Category:Southern Region Chalk Group Lithostratigraphy: The North Downs (Robinson, 1986): Difference between revisions

From MediaWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with " Robinson (1986) proposed a lithostratigraphical scheme for the Chalk Group of the North Downs, some of the nomenclature being borrowed from earlier classifications (Dowker, ...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Robinson (1986) proposed a lithostratigraphical scheme for the Chalk Group of the North Downs, some of the nomenclature being borrowed from earlier classifications (Dowker, 1870; Whitaker et al., 1872, Barrois, 1876) that predated the establishment of the traditional tripartite (Lower Chalk, Middle Chalk & Upper Chalk) subdivision. Mortimore (1987) suggested that there was good correlation with the lithostratigraphical scheme he had simultaneously proposed for the South Downs (Mortimore, 1986a), and reccommended rationalisation of  the lithostratigraphical nomenclature by adoption of  most of the more expanded Sussex stratotypes for both areas. Robinson (1987) disputed Mortimore's (1987) correlation of the two lithostratigraphical schemes, and maintained that the lithological differences of the North Downs Chalk compared to the South Downs warranted a separate nomenclature for the former.
Robinson (1986) proposed a lithostratigraphical scheme for the Chalk Group of the North Downs, some of the nomenclature being borrowed from earlier classifications (Dowker, 1870; Whitaker et al., 1872, Barrois, 1876) that predated the establishment of the traditional tripartite (Lower Chalk, Middle Chalk & Upper Chalk) subdivision. Mortimore (1987) suggested that there was good correlation with the lithostratigraphical scheme he had simultaneously proposed for the South Downs (Mortimore, 1986a), and reccommended rationalisation of  the lithostratigraphical nomenclature by adoption of  most of the more expanded Sussex stratotypes for both areas. Robinson (1987) disputed Mortimore's (1987) correlation of the two lithostratigraphical schemes, and maintained that the lithological differences of the North Downs Chalk compared to the South Downs warranted a separate nomenclature for the former.



Revision as of 08:36, 4 October 2013

Robinson (1986) proposed a lithostratigraphical scheme for the Chalk Group of the North Downs, some of the nomenclature being borrowed from earlier classifications (Dowker, 1870; Whitaker et al., 1872, Barrois, 1876) that predated the establishment of the traditional tripartite (Lower Chalk, Middle Chalk & Upper Chalk) subdivision. Mortimore (1987) suggested that there was good correlation with the lithostratigraphical scheme he had simultaneously proposed for the South Downs (Mortimore, 1986a), and reccommended rationalisation of the lithostratigraphical nomenclature by adoption of most of the more expanded Sussex stratotypes for both areas. Robinson (1987) disputed Mortimore's (1987) correlation of the two lithostratigraphical schemes, and maintained that the lithological differences of the North Downs Chalk compared to the South Downs warranted a separate nomenclature for the former.

The details of the Robinson (1986) scheme for the Chalk Group of the North Downs are as follows:

Pages in category "Southern Region Chalk Group Lithostratigraphy: The North Downs (Robinson, 1986)"

The following 14 pages are in this category, out of 14 total.