2008Unpublished venueRequires access

What does lithostratigraphy do for us

J. H. Powell

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Peter Gutteridge’s recent Soap Box article (Geoscientist 18 v.3) prompted lively debate in the Letters page about the usefulness of lithostratigraphy. My view is that geoscientists should make full use of all varieties of stratigraphy (lithostratigraphy ; sequence stratigraphy; biostratigraphy; chronostratigraphy; seismic stratigraphy; magnetostratigraphy; isotope stratigraphy etc.); they all have their place, dependent often on scale, and the availability of data. For practical geologists these tools all relate back to the rock record that is most readily defined by a lithostratigraphical framework. It is the powerful combination of these branches of stratigraphy that advances our science and allows us to communicate our ideas and research. In this brief article I highlight the some of the work of the British Geological Survey (BGS) in the field of lithostratigraphy, and the important collaborative links with the GSL Stratigraphy Commission.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Peter Gutteridge’s recent Soap Box article (Geoscientist 18 v.3) prompted lively debate in the Letters page about the usefulness of lithostratigraphy. My view is that geoscientists should make full use of all varieties of stratigraphy (lithostratigraphy ; sequence stratigraphy; biostratigraphy; chronostratigraphy; seismic stratigraphy; magnetostratigraphy; isotope stratigraphy etc.); they all have their place, dependent often on scale, and the availability of data. For practical geologists these tools all relate back to the rock record that is most readily defined by a lithostratigraphical framework. It is the powerful combination of these branches of stratigraphy that advances our science and allows us to communicate our ideas and research. In this brief article I highlight the some of the work of the British Geological Survey (BGS) in the field of lithostratigraphy, and the important collaborative links with the GSL Stratigraphy Commission.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Peter Gutteridge’s recent Soap Box article (Geoscientist 18 v.3) prompted lively debate in the Letters page about the usefulness of lithostratigraphy. My view is that geoscientists should make full use of all varieties of stratigraphy (lithostratigraphy ; sequence stratigraphy; biostratigraphy; chronostratigraphy; seismic stratigraphy; magnetostratigraphy; isotope stratigraphy etc.); they all have their place, dependent often on scale, and the availability of data. For practical geologists these tools all relate back to the rock record that is most readily defined by a lithostratigraphical framework. It is the powerful combination of these branches of stratigraphy that advances our science and allows us to communicate our ideas and research. In this brief article I highlight the some of the work of the British Geological Survey (BGS) in the field of lithostratigraphy, and the important collaborative links with the GSL Stratigraphy Commission.

Key concepts: Lithostratigraphy, Stratigraphy, Chronostratigraphy, Geology, Sequence stratigraphy, Paleontology, Biostratigraphy, Magnetostratigraphy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
What does lithostratigraphy do for us — Research Paper | ScholarLens