1,721,002 research outputs found

    Low energy vs. high energy depositional settings related sedimentary bodies in early Senonian rudist bearing carbonate shelves (central-southern Italy)

    No full text
    Carannante Gabriele, Laviano A., Ruberti D., Simone Lucia, Sirna G., Sirna M., Tropeano M. Low energy vs. high energy depositional settings and related sedimentary bodies in early Senenian rudist bearing carbonate shelves (central-southern Italy). In: Géologie Méditerranéenne. Tome 28, numéro 1-2, 2001. Anatomy of Carbonate Bodies / Anatomie des corps carbonates. International Meeting / Colloque international. Marseille, 9-12 mai 2001, France, sous la direction de Marc Floquet, Jérôme Hennuy et Jean-Pierre Masse. pp. 37-40

    Sedimentary processes and biofacies of Late Cretaceous carbonate low-energy ramp systems (southern Italy).

    No full text
    This paper characterizes a low-energy, open-shelf setting by focusing on the sedimentary processes and biofacies of a Late Cretaceous, temperate-type open shelf in the southern Apennine nappes of Italy. The facies evolution of the related rudist-rich limestones takes into account the macrofossil characteristics and the microfaunal assemblages. The open-shelf depositional setting is interpreted by facies analysis. The facies are gradually transitional and the facies belts are broad, but wave-resistant biogenic frameworks are absent. Presumably the sea floor was characterized by a low bathymetric slope on which the wave energy was dissipated across a wide shelf, resulting in low-energy environments. Storm waves were damped by the wide, shallow bottom, and the fine fraction was not winnowed. Many rudists are in growth position, and those reworked are well preserved and commonly articulated. Different bathymetries and hydrodynamic conditions in two study areas, the Sorrento Peninsula and the northern Cilento, resulted in different biofacies and stratal geometries. In the Cilento area, high-energy currents such as tidal currents created a network of small channel-like depressions. Different rudist species colonized these channels and their margins. Rudists in growth position are rare, although reworked bivalves are commonly conjoined and the shells are pristine. In this subtidal facies key foraminifer species vary in abundance. The presence of marine open-shelf agglutinate forms supports the interpretation of a marine, high-energy shelf. In the Sorrento area, ephemeral subaerial exposure surfaces and pedogenic deposits indicate intertidal conditions and rudist facies indicate subtidal sandy shelf. The rudists formed monospecific to paucispecific assemblages. The foraminiferal assemblages are much more diversified than those in the Cilento successions, indicating small but meaningful oscillations in sub-environments. The rudist shell beds exhibit great taphonomic variability. The foraminiferal assemblages are characterized by distinct taxa such as abundant conical and discoidal agglutinate forms (Cuneolina and Dicyclina), thick-shelled evoluted Soritidae (Murgella, Scandonea, and Pseudorhapydionina), and larger, thicker ovoidal or subspherical Rotaliidae that indicate well-lit depositional environments with open water circulation and normal salinity, characterized by medium values of the hydrodynamic energy with scarce or no evidence of traction currents

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore