Permian Conodont Provincialism, Zonation and Global Correlation

Shilong Mei
China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China

Charles M. Henderson
University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4

Yugan Jin
Nanjing Institute of Geology and Paleontology, Nanjing, 210008, China

Introduction

Permian conodonts are regarded as the most important fossils for chronostratigraphy of the Permian. One reason is that they were thought to be more cosmopolitan in distribution than other important fossils such as fusulinaceans, ammonoids, brachiopods and corals. As a result, a single generalized zonation, usually entitled "standard zonation", tended to be proposed (Kozur, 1994; 1995; 1996; Wang Chengyuan, 1995) with only acknowledgement of facies differentiation and minor discussion on provincialism. However, the accumulating literature indicates that varying levels of provincialism can be seen for conodonts of Asselian (Henderson and Orchard, 1991), Artinskian (Nicoll and Metcalfe., 1998), Kungurian and Guadalupian ( Behnken, 1975; Wardlaw, 1995), Lopingian (Mei, 1996; Mei and Wardlaw, 1996), and Permian-Triassic boundary interval (Matsuda, 1985; Mei, 1996). The lack of appreciation for conodont provincialism has caused taxonomic misidentification for Permian-Triassic conodonts at Selong (for detail see Orchard et al., 1994; Mei, 1996), and construction of non-existent zones (for detail see Mei and Wardlaw, 1996). A survey of available references of Permian conodonts suggests an increasing degree of conodont provincialism throughout the Permian. Recognition of the provincialism results in the re-evaluation of Permian conodont taxonomy and zonation. The present authors only briefly dealt with conodont provincialism, evolution and zonation previously (Mei et al, 1999a). This paper presents a more comprehensive discussion on Permian conodont distribution, provincialism, zonation, correlation and climate changes.

>>Next