have been documented so far. The localities of the investigated areas are mostly on the Cambrian Jiangnan slope and basin and the north continental shelf of the Yangtze plate, where the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition has been largely discussed. The compilation points out that some geographical areas and some stratigraphical intervals remain relatively unstudied. Further research on these intervals and areas needs to be carried out to fill some of the gaps in the record. The data from the literature on organic-walled microfossils in China are added to the previously published dataset of global acritarch diversity. The higher diversities in the early Cambrian Fortunian stage and Stage 2 in China point to a global diversification up to a diversity peak around the late early/early middle Cambrian reported in previous studies. The latest Cambrian diversification rise in China confirms the onset of the Ordovician plankton revolution. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据